Next weekend the local Renaissance faire is opening here in my area. I'm hoping that this year, the jousting returns. I've been to Medieval Times, a dinner-theater place that has a handful of locations throughout the country, including Dallas and Chicago, and it's great theatrics. I've also had the opportunity of seeing real jousting. No, not through time-travel, although that would be a dream come true for me.
For two years at this local fair, I've had the pleasure of watching Shane Adams and his troupe perform in essentially historical accurate armor, from the back of heavy horses, with real lances. As a breeder of Clydesdale horses and a Middle Ages enthusiast, it couldn't have gotten any better for me. I was disappointed at not getting to watch him and his fellows last year, unaware that he was in the midst of filming the debut of a reality series for The History Channel entitled "Full Metal Jousting."
I thought the series was well done, and was appreciative of the concern demonstrated for the horses and the contestants alike. I've heard rumors that the show will be repeated this year, and while I hope that doesn't mean I have to miss seeing them in person yet again, I'll certainly look forward to seeing a second season of the show.
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Friday, September 27, 2013
Eleanor of Aquitaine
The view of women in Medieval society has been largely shaped by seeing it through a modern lens. As a result, I think we tend to ignore certain subtleties in that society. In particular, the popular view of women at this time is that they were powerless and downtrodden--which is true by today's standards, but I don't think it's entirely accurate.
First, only a small number of people in the Middle Ages had any real power, which here I will define as options (choices) and influence over others. This was the case whether they were male or female. Only farther up the wealth and societal ladder does the question of power really begin to have much of a context. Women were used as bargaining chips in securing advantageous alliances or in acquiring lands (from which wealth and power derived.) She benefited from such a marriage as well, providing her with a standard of living that was equal to or greater than she had been raised with, and which was above that of many women. As long as she was able to provide her husband with an heir, her place was generally secure.
These times were a time for warfare, and while her husband was away, the woman had control over her husband's holdings. She assumed his authority in his absence, and had control over the purse, as well. Once out of her father's household, many women acquired significant power, albeit behind the scenes through influence over her husband or the men around him.
Consider Eleanor of Aquitaine. Born in 1122, she inherited the duchy of Aquitaine (in France) directly from her father, and was thus ruler of Aquitaine in her own right. A month after her marriage to Louis of France, he became King of France, and she actually accompanied him on the Second Crusade. Her marriage to Louis VII failed, very likely because she failed to provide him an heir, and despite the efforts of the Pope, Louis was determined to divorce her.
In 1152 she married Henry Fitz-Empress, the Duke of Normandy through his mother (a daughter of King Henry I of England) and the Count of Anjou through his father. After the deaths of both Henry I and his successor, Stephen, Henry Fitz-Empress became Henry II, King of England, and Eleanor became queen. Two of her sons became King of England after Henry II's death, and Eleanor also continued to take an active role in ruling Aquitaine.
While her son, King Richard I, was on crusade, his brother John allied with France and tried to take the throne. It was Eleanor who helped to maintain the support of those in England for Richard, defeating John. After Richard's death, Eleanor's grandson, Arthur of Brittany, tried to seize the throne, and it was Eleanor, aged 80, who held out against his forces until John could muster a force to defeat him.
It was Eleanor's strength, in part, that held England together during Richard's reign. He spent very little time in England and had little interest in administering the affairs of the country. And it was Eleanor's power and influence that helped enable John to defeat Arthur of Brittany and assume the throne after Richard's death.
First, only a small number of people in the Middle Ages had any real power, which here I will define as options (choices) and influence over others. This was the case whether they were male or female. Only farther up the wealth and societal ladder does the question of power really begin to have much of a context. Women were used as bargaining chips in securing advantageous alliances or in acquiring lands (from which wealth and power derived.) She benefited from such a marriage as well, providing her with a standard of living that was equal to or greater than she had been raised with, and which was above that of many women. As long as she was able to provide her husband with an heir, her place was generally secure.
These times were a time for warfare, and while her husband was away, the woman had control over her husband's holdings. She assumed his authority in his absence, and had control over the purse, as well. Once out of her father's household, many women acquired significant power, albeit behind the scenes through influence over her husband or the men around him.
