Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[SCA-JML] Re: Post period

Expand Messages
  • Anthony J. Bryant
    ... Because that s not the SCA game. If you want to recreate Edo Japan, we can always start a new group, but the SCA is geared at Medieval Europe. We re
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 5, 1999
      Jordan Malokofsky wrote:

      > Makes sense to me. The SCA recreates the European middle ages and
      > happens to define that as pre-1600 (which fits). Seeing as how
      > several groups of people within the SCA do non-European personae,
      > different time periods should be acceptable. We don't do European, so
      > why should we limit our time period according to it?

      Because that's not the SCA game. If you want to recreate Edo Japan, we can
      always start a new group, but the SCA is geared at Medieval Europe. We're
      visitors, we don't control the game. It's the height of rudeness to be a
      guest in someone's house and then tell them how they should behave.

      > I am, unfortunately, not that familiar with the history of the Edo
      > period, but from all I've heard it could be considered within period
      > for Japanese personae.

      Depends on how you define period for Jp personae. Period for the SCA is a
      definite cutoff at 1600, so that makes it academic. If, OTOH, you mean
      feudal, yes, it's feudal, but the Japanese society and government of 1500
      and 1700 were very different. The clothing was different, the mores were
      different, the economy was different, the social scene was different, the
      military was different..

      No, Japan after 1600 was a different world. Don't confuse "not
      westerized/democratized" with "medieval."

      > However, I don't think you'll get any kind of
      > official acknowledgement for this idea. It would be too complicated
      > to have to keep track of for all the different cultures. I'd just
      > quitely do things "post-period" that were still relevant to medieval
      > recreation and not use any of it in documentation cases (such as A&S
      > competitions).

      Sorry, to my mind, that's cheating. You're going behind the back of the
      rules. I do not do post period whenever I can help it, and I don't suborn
      it, either.

      > There may be some people who will draw the line at 1600 reguardless,
      > but I agree that, going with the spirit of medieval recreation, it
      > should be OK to use pre-Meiji history as "period" for Japanese
      > personae.

      Not in the SCA it isn't.


      Effingham
    • Barbara Nostrand
      Noble Cousins! ... Which Japanese history books have you been reading? Most Japanese history books have the Japanese middle ages ending either with Hideyoshi
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 5, 1999
        Noble Cousins!

        >> To that end I would say that, anathema though it may be to many
        >> good gentles (yeah, yeah- I know how you feel about this one, Baron
        >> Master Edward-tono), that the 1600 doesn't apply as well to Japan as it
        >> does to European cultures, since the Japanese fuedal period ended only
        >> in 1860ish.

        Which Japanese history books have you been reading? Most Japanese
        history books have the Japanese middle ages ending either with
        Hideyoshi unifying Japan or in GASP at about 1600. The battle
        of Sekigahara occured in 1600 and there were the two battles of
        Osaka Castle. The Genroku period (if I recall my era names
        correctly) is generally considered to be post medieval.

        >>I would propose a more fluid standard in keeping with the
        >> purpose of the SCA, rather than trying to impose hard-and-fast rules.
        >> In other words, cut off Japan just before the Meiji restoration, but
        >> cut off Europe at 1600, and apply other dates to other cultures as
        >> appropriate. Oh, and ixnay on the american colonist thing.

        Why? This distinction does not make sense for EUROPE! The Spanish
        practiced patronage with gold mined from placer mines in the New
        World. The Spanish remained arguably medieval for quite some time
        and (as I recall) the Russians only freed their serfs in the
        19th century. Some argue that Spanish redistribution of American
        gold brought about the enclosure act and the forced urbanization
        of England and the conversion of the English economy to an
        industrial economy. This sort of thing was not at all universal
        throughout Europe.

        In short. We can make a BETTER case for the middle ages ending in
        Japan at 1600 than can for Europe.

        Your Humble Servant
        Solveig Throndardottir
        Amateur Scholar

        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM |
        | de Moivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
        | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Ignored domains: bestbiz.net, pop.net, hotmail.com, aibusiness.com |
        | vdi.net, usa.net, tpnet.pl, myremarq.com |
        | netscape.net, excite.com, bigfoot.com, public.com |
        | com.tw, eranet.net, yahoo.com, success.net |
        | mailcity.com, net.tw, twac.com, netcenter.com |
        | techie.com |
        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.