Basic Judging