1254Re: [Ayreton] Re: Questions about principality
- Jul 3, 2007spdesroches@... said:
> A principality would be a shortcut fraught with peril. Although it wouldI think the seperatist fears are largely unfounded.
>sidestep the problem of maintaining TGS's status of Province, it would engende
>r seperatist fears from the Midlands, and possibly even the Kingdom. No group
>in the history of the Midrealm has gone Principality without then proceeding t
>o independent kingdom.
The idea of the Midlands splitting off from the Midrealm is laughable.
We don't have the fighters, the peers.... We'd be playing in a pretty
small pond. We play nicely with the rest of the Kingdom. And there's that
nagging issue that the Midrealm originated here, so we can't exactly walk
away and take the name Middle Kingdom with us.
Admittedly, all Midrealm Principalities have ultimately split off into
their own Kingdoms, but this model isn't necessarily true elsewhere in
the Society. The BoD knows this. There are plenty of reasons to have the
Midlands be a Principality that have nothing to do with independence.
Recognition of the populace, more of a Royal presence, the schtick and
pageantry... all of these are Good Things. We know this. The Kingdom
knows this. The BoD knows this.
Throughout history, there have been plenty of compromises attached to
the change in status of land, such the Missouri Compromise, the
Kansas-Nebraska Act, etc. Elevating the Midlands to a Principality
could be tied to a provision in Kingdom Law stating that the Midlands
cannot leave to become its own Kingdom. The only way that could happen
would be if every other region became a Principality and chose to leave
Also, if a goal is to get people recognized, then, I think, a Principality
would be far more effective than a Barony. Territorial Princes and
Princesses are allowed by Kingdom law to give AoAs. And, I imagine,
having a territorial Prince and Princess would greatly increase the
likelihood of having some form of Royalty at Midlands events.
Other than the perception issues of seperatism and fear that it isn't
possible, are there any downsides to a Principality? Already there are
plenty of issues raised regarding an Ayreton shell barony; I wonder if
it would be easier to reach consensus on a Midlands Principality than
an Ayreton Barony.
If there has been serious talk in the past about this within Curia,
then why not explore it further? I don't think we should dismiss it
out of hand.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>