Consider Eleanor of Aquitaine. Born in 1122, she inherited the duchy of Aquitaine (in France) directly from her father, and was thus ruler of Aquitaine in her own right. A month after her marriage to Louis of France, he became King of France, and she actually accompanied him on the Second Crusade. Her marriage to Louis VII failed, very likely because she failed to provide him an heir, and despite the efforts of the Pope, Louis was determined to divorce her.
In 1152 she married Henry Fitz-Empress, the Duke of Normandy through his mother (a daughter of King Henry I of England) and the Count of Anjou through his father. After the deaths of both Henry I and his successor, Stephen, Henry Fitz-Empress became Henry II, King of England, and Eleanor became queen. Two of her sons became King of England after Henry II's death, and Eleanor also continued to take an active role in ruling Aquitaine.
While her son, King Richard I, was on crusade, his brother John allied with France and tried to take the throne. It was Eleanor who helped to maintain the support of those in England for Richard, defeating John. After Richard's death, Eleanor's grandson, Arthur of Brittany, tried to seize the throne, and it was Eleanor, aged 80, who held out against his forces until John could muster a force to defeat him.
It was Eleanor's strength, in part, that held England together during Richard's reign. He spent very little time in England and had little interest in administering the affairs of the country. And it was Eleanor's power and influence that helped enable John to defeat Arthur of Brittany and assume the throne after Richard's death.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
For the Love of English
My daughter came home from school the other day complaining about her English class. Of course I gave her the "parent" speech about all learning has merit, which it does, but at her age I didn't believe it, either. I remember when I was in high school, we read Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales" in Middle English, and there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth.
I was thinking about this, and decided to take a brief look at the changes in English over time. All countries, including France, Germany, and Russia to name a few, seem to have undergone a similar linguistic evolution. This evolution seems to follow a pattern of multiple dialects of a basic language, regionally-based, which then undergo various phases of standardization, usually in response to ecclesiastical or commercial needs.
I wanted to choose something simple, but which had longevity so the same piece could be looked at over time. I ran across various incarnations of the "The Lord's Prayer" which I thought I would share you.
Old English, which is essentially Anglo-Saxon and was initially more of a spoken than written language, was spoken in England from roughly 500-1000 A.D.
to-becume ðin rice
geweorþe ðin willa on eorðan swa swa on heofenum.
Urne ge dæghwamlican hlaf syle us to-deag
and forgyf us ure gyltas
swa swa we forgifaþ urum gyltendum
ane ne gelæde ðu us on costnunge
ac alys us of yfle.
This version of Middle English is from John of Wycliffe circa 1380-1389. The letter "z" here represents a character no longer used, but which represented a guttural sound somewhere between a "g" and a "y".
Oure fadire that are in heuenes
halwid be thi name
Thi kingdom cumme to
Be thi wille don
As in heuen and in erthe;
Ziv to vs this day oure breed oure other substance
And forzeue to vs. oure dettis
As we forzeue to oure dettours;
And leed vs nat into temptacioun
But delyuere vs fro yeuel. Amen
This later Middle English version is from Tyndale's Testament dated 1526:
O oure father which art in heven,
halowed be thy name.
Let thy kingdom come.
Thy wyll be fulfilled, as well in eth
as hit ys in heven.
Geve vs this daye our dayly breade,
And forgeve vs oure treaspases
euen as we forgeve them which treaspas vs.
Leede vs not into temptation,
but delyvre vs from yvell. Amen.
Spelling was not a constant, from region to region or even writer to writer, but words and syntax also changed. For example, the "and forgyf us ure gyltas" in the Old English, "gyltas" being "guilt." In the early Middle English guilt has become "dettis" or "debts". By the mid-sixteenth century this has become "trespass."
I was thinking about this, and decided to take a brief look at the changes in English over time. All countries, including France, Germany, and Russia to name a few, seem to have undergone a similar linguistic evolution. This evolution seems to follow a pattern of multiple dialects of a basic language, regionally-based, which then undergo various phases of standardization, usually in response to ecclesiastical or commercial needs.
I wanted to choose something simple, but which had longevity so the same piece could be looked at over time. I ran across various incarnations of the "The Lord's Prayer" which I thought I would share you.
Old English, which is essentially Anglo-Saxon and was initially more of a spoken than written language, was spoken in England from roughly 500-1000 A.D.
