Musings on Fealty

[madbaker]

I am a Peer. I swore fealty to the King and Queen when I was elevated to the Laurel. Why didn't I go up to affirm my fealty at Twelfth Night? This is some rambling I wrote down to try to clarify my feelings on the matter.

The short version: the Royalty was having the Laurels swear only to the Queen, with the Chivalry swearing to the King and the Pelicans to both. This bugged me on a nonrational level; it felt like more of the same "some animals are more equal than others" that can happen when any one of the peerages has more cachet then others. In the West, it's the Chivalry. In Caid (at least when I lived there some years back) it was the Laurels.

The longer version:
This is personal fealty, me as a Peer. It is completely separate from fealty which I swear as a greater officer to the Coronet of the Mists. If this happened at the Principality level, I'd still go up for my office because that's a responsibility of the office. A few years back there was a greater officer of the Kingdom who refused to swear fealty as an officer because she had personal history with the Crown. (To which I say: bollocks. Then resign your office if you can't stomach it.)

First the legal argument. Corpora says that peers, including Knights, are in fealty to the Crown. Which is defined as both the King and Queen.
This has no emotional weight, of course. In the West, the Knights have always sworn to the King only since time immemorial and no legal ruling will change some Knights' feelings on this. I remember the shitstorm the first time a Queen dared say "So also say I". It goes back and forth depending on the views of the K&Q - and if they care.

I empathize with this - one of our values in the SCA, especially here in the West, is the weight of Tradition. This Is The Way It's Always Been, with the subtext that It Always Will Be That Way. Why change the lightbulb? (And I don't necessarily mean that in a negative way. One of the things I miss about the Bard not reading the roll of past Princes and Princesses at Investiture is the weight of history, of all those names rolling off. But I digress.)

So, legally, it doesn't matter what the K&Q say: I am in fealty to the Crown unless and until my peerage is revoked or I renounce my fealty. It shouldn't matter and I should have gone up to affirm my fealty regardless.

But it does matter to me. Here we get to the heart of the slight: the emotional component.

The SCA is a game, a leisure time organization. Fealty has no legal weight; it only exists in the SCA insofar as we recognize it. Like the Crown's authority, it requires everyone's buy-in. To be summoned up in the solemn rite of Coronation and to be effectively told that half the Crown doesn't want my fealty - that's a slap in the face. Unintended I'm sure, but that's how I perceive it.

I feel no need to affirm something publicly that isn't apparently valued by the recipient.

And all His Majesty had to do was say "So also say I" to make it a non-issue.

Comments

[finickynarcane.livejournal.com]

No matter how many times I've been mistaken for a Pelican, I'm happy (to an extent) that no one will ever bestow this honor upon me. I may not be religious, at all, but the one thing that has stuck from my religious school days as a child is that Jews don't kneel. This whole kneeling and swearing fealty thing is an issue that I've thought about but expect never to have to grapple with first hand. I wasn't even aware of the issues that you mention. Those would gripe me no end.

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

Is this a newish thing in the West? It does seem most peculiar. I suppose I could understand if the non-martial orders swore to the non-winning part of The Crown, but separating them seems odd.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

In the West, the Knights have always sworn to the King only since time immemorial and no legal ruling will change some Knights' feelings on this. I remember the shitstorm the first time a Queen dared say "So also say I". It goes back and forth depending on the views of the K&Q - and if they care.

As the person who re-wrote the ceremony (with permission of western_duchess who was Queen at the time, and the King at the time -- Valgard), most of the time these days the Knights swear fealty to both (except Leon who claims that even if the ceremony is performed as written, he feels his oath is only to the King ...).

I agree with what you say on this, no big surprise. One reason I wasn't at Coronation was just this. What makes it weirder is if all peers are equal, how come the Pelicans and the Royal Peers swore fealty (this time) to both the King and Queen, but the Knights only swore fealty to the King and the Laurels only swore fealty to the Queen?

