Re: Regional issues
- --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, "Anthony J. Bryant"
> That's probably because those cultures fit a feudal paradigm andGood rationalizations, certainly. And they certainly have been used
> have recognizable social and ranking structures that can parallel
> European mediaeval ones. Native American societies of the time were
> functionally almost paleolithic -- even the Aztecs and Inca were
> much more primitive.
> One can add to that the fact that, simply, these native American
> societies don't really have a written record, and so much of the
> the ones we really *do* know about is either (1) filtered through
> the eyes of European explorers/settlers, or (2) historical
> speculation. Neither of these is exactly conducive to a decent
> replication of a persona. I mean, if you want to be an Aztec, you
> can't even know for a fact any of the most basic details of that
> basketball-like game they are so famous for.
to explain away the lack of Native American personas. However, the
lack of a serious historical record, or a record that's been filtered
through other people first, hasn't slowed down any of the other groups
(say, for example, Ireland, Greenland or Mongolia) that seem to be
accepted. For that matter, how much of what we know about the average
western European is more than historical speculation?