Is it Honorable to win, then say the loser should reign?

[Sir Brian]

Well...while honorable I think the SCA and reigning royalty would have an issue with it cause it goes against the oath that you as a fighter took at the beginning of the tournament. It also goes against the letter of intent that you, along with your consort, sent into the crown to fight in the first place. And if you did that what would it do to the honor of your consort, who thinks you would make a good king or would not have agreed to be your consort?

Wait WHAT!   

Okay I know nothing about the inner intrigues of the SCA world. With this additional information I recant my earlier determination and deem him his act to be dishonorable. If he swore an oath that was also carrying the honor and reputation of a lady then his action is twice as deplorable. However he certainly proved his lack of suitability to be king.

[Sir Edward]

Well...while honorable I think the SCA and reigning royalty would have an issue with it cause it goes against the oath that you as a fighter took at the beginning of the tournament. It also goes against the letter of intent that you, along with your consort, sent into the crown to fight in the first place. And if you did that what would it do to the honor of your consort, who thinks you would make a good king or would not have agreed to be your consort?

Wait WHAT!   

Okay I know nothing about the inner intrigues of the SCA world. With this additional information I recant my earlier determination and deem him his act to be dishonorable. If he swore an oath that was also carrying the honor and reputation of a lady then his action is twice as deplorable. However he certainly proved his lack of suitability to be king.

Wow, yes, that sheds a lot of additional light on the matter.

[Sir Nate]

coming into this late. But yes I think that is very honorable, in fact in the same situation I would do the same thing.

[Lord Chagatai]

Having fought in four crown tournaments I take this very seriously....if I didn't think I would be a good king then I would have never sent in my letter of intent. You swear on the sword of the King to fight with honor and chivalry and for the honor of your lady/consort. And you also swear that if you win you will honor the thrown of the kingdom, so if you win and then give it up it goes against what you swore to your leige and the queen, let alone the oath you swore to your consort when you asked to fight for them. It goes against personal honor, your ladies honor, their royal majesties honor and the kingdom's. If you don't feel worthy enough then don't enter or if you did enter withdraw with the permission of your consort, so that you can remain honorable and respected. Stay true to the virtues that you strive to uphold...!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Sir Douglas]

Yeah, that definitely sheds some more light on the matter.

But then, what do you do in the situation? On the one hand, if X was allowed to concede to Y, then Y would be king, but if X was dishonored for trying to concede (because if the crown tournament is that involved a matter, then would you really want a king who would shirk his duties so readily?), then it seems like Y would end up being king anyway.

[Lord Chagatai]

But then, what do you do in the situation? On the one hand, if X was allowed to concede to Y, then Y would be king, but if X was dishonored for trying to concede (because if the crown tournament is that involved a matter, then would you really want a king who would shirk his duties so readily?), then it seems like Y would end up being king anyway.

If in the middle of your final fight you deem your opponent to be the better king, then lose the fight. That way your honor is in tact and so is your lady/consort's. Don't win unless you are able to take the throne, if you do not think or have any doubts that you would get a good king then don't enter the tournament in the first place.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[SirNathanQ]

The better fighter should take the crown. He won it. If he thinks the other guy needs to rule, make him your regent or head adviser or something. Pull a Robert Baratheon and let the Hand (regent/adviser) unofficially rule. It's a win-win, legitimacy and good rule.

[Sir James A]

Lady consorts, letters of intent and everything? Way more political than anything to do with chivalry at that point, I'd say.

[Ian]

Yes indeed.  That's why you cannot remove this situation from its context (That of specifically an SCA Crown Tournament and all the rules therein included).  Without the context, you can't answer the original question.  It's dangerous to remove a situation from it's greater context and examine it in isolation.

[Sir Brian]

Yes indeed.  That's why you cannot remove this situation from its context (That of specifically an SCA Crown Tournament and all the rules therein included).  Without the context, you can't answer the original question.  It's dangerous to remove a situation from it's greater context and examine it in isolation.

Ah but that is the beauty of having hypothetical discussions and interesting in of itself to see the shift of perspectives as more evidence is revealed. Even if it is ‘first hand’ observations!

It certainly reinforces the notion not to be hasty, somewhat of an occupational hazard of mine working as a supervisor in a job that is proverbially in nonstop ‘crisis’ management mode. 

[Ian]

Oh no Thorsteinn... you're not getting away with it this time.   You do this in all of your threads.  You get everyone to discuss your question but you never ever tell us you're own opinion on it.  So, let's hear it.  Call this situation. 

[Thorsteinn]

So here is the relevant bit of the West Kingdom Crown Invocation & Oath (taken from the Heralds Website) that will be spoken this weekend in Tres Pinos, CA. I can't take the 600 mile round trip due to a bad case of Poor, mores the pity.

Herald: You have all heard the conventions of combat for this tournament, and you all know the Rules of the Lists. Do you swear to abide by these rules and these conventions during these Lists?
 
Fighters: I so swear.
 
Herald: And do you each have one whose favor you shall bear in these Lists, and who shall reign beside you should you be given victory over the field?
 
Fighters: I do.
 
Herald: And do you each swear that, should you be given victory in these Lists, you and your consort will swear fealty to the Kingdom and populace of the West. And do you swear that you and your consort can and will fulfill the duties and obligations of a King or Queen of the West, and that you will rule justly and to the utmost of your abilities, as long as you shall reign?
 
Fighters: I do.
 
Herald: Then upon pain of expulsion from these Lists, let none here present enter these lists bearing any stone, charm, or herb of virtue, by which they hope to gain advantage over their opponent. Let each of you prove by your skill and strength alone the worth and virtue of those whose favors you bear, either in victory or in honourable defeat.

[Thorsteinn]

Oh no Thorsteinn... you're not getting away with it this time.   You do this in all of your threads.  You get everyone to discuss your question but you never ever tell us you're own opinion on it.  So, let's hear it.  Call this situation. 

I think that it could be seen as Honorable to let Y have it. it is the best move for the Kingdom to have a great King, rather than a poor King. To say that there have never been Crowns the populace wished would have gone the other way is to lie.

If X keep's the Crown: He fulfill's his Oath as expected, and he get's the "Prize" he has striven so hard for (As a Western KSCA said once: "Only gotta win 10 fights after all, and you can lose 2 on the way there, how hard can it be. Oh wait, that's 10 of 12 that have to be won, and you can't lose 2 in a row").

If X gives Y the Crown: He does what is best in the long run for the Kingdom, and makes sure that he has put the best person on the Throne. That also must be honorable. He loses public renown but then again he may, in the long run, gain much word-fame from the act.

THe question ultimately would be: What can X live with at the end of the day. What will allow him to sleep at night?

[Sir Edward]

Perhaps the whole question can be rephrased: Is it better to "take one for the team", by taking a stain upon your honor, in order to serve the greater good?

Rephrased that way, I can see that under some circumstances, that the answer can be yes.

But of course, in this particular case, if X is abdicating in favor of Y, then he, and he alone (in that moment), is making the call as to whether Y is truly the better king. We have to assume that he has good judgment.

[Thorsteinn]

Personally, if I were X, I would feel some regret at Y not having the Throne, however I know how to surround myself with good people, and I play politics with a sledgehammer so I would quickly drive snotty courtiers & backbiters from my midst. Thusly I would accept the Crown and gladly too.