Promoting Early Period Within the SCA: Part 3

T. Finkas · Post by **T. Finkas** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:50 pm

[img]http://www.atomicacorndesign.com/AAtitlebar.gif[/img]

I just launched a Proboards forum that I have entitled "Ancient Age".
You can reach it at http://ancientage.proboards32.com/index.cgi .
If you have an interest in participation within the SCA as an early
personna, please join the discussion!

You'll note that there's not much structure there yet. That's because
I'd like to be responsive to what the forum members want to see there.
The forum will grow and gain structure as people participate and
make suggestions.

Cheers,
Tim Finkas, Administrator
Ancient Age Forum

tessathehuntress · Post by **tessathehuntress** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:22 pm

Thanks for doing this and for letting us know.

Tessa

Animal · Post by **Animal** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:51 pm

Cool. I'm there. I'm sick of the later period assholes and their exclusionist attitudes.

Aidan Cambel · Post by **Aidan Cambel** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:24 pm

Animal wrote:Cool. I'm there. I'm sick of the later period assholes and their exclusionist attitudes.

Animal,

I really don't want this to turn ugly, But I do want to address this. I understand that the early personas get a lot of flack. Mine is 13th c. moving to 14th, and so I guess I fall into that later period group. I agree that there are a large number of people that look down on eary period personas, and I think I understand why. Its just as wrong though as you grouping all later period's together. There has been a lot of people who losely portrayed early period personas, and did/do so poorly. They make up versions of what history was to them, and it is loosely based on anything, if even that much. More specifically in the SCA, people would pick personas and time frames that were before the date-range set in corpora. When I started, it was roughly 600-1600. I think now its been changed to pre-1600. In addition, there has been alot of contraversy over portraying a later period idealogy in a pre-inclusive time frame (i.e. a Pict becoming a Knight). But, for every one of those people out there that gets twisted over these things, there are those as well that don't give a rip. I mean, I portray my persona to the best of MY ability, because I want to. I don't ask that of anyone else. Everyone plays at their own level. The household I am part of has many early period personas, and I love 'em all. My squire brother is an early period persona (although our Knight refers to him as his 14th c. pictish reenactor.. LOL). I think the biggest problem is that those of us that do feel this way, don't stand up and say it. I guess its just because on the issue, we are passive. The only reason I even addressed this is because I didn't want you to believe that we all feel that way.

If anyone wants to do an early period persona, thats great! Those things that took place in early period, built the later period lifestyles. The more people research and learn about that period, the more they bring to the table. We are all in this together, to learn what we want to, to play and have fun, and build long lasting friendships through common, although bizarre, interests.

Thank you for reading this. I just didn't want you to think that all later period people felt the way you stated.

In Service,
Aidan

Animal · Post by **Animal** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:40 pm

Hiya Aiden.
I'd like you to reread my post and pay attention to the word 'the'. I'm talking about 'the' later period assholes. Not later period everyone. I'm glad you feel the way you do. Obviously my post wasnt meant for you. My post was for all the later period assholes that come off as exclusionist assholes. The 'it's not a war it's a grand melee' morons and the 'I'm too good to get killed by an arrow idiots'. I'm just sick of it. When it comes down to it when they take their later period armor off their' still just modern day dilberts. Nothing special at all.
Again, glad you feel that way. But believe me, the ones who that comment was meant for know exactly who they are.

Robert P. Norwalt · Post by **Robert P. Norwalt** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:16 am

This is just friendly talk here, I aint' trying to make no big "Statement", but I'm with Animal. The Early period prejudice I've noticed over the last couple of years is a little annoying. I've seen "poorly" done persona's from EVERY period in EVERY Society out there. Seeing as how I get along with most folks in LH, SCA, and Fantasy groups, I don't see why we can't do the Rodney King thing here?

OH yeah!,...Screw Scotland. Pictdom Rules!!! :lol:

Agnarr · Post by **Agnarr** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:49 am

Well said Animal.

Christophe de Frisselle · Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:09 am

Animal wrote:"When it comes down to it when they take their later period armor off their' still just modern day dilberts. "

Sounds more like Pointy Haird Boss syndrome. Dilberts would be much more easy going.

Vasilii · Post by **Vasilii** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:33 am

well hey I joined, hopefully there will be away for more of us "steppe children" to share ideas and research, without some of the unfortunate snarkiness that seems to come with not wanting to be yet ANOTHER 14th century french, german, english, etc ad nauseum western european persona. Nothing at all against the 14th century, Personally I like it when it is really well done, and have plans to put together a nice kit to do pas de arms with. I just get tired of some peoples rigid attitudes about how I should play.........ok mini-rant over, please if you are into early period come talk with us too

T. Finkas · Post by **T. Finkas** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:22 am

Okay "Early" fans, let's not get too contentious or prickly here

, our goal is to make the Early portrayals better, stronger and more accepted---NOT to piss off the SCA at large.

Tim

Morgan · Post by **Morgan** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:37 am

For every late period asshole to which you refer, please understand that there is an "early period slob" who's idea of persona is to dress up as a "Viking" or some such, act discourtesly on the field because courtesy was a knightly virtue and his "persona" didn't have knighthood, wears the same tunic to fight as after, etc.

The way to fix it is certainly not to venemously cast aspersions.

Animal wrote:Hiya Aiden.
I'd like you to reread my post and pay attention to the word 'the'. I'm talking about 'the' later period assholes. Not later period everyone. I'm glad you feel the way you do. Obviously my post wasnt meant for you. My post was for all the later period assholes that come off as exclusionist assholes. The 'it's not a war it's a grand melee' morons and the 'I'm too good to get killed by an arrow idiots'. I'm just sick of it. When it comes down to it when they take their later period armor off their' still just modern day dilberts. Nothing special at all.
Again, glad you feel that way. But believe me, the ones who that comment was meant for know exactly who they are.

Owen · Post by **Owen** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:52 am

our goal is to make the Early portrayals better, stronger and more accepted---NOT to piss off the SCA at large.

That would merely be an added bonus! :twisted:

Tom Knighton · Post by **Tom Knighton** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:52 am

StudBuckle wrote:Okay "Early" fans, let's not get too contentious or prickly here , our goal is to make the Early portrayals better, stronger and more accepted---NOT to piss off the SCA at large.

Tim

Personally, I see no reason both can't be accomplished

Seriously though, I think it's great trying to get early period personas looking better. I know many late period folks who would rather see 12 well done greeks, romans, and scythians (just to name a few) than 120 crappy 14th Century folks. Anything to get the quality up

btw...what time period is being classified as "ancient" exactly. While my primary focus is 5th Century, I have interest in anything from the 11th Century and earlier

Tom

Morgan · Post by **Morgan** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 11:41 am

I'm a late period guy. I'd rather see ANY GOOD impression than ANY bad impression. Period. Yes, even Japanese.

T. Finkas · Post by **T. Finkas** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 11:48 am

My idea is to cover Ancient to Classical times. Possibly from 1186 BC Trojan War to 467 Fall of Rome? However, this is all subject to the will of the participants, plus further discussion and exploration.

Tim

T. Finkas · Post by **T. Finkas** » Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:27 pm

We have 25 members so far. Thanks for the response!

Cheers,
Tim

Tom Knighton · Post by **Tom Knighton** » Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:25 am

StudBuckle wrote:My idea is to cover Ancient to Classical times. Possibly from 1186 BC Trojan War to 467 Fall of Rome? However, this is all subject to the will of the participants, plus further discussion and exploration.

Tim

Good! Then I can contribute some

Tom