Fæder ure
ðu ðe eart on heofenumsi ðin nama gehalgodto-becume ðin rice
geweorþe ðin willa on eorðan swa swa on heofenum.
Urne ge dæghwamlican hlaf syle us to-deag
and forgyf us ure gyltas
swa swa we forgifaþ urum gyltendum
ane ne gelæde ðu us on costnunge
ac alys us of yfle.
This version of Middle English is from John of Wycliffe circa 1380-1389. The letter "z" here represents a character no longer used, but which represented a guttural sound somewhere between a "g" and a "y".
Oure fadire that are in heuenes
halwid be thi name
Thi kingdom cumme to
Be thi wille don
As in heuen and in erthe;
Ziv to vs this day oure breed oure other substance
And forzeue to vs. oure dettis
As we forzeue to oure dettours;
And leed vs nat into temptacioun
But delyuere vs fro yeuel. Amen
This later Middle English version is from Tyndale's Testament dated 1526:
O oure father which art in heven,
halowed be thy name.
Let thy kingdom come.
Thy wyll be fulfilled, as well in eth
as hit ys in heven.
Geve vs this daye our dayly breade,
And forgeve vs oure treaspases
euen as we forgeve them which treaspas vs.
Leede vs not into temptation,
but delyvre vs from yvell. Amen.
Spelling was not a constant, from region to region or even writer to writer, but words and syntax also changed. For example, the "and forgyf us ure gyltas" in the Old English, "gyltas" being "guilt." In the early Middle English guilt has become "dettis" or "debts". By the mid-sixteenth century this has become "trespass."
Monday, September 23, 2013
It's Good to be the King---or is It?
So said Mel Brooks repeatedly in his "History of the World, Part I." And, in many ways, he was right. Kings had power, money, and certainly did not live in deprivation or starvation. Instead, kings (and queens) had other things to worry about. Before you roll your eyes and think, "I wish I had their problems," consider that intrigue was a given, and seems to have been constant, given just the handful of examples below:
Edward the Martyr of England (c962-978) was calling on his stepmother and his half-brother at Corfe Castle in Dorset. When he arrived, those who greeted him stabbed him to death as he dismounted from his horse. The murder was committed at the orders of his stepmother, Elfrida.
Edmund II of England (c989-1016), was said officially to have died of natural causes, but was believed by some chroniclers to have been murdered. There is evidence to support that an assassin hid under the king's privy, and while Edward was seated, stabbed him twice through the rectum and into the bowels.
Richard II of England (1367-c1400) made an enemy of Henry Bolingbroke, his cousin. When Richard later found himself deserted by his supporters, he was imprisoned in the Tower of London by Henry, who later claimed the throne. Richard was moved from the Tower of London to Pontefract Castle in Yorkshire, where several of his supporters tried to free him and murder Henry in the process. In return, Richard was left to die at the castle, most likely of starvation.
James I of Scotland (1394-1437) and his wife were attacked by a group of assassins on February 20, 1436. James fled into an underground vault where he was cornered and stabbed to death. Among the conspirators were an old friend, and James' grandson, Robert.
These are just a few of the known instances of regicide, as opposed to the executions of deposed or overthrown rulers. Many others died in battle or as the result of wounds sustained in battle, and yet more under questionable circumstances where murder was suspected or rumored but could not be proven. Several were able to discover plots against them in time to turn the tables on their enemies. Even Edward VII of England was the victim of an assassination attempt in April 1900, and rumors still swirl about the death of Princess Diana.
Good to be the king, perhaps, but you might want to sleep with one eye open.
Edward the Martyr of England (c962-978) was calling on his stepmother and his half-brother at Corfe Castle in Dorset. When he arrived, those who greeted him stabbed him to death as he dismounted from his horse. The murder was committed at the orders of his stepmother, Elfrida.
Edmund II of England (c989-1016), was said officially to have died of natural causes, but was believed by some chroniclers to have been murdered. There is evidence to support that an assassin hid under the king's privy, and while Edward was seated, stabbed him twice through the rectum and into the bowels.
Richard II of England (1367-c1400) made an enemy of Henry Bolingbroke, his cousin. When Richard later found himself deserted by his supporters, he was imprisoned in the Tower of London by Henry, who later claimed the throne. Richard was moved from the Tower of London to Pontefract Castle in Yorkshire, where several of his supporters tried to free him and murder Henry in the process. In return, Richard was left to die at the castle, most likely of starvation.