Now, with that said, I do not consider myself to be out of fealty. I have always felt that the fealty oaths at Coronations are a reaffirmation of my fealty, which I gave when I was made a peer lo' these many years ago. I have therefore always been in fealty to the Crown and Kingdom of the West. While one might feel that it is my duty therefore to go forward during Coronation and reaffirm my oath of fealty as a show of support of the current persons wearing the Crowns, I feel that it is not 100% necessary. I am and always will be, unless I feel my oath of fealty has been broken by the Crown, in fealty ...

Well, that was a longer ramble than expected. As you noted this is an emotional issue.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

This is something that happened at *this* 12th Night ... Uther and Kara decided to do this. My impression is that it came mostly from Uther, but I don't know as I wasn't involved in any of it.

[albionwood.livejournal.com]

Passionate arguments about fealty are another Western tradition that will never die. There has to be something to stir it all back up every now and then. It just wouldn't be the West(tm) if there wasn't some big brouhaha over fealty going on...

What's really funny is how emotional people are about SCA fealty, which has no substance. Some sort of inverse power law, I deem.

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

reposted.

note: Strong Opinions Here.

Fealty is TO THE CROWN. If the King told me to do something, I'd have very little compunction telling him to piss off (though I might do it, 'cause I'm an extreme Royalist). If the Queen told me to do something... Well... :)

Fealty has no choice. If you choose to accept the Burden, you choose to accept all of the Burden, not just when you want it.

THAT SAID, I can definitely understand your consternation, because I would want to swear to both, and I would probably go to Uther and swear personally. (I say the above statement because in other Kingdoms (and yes, even our own, though many folks don't exercise it), it is seen as Knights are the only peerage which HAS to swear fealty.) I think this is a crock for the reason mentioned above. You're a peer. You swear fealty. End of story.

This is not that. This is something different. As such, I wholly understand (and agree with) your opinions.

Regarding oaths and the like - While I realize that Jews do not kneel or swear, allowances have been made for this, and as such, I do not see religion as an issue ONLY in the context of whether or not to accept an accolade based on kneeling or swearing. (What I am trying to say here is ONLY that you don't have to kneel or swear to be a peer, so that shouldn't be an impediment. I do not think your issues are bad or wrong, just I don't see the one you mentioned above as a technical difficulty).

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

Again, strong opinions here.

While is it true that SCA fealty has no legal weight (though, you MAY be able to argue it from an oral contract perspective, since those do have precedent) and no substance, I find it has all the substance of an ACME 2 TON weight.

Why is that true in my case:

1) I dream.
2) I give my word to do something. Thus, I'm going to try to do whatever I can to make sure that it gets done.
3) I am an emotional bastard.

Such is why I bawl every time I can't give my fealty to the West. Not because I value my current Kingdom and Crown any less. But because it's My Home, and it shaped me, formed me and it is a huge reason why I try VERY hard not to be a 'Geek' (TM). :) Yeah, it's a hobby. But I rather like my hobby, especially the esoteric parts of it. :)

Just my opinion. (Hi Colin! Tell K I said hi! :))

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

Laurels and Pelicans are not required to swear fealty, either at their elevation or at Coronation.

Since I brought it up...

[finickynarcane.livejournal.com]

Since I'm the one who brought up the Jewish/kneeling issue, I have to say that, for me, it won't be an issue since I'm invisible. I've been interested in seeing what others do in this situation. So far, all I've ever seen is kneeling. I don't go to court, so I don't see much.

Since I'm something of a feminist, I'd probably have the same sort of issue that started this discussion. Until I read it here, I didn't even know that fealty was being divided and along somewhat arbitrary lines. I get why Chivalry might logically swear only to the king (and who's defending the queen?), but the other two branches divided as mentioned makes no logical sense to me. But this is something to do with the emotions, not logic.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

I knew you were a reasonable human being, and a gentleman ... <g>

Frankly, as I feel my oath is a given, as I swore to the Crown and Kingdom when I was made a peer 24 years ago, and I have never told the Crown my fealty had been revoked (although there have been a few times it's gotten close because of some idiocy the current (at the time) Crown had done), the ceremony at Coronation is just a reaffirmation and is not required. Frankly, it shouldn't be required of the Knights either, but that's part of a complex concept involved in Coronation (settling the power-base, as it were).

