Being able to kick the butt of everyone else with a stick is not a solid basis for the head of government.
And strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government, either.
Name me another contest that is fair.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!
That shows the person is willing to sacrifice time, money, and body to prove they are worthy. That shows they are willing and able to defend the Kingdom or Principality if need be. Who is willing to prove, not just boast, that they are good, and one that has no judges and no politics in the achieving of the Crown (or at least aught not to).
False. It shows that one person is able to beat another in combat on any given day. Some people can put 10x the level of effort of their opponent and still lose, due to conditioning, natural talent, unequal gear, or any other list of variables. The level of sacrifice of money, body and time is a poor measure of suitability, in my opinion.
one of the Rulers duties is to take the field with their army. Would you have the Army of Ansteorra led by a weakling or coward?
A good singles fighter does not make a good war leader, and fixation upon their own combat situation, to me, weakens their ability to focus on leading an actual group or army. Personally, I don't want someone on the front lines. I want someone on top of the hill, with an overview of the combat, able to see the entire situation, who can relay orders accordingly. It makes sense being a ruler's duty, as the consensus for choosing a king and queen probably came primarily from a group of fighters, not event organizers or administrative-type people (I'm guessing).
Me? I'll take a weak and cowardly strategic genius capable of leading an army to victory, over somebody who is better at hitting somebody else with a stick before they get hit themselves.
I think what's going on here is that you guys are looking at this issue from wildly different perspectives. A king and queen in the SCA aren't really analogous in responsibility to a real king or queen in a real monarchy.
Yep, this is the biggest point to make. It's odd, but you have to completely disregard history when discussing some things in the SCA, or it won't make any sense.
The titles within the SCA are confusing for someone used to the terms as they are used in the real world. A duke in real life is subordinate to a king. In the SCA a duke is just the title used to denote a person who has been king more than once.
I had no idea about that, but well, perfect example of my statement above.
I think that as long as you're enjoying it, does it truly matter?
This is precisely why I've done armored combat (WMA/HEMA) for 3 years now, have possibly 1 or 2 wins in the course of those 3 years, and still love everything about it. It's not about a W or L for me, it's about having fun doing it... with a side of entertaining and educating folks too.