James I of Scotland (1394-1437) and his wife were attacked by a group of assassins on February 20, 1436. James fled into an underground vault where he was cornered and stabbed to death. Among the conspirators were an old friend, and James' grandson, Robert.
These are just a few of the known instances of regicide, as opposed to the executions of deposed or overthrown rulers. Many others died in battle or as the result of wounds sustained in battle, and yet more under questionable circumstances where murder was suspected or rumored but could not be proven. Several were able to discover plots against them in time to turn the tables on their enemies. Even Edward VII of England was the victim of an assassination attempt in April 1900, and rumors still swirl about the death of Princess Diana.
Good to be the king, perhaps, but you might want to sleep with one eye open.
Was There A Female Pope?
There has been argument for centuries over whether or not a woman posing as a man--John Anglicus--became Pope in the 9th century. The argument is fascinating because both sides can present circumstantial evidence to support their claims. However, like most scholarly debate about people and events from a millennium ago, it's unlikely that there will ever be any definitive proof one way or the other.
All sides agree that "Pope Joan" as she is called would have had to disguise herself as a man in order to ascend through the ranks and ultimately become the Pope. There are documented instances of cross-dressing in the Middle Ages, within and outside of the Catholic Church. There is a professor of medieval studies at Southern Methodist University, Valerie Hotchkiss, who has written about several women who pretended to be men, became monks, and some actually achieved sainthood.
Of course, the most well-documented and well-known case is that of Joan of Arc, though her case is atypical. On only one occasion did she dress in male clothing with the intent to deceive: before she began her military campaign on behalf of Charles VII she had to be smuggled through enemy territory to reach him. Beyond that, she dressed in male clothing and armor because all of the ties necessary to secure the armor and garments actually offered her greater protection against rape than a woman's dress. In fact, when she was imprisoned and guarded by British (male) guards, she continued to wear male clothing for that reason, even though that was ultimately the charge that was used to justify her conviction for heresy.
Returning to the female Pope Joan, the tale of her papacy, which supposedly was just over two years in length, ends in disgrace. Manuscripts describe how, in the midst of a papal procession in Rome, she began suffering abdominal pains and, to the horror of those around her, gave birth. Some manuscripts say she and the infant were stoned to death; others say she was cloistered in a convent and the child, a son, eventually became bishop of Ostia
So, do we believe writings that do not begin to appear until the 1200's regarding a female pope, or do we believe the fact that there are no documents contemporary to her papacy, or anything from the Vatican's secret archives, supporting the assertion that a female was ever elected Pope? Was it possibly a case of a woman successfully masquerading as a man who was able to ascend in the Church hierarchy to some degree, perhaps as a secretary to a cardinal, and the story became embellished over the years? Or were there no "official" or secret documents because any evidence was destroyed out of fear that the truth would prove the Church was fallible, thereby destroying it's divine authority? Or was it merely allegory, a cautionary tale to warn women of the dangers of discontent with their role in medieval society?
.
All sides agree that "Pope Joan" as she is called would have had to disguise herself as a man in order to ascend through the ranks and ultimately become the Pope. There are documented instances of cross-dressing in the Middle Ages, within and outside of the Catholic Church. There is a professor of medieval studies at Southern Methodist University, Valerie Hotchkiss, who has written about several women who pretended to be men, became monks, and some actually achieved sainthood.
Of course, the most well-documented and well-known case is that of Joan of Arc, though her case is atypical. On only one occasion did she dress in male clothing with the intent to deceive: before she began her military campaign on behalf of Charles VII she had to be smuggled through enemy territory to reach him. Beyond that, she dressed in male clothing and armor because all of the ties necessary to secure the armor and garments actually offered her greater protection against rape than a woman's dress. In fact, when she was imprisoned and guarded by British (male) guards, she continued to wear male clothing for that reason, even though that was ultimately the charge that was used to justify her conviction for heresy.