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

Yeah: fealty has no substance, I agree. Neither does friendship, using those terms, or joy.

Re: Since I brought it up...

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

I have friends (Jewish, Quaker, etc.) who do not kneel or swear when they give oaths in the SCA. They affirm them, or reply that they will do their best to uphold what they are being asked, but. And everyone

I'm not a feminist, but I have those same issues, because I don't think fealty is optional or to be split. Due to what I suspect are very similar emotions... :)

Re: Since I brought it up...

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

The kneeling thing depends on how you play the SCA "game". The title of Master of Arms was initially created for someone who was of the Jewish faith, and had a problem with the idea of swearing fealty.

If you consider the SCA a game, rather than real-life, would that take care of your concern? I am really just curious.

As to who is defending the Queen -- well, there is the Queen's Guard ... but if the Knights are not willing to defend the Queen, then I think there's a real problem there.

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

2 TON weight.
10 TON weight.
20 TON weight.

surprise at someone's birthday party? Well, that depends on if they tackle you or not, but it's very substantive, yet surprisingly light.... :)

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

Fealty has no choice. If you choose to accept the Burden, you choose to accept all of the Burden, not just when you want it.

I agree. And I agree with goldenstag that I am in fealty dating to my elevation. For reasons stated, I chose not to re-affirm it publicly; I am not revoking my oath.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

Within the context of our game (if it helps to think of it that way - our hobby/pasttime/whatever) fealty is very emotional. We are trying to recreate in our way a concept that had, in period, a very profound effect. Granted, our version of it has a lot more emotional pull than any real legal consequences if we do something to break fealty, but even so, the emotional aspect is very strong. I remember when I was made a Laurel back in 83 that I cried during the fealty ceremony, and I am the first to admit that back then I hadn't put as much thought into what it meant to me as I do know ...

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

D'oh. The last word there should have been "now", not "know". Sheesh.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

I am not revoking my oath.

Exactly. Just because I am not reaffirming it does not mean I am revoking it ...

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

Of course. Nor did I ever think you would. :)

Re: Since I brought it up...

[rustmon.livejournal.com]

And everyone is cool with that. :)

Just wondering...

[callistotoni.livejournal.com]

Does this mean that only the Queen will be attending our Laurel Council meetings, whereas both the King and the Queen will attend Pelican Council?

Re: Since I brought it up...

[finickynarcane.livejournal.com]

I DO consider the SCA a game. That makes absolutely no difference. It's still MY knees. The story I (almost) remember from my childhood was some Pharoh wanted a Jewish Patriarch to kneel to him. The Patriarch refused. The Pharoh asked "What if I put my ring on the floor and you pick it up for me?" Again, the Patriarch refused because that would have the appearance of kneeling. Nothing else from my religious schooling may have stuck, but this did. That, and being admonished by my parents before I set off to visit a friend's church, not to kneel. We stand to show respect.

To leap in here...

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

Fealty may have no substance, but it does have emotional weight. In fact, we were talking the other day about how children raised in the SCA by parents who take the "chivalrous and courteous" part of this "game" tend to learn about manners, ethics, responsibility, and tolerance -- differently or to a greater extent than children in families in the 'outside' world. Fealty, as a promise, is part of that environment, in my opinion.

I take fealty very seriously -- my first personal fealty oath was strongly meant, and the way I've structured my household shows a lot of my feelings about fealty. And as a peer, I am sworn to the Crown and Kingdom; I don't think any King or Queen can change that in a coronation ceremony, no matter what they think.

Hmm. Wonder what that says about how I feel about Royalty? ;-) Gotta go think about that...

Stirring the pot

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

I generally wear an unadorned chain as a sign of my fealty, too.

Re: To leap in here...

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

I am sworn to the Crown and Kingdom; I don't think any King or Queen can change that in a coronation ceremony

Absolutely. My fealty to the Crown is unchanged.
But since I felt that His Majesty did not value it appropriately, I chose not to re-affirm that oath in public.