Returning to the female Pope Joan, the tale of her papacy, which supposedly was just over two years in length, ends in disgrace. Manuscripts describe how, in the midst of a papal procession in Rome, she began suffering abdominal pains and, to the horror of those around her, gave birth. Some manuscripts say she and the infant were stoned to death; others say she was cloistered in a convent and the child, a son, eventually became bishop of Ostia
So, do we believe writings that do not begin to appear until the 1200's regarding a female pope, or do we believe the fact that there are no documents contemporary to her papacy, or anything from the Vatican's secret archives, supporting the assertion that a female was ever elected Pope? Was it possibly a case of a woman successfully masquerading as a man who was able to ascend in the Church hierarchy to some degree, perhaps as a secretary to a cardinal, and the story became embellished over the years? Or were there no "official" or secret documents because any evidence was destroyed out of fear that the truth would prove the Church was fallible, thereby destroying it's divine authority? Or was it merely allegory, a cautionary tale to warn women of the dangers of discontent with their role in medieval society?
.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
A Little Thank You to ARMA
Sometimes in the course of writing, I find myself writing about something of which I have little firsthand knowledge. This was certainly true during my last project, which involved sword-fighting. I will confess that I have swords--three of them, if you don't count one purely decorative one--but I haven't had a whole lot of opportunity to fight with them (though there are a few people walking around who should be grateful that I refrained from doing so.)
Filmmakers have choreographers who assist them in coming up with swordplay scenes that are visually exciting, and which last as long as the drama of the scene requires. It's a little more difficult to convey such drama in writing, especially if all you're going to write is five minutes-worth of, "thrust, parry, thrust, parry, slash, evade...." Besides, I wanted the scenes to be grittier, more realistic. Ah, thank you, ARMA!
ARMA, the Association for Renaissance Martial Arts, is a very serious player in the growing world of Western martial arts, which refers to the personal combat weapons and styles that were in use in Western Europe prior to the large-scale adoption of firearms in the 16th century. Eastern or Oriental martial arts are such disciplines as judo, kendo, and karate, and these are what most people think of when they hear the term "martial arts." Being tied to cultural and spiritual beliefs and traditions as well as to military ones, Oriental martial arts have been passed down as living knowledge from generation to generation to the current day. Not so for Western martial arts, a discipline that was essentially abandoned once firearms came to predominate in battle.
Groups such as ARMA have researched existing historical texts on hand-to-hand combat used in Western Europe during the Middle Ages up into the 16th century. Some of these texts and training manuals are extremely detailed in both description and illustration. Based on them, and through practical application, this and similar groups have resurrected these martial arts, and continue to train and teach them to enthusiasts.
Through a number of short videos made by ARMA in particular, I was able to study the various moves. I was then able to adapt them for the scenes I was writing, and it appears to have worked very well, lending a crispness and a clarity to those scenes that I would probably not been able to achieve, otherwise. Once again, thank you, ARMA.
Filmmakers have choreographers who assist them in coming up with swordplay scenes that are visually exciting, and which last as long as the drama of the scene requires. It's a little more difficult to convey such drama in writing, especially if all you're going to write is five minutes-worth of, "thrust, parry, thrust, parry, slash, evade...." Besides, I wanted the scenes to be grittier, more realistic. Ah, thank you, ARMA!
ARMA, the Association for Renaissance Martial Arts, is a very serious player in the growing world of Western martial arts, which refers to the personal combat weapons and styles that were in use in Western Europe prior to the large-scale adoption of firearms in the 16th century. Eastern or Oriental martial arts are such disciplines as judo, kendo, and karate, and these are what most people think of when they hear the term "martial arts." Being tied to cultural and spiritual beliefs and traditions as well as to military ones, Oriental martial arts have been passed down as living knowledge from generation to generation to the current day. Not so for Western martial arts, a discipline that was essentially abandoned once firearms came to predominate in battle.
Groups such as ARMA have researched existing historical texts on hand-to-hand combat used in Western Europe during the Middle Ages up into the 16th century. Some of these texts and training manuals are extremely detailed in both description and illustration. Based on them, and through practical application, this and similar groups have resurrected these martial arts, and continue to train and teach them to enthusiasts.
Through a number of short videos made by ARMA in particular, I was able to study the various moves. I was then able to adapt them for the scenes I was writing, and it appears to have worked very well, lending a crispness and a clarity to those scenes that I would probably not been able to achieve, otherwise. Once again, thank you, ARMA.
Friday, September 20, 2013
Something to Do, September through October
Okay, my friends. I know many of you think of Renaissance fairs are populated by out-there folks who maybe have a somewhat slippery grasp on reality. We all have our escapes--whether it's playing the latest app, or Farm Town, or Call of Duty. Come now, don't be unfair.
Renfaire enthusiasts range from folks who want to be able to just do something a little different for a day to members of the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA), an international society of living history enthusiasts who attempt to recreate portions of medieval life and living as authentically as possible. Many of these fairs attract outstanding performing talent and artisans of medieval and not-quite-so-medieval crafts.
Following is a listing of renaissance fairs operating in September and October that expect or have previously had an attendance of over 1,000. I have provided the names of the fairs because they all have websites with details about ticketing, hours, and special events. Many even list talent or artisans that will be appearing there. If you've never attended one, it is certainly something you should experience. As a side note, many southern states in the U.S. have events that run during the months of November through March. May through August are popular months for these events throughout the U.S. and Europe.
UNITED STATES
ALABAMA
Florence, AL - Alabama Renaissance Faire, 4th weekend in October, attendance 38,000
Mobile, AL - Mobile Renaissance Faire, Nov 10-12th, attendance 6,500
ARKANSAS
Texarkana, AR - Texarkana Renaissance Faire (New), October 5-7th, est. attendance 500
CALIFORNIA
Sonora, CA - All Hallows Fantasy Faire, Oct. 18-20th, attendance 3,000
Folsom, CA - Folsom Renaissance Faire & Shakespeare Festival, Oct. 19-20th, attendance 7,000
Escondido, CA - Gold Coast Escondido Renaissance Faire, Oct. 26-27th, attendance n/a
Taft, CA - Great Western War (War Through the Ages), Oct. 9-14th, attendance n/a
Grass Valley, CA - KVMR Celtic Festival & Marketplace, Sept. 27-29th, attendance n/a
Hollister, CA - Northern California Renaissance Faire, Wknds Sept. 14 - Oct. 13, attendance 150,000
San Diego, CA - Tournament of the Phoenix (New, Jousting Tourney), Oct. 18-20th, est. attendance 3,000
CONNECTICUT
Norwich, CT - Connecticut Renaissance Faire, Wknds Sept. 21 - Oct. 20th, attendance 11,000
GEORGIA
Columbus, GA - Southern Pirate Festival (New), Oct. 20th, est. attendance 1,200
IDAHO
Emmett, ID - Idaho Renaissance Faire, Oct. 12-13th, attendance, 2,000
INDIANA
Fishers, IN - Fishers Renaissance Faire, Oct. 5-6th, attendance, 15,000
IOWA
Sioux City, IA - Sioux City Riverssance Festival, Oct. 5-6th, attendance 9,000
KANSAS
Wichita, KS - Great Plains Renaissance Festival, Sept. 21-22nd, attendance 18,000
Kansas City, KS - Kansas City Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 31 - Oct 14th, attendance 200,000
MARYLAND
Annapolis, MD - Maryland Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 24 - Oct. 20th, attendance 290,000
MASSACHUSSETS
Carver, MA - King Richard's Faire, Weekends Aug. 31 - Oct. 20th, attendance 150,000
MICHIGAN
Holly, MI - Michigan Renaissance Faire, Weekends Aug. 17 - Sept.29th, attendance 250,000
MINNESOTA
Shakopee, MN - Minnesota Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 17 - Sept. 29th, attendance 280,000
MISSISSIPPI
Ocean Springs, MS - Ocean Springs Renaissance Faire, Oct. 19-20th, attendance 8,000
NEVADA
Las Vegas, NV - Age of Chivalry Renaissance Festival, Oct. 11-13th, attendance 40,000
NEW MEXICO
Santa Fe, NM - Santa Fe Renaissance Faire, Sept. 21-22nd, attendance 6,500
NORTH CAROLINA
Huntersville, NC - Carolina Renaissance Festival & Artisan Marketplace, Wknds Oct. 5 - Nov. 4th, attendance 170,000
OHIO
Harveysburg, OH - Ohio Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 31 - Oct. 20th, attendance 175,000
PENNSYLVANIA
West Newton, PA - Pittsburgh Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 24th - Sept. 29th, attendance 50,000
TEXAS
Plantersville, TX - Texas Renaissance Faire, Wknds Oct. 12 - Dec. 1st, attendance 450,000
VIRGINIA
Salem, VA - Green Hill Medieval Faire & Highland Games, Sept. 28-29th, attendance 2,000
Radford, VA - Radford Highlanders Festival, Oct. 12th, attendance 10,000
GREAT BRITAIN
Bruntingthorpe, Leicestershire - International Living History Fair, Oct. 25-27th, attendance n/a
Nottingham, Nottinghamshire - Robin Hood Pageant, Oct. 26-27th, attendance n/a
Renfaire enthusiasts range from folks who want to be able to just do something a little different for a day to members of the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA), an international society of living history enthusiasts who attempt to recreate portions of medieval life and living as authentically as possible. Many of these fairs attract outstanding performing talent and artisans of medieval and not-quite-so-medieval crafts.
Following is a listing of renaissance fairs operating in September and October that expect or have previously had an attendance of over 1,000. I have provided the names of the fairs because they all have websites with details about ticketing, hours, and special events. Many even list talent or artisans that will be appearing there. If you've never attended one, it is certainly something you should experience. As a side note, many southern states in the U.S. have events that run during the months of November through March. May through August are popular months for these events throughout the U.S. and Europe.
UNITED STATES
ALABAMA
Florence, AL - Alabama Renaissance Faire, 4th weekend in October, attendance 38,000
Mobile, AL - Mobile Renaissance Faire, Nov 10-12th, attendance 6,500
ARKANSAS
Texarkana, AR - Texarkana Renaissance Faire (New), October 5-7th, est. attendance 500
CALIFORNIA
Sonora, CA - All Hallows Fantasy Faire, Oct. 18-20th, attendance 3,000
Folsom, CA - Folsom Renaissance Faire & Shakespeare Festival, Oct. 19-20th, attendance 7,000
Escondido, CA - Gold Coast Escondido Renaissance Faire, Oct. 26-27th, attendance n/a
Taft, CA - Great Western War (War Through the Ages), Oct. 9-14th, attendance n/a
Grass Valley, CA - KVMR Celtic Festival & Marketplace, Sept. 27-29th, attendance n/a
Hollister, CA - Northern California Renaissance Faire, Wknds Sept. 14 - Oct. 13, attendance 150,000
San Diego, CA - Tournament of the Phoenix (New, Jousting Tourney), Oct. 18-20th, est. attendance 3,000
CONNECTICUT
Norwich, CT - Connecticut Renaissance Faire, Wknds Sept. 21 - Oct. 20th, attendance 11,000
GEORGIA
Columbus, GA - Southern Pirate Festival (New), Oct. 20th, est. attendance 1,200
IDAHO
Emmett, ID - Idaho Renaissance Faire, Oct. 12-13th, attendance, 2,000
INDIANA
Fishers, IN - Fishers Renaissance Faire, Oct. 5-6th, attendance, 15,000
IOWA
Sioux City, IA - Sioux City Riverssance Festival, Oct. 5-6th, attendance 9,000
KANSAS
Wichita, KS - Great Plains Renaissance Festival, Sept. 21-22nd, attendance 18,000
Kansas City, KS - Kansas City Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 31 - Oct 14th, attendance 200,000
MARYLAND
Annapolis, MD - Maryland Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 24 - Oct. 20th, attendance 290,000
MASSACHUSSETS
Carver, MA - King Richard's Faire, Weekends Aug. 31 - Oct. 20th, attendance 150,000
MICHIGAN
Holly, MI - Michigan Renaissance Faire, Weekends Aug. 17 - Sept.29th, attendance 250,000
MINNESOTA
Shakopee, MN - Minnesota Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 17 - Sept. 29th, attendance 280,000
MISSISSIPPI
Ocean Springs, MS - Ocean Springs Renaissance Faire, Oct. 19-20th, attendance 8,000
NEVADA
Las Vegas, NV - Age of Chivalry Renaissance Festival, Oct. 11-13th, attendance 40,000
NEW MEXICO
Santa Fe, NM - Santa Fe Renaissance Faire, Sept. 21-22nd, attendance 6,500
NORTH CAROLINA
Huntersville, NC - Carolina Renaissance Festival & Artisan Marketplace, Wknds Oct. 5 - Nov. 4th, attendance 170,000
OHIO
Harveysburg, OH - Ohio Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 31 - Oct. 20th, attendance 175,000
PENNSYLVANIA
West Newton, PA - Pittsburgh Renaissance Festival, Wknds Aug. 24th - Sept. 29th, attendance 50,000
TEXAS
Plantersville, TX - Texas Renaissance Faire, Wknds Oct. 12 - Dec. 1st, attendance 450,000
VIRGINIA
Salem, VA - Green Hill Medieval Faire & Highland Games, Sept. 28-29th, attendance 2,000
Radford, VA - Radford Highlanders Festival, Oct. 12th, attendance 10,000
GREAT BRITAIN
Bruntingthorpe, Leicestershire - International Living History Fair, Oct. 25-27th, attendance n/a
Nottingham, Nottinghamshire - Robin Hood Pageant, Oct. 26-27th, attendance n/a
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Have You Seen This Man?
I was truly excited when archaeologists recently found the body of King Richard III of England in an excavation of a parking lot in the vicinity that had been known to be the location of the Greyfriars Church in Leicester, England. King Richard III had been killed at the Battle of Bosworth Field, which was the decisive battle of the War of the Roses. Richard had been king for only two years, and unpopular at that: there were two rebellions against him in those two years.
It appears that his unpopularity resulted in the post-mortem humiliation of his remains, and then he was, according to the archaeologists who found him, hastily buried in a grave that was too small for him in the Greyfriar's Church. Knowledge of his burial there was lost until his recent discovery--just over five hundred years.
There is another King of the British Isles whose remains have never been found. King James IV of Scotland was killed in the Battle of Flodden Field in 1513, after being forced to choose between his alliance with the French and with Britain when his wife's brother, King Henry VIII of England, decided he wanted to re-annex Angevin lands (Anjou, France).
After the disastrous battle, where it's estimated that anywhere from four to fourteen Scots died for every Englishman killed, James' body was taken to Berwick, Scotland, embalmed, and placed in a lead coffin for transit to London. Placed at the monastery of Sheen in Richmond, James' body awaited King Henry's decision about burial. The orders were never given, and the body appears to have remained in a storeroom until twenty years later when, during the Dissolution of the Monasteries, it disappeared.
Did James ever get an actual burial? Since the monastery was dissolved by Henry's decree, and since he surely knew that his brother-in-law's remains were there, it would seem likely that James was eventually buried, though perhaps not with all the office of a king.
It appears that his unpopularity resulted in the post-mortem humiliation of his remains, and then he was, according to the archaeologists who found him, hastily buried in a grave that was too small for him in the Greyfriar's Church. Knowledge of his burial there was lost until his recent discovery--just over five hundred years.
There is another King of the British Isles whose remains have never been found. King James IV of Scotland was killed in the Battle of Flodden Field in 1513, after being forced to choose between his alliance with the French and with Britain when his wife's brother, King Henry VIII of England, decided he wanted to re-annex Angevin lands (Anjou, France).
After the disastrous battle, where it's estimated that anywhere from four to fourteen Scots died for every Englishman killed, James' body was taken to Berwick, Scotland, embalmed, and placed in a lead coffin for transit to London. Placed at the monastery of Sheen in Richmond, James' body awaited King Henry's decision about burial. The orders were never given, and the body appears to have remained in a storeroom until twenty years later when, during the Dissolution of the Monasteries, it disappeared.
Did James ever get an actual burial? Since the monastery was dissolved by Henry's decree, and since he surely knew that his brother-in-law's remains were there, it would seem likely that James was eventually buried, though perhaps not with all the office of a king.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Parody of a Parody
I ran across this the other day, and could not resist sharing it. I'm assuming that most of you are familiar with Monty Python and their iconic spoof of the legend of King Arthur, "The Holy Grail." While avid Medievalists cringe at the view of the Middle Ages popularized in movies, Monty Python manages to highlight the ridiculousness of many things--including the very narrow vision that creates those stereotypes.
This link is to a movie trailer made by Stephane Bouley. It is a movie trailer positioning Monty Python's movie as serious historical cinema, a clever move that the members of Monty Python would no doubt thoroughly applaud.
Monty Python Spoof Trailer
This link is to a movie trailer made by Stephane Bouley. It is a movie trailer positioning Monty Python's movie as serious historical cinema, a clever move that the members of Monty Python would no doubt thoroughly applaud.
Monty Python Spoof Trailer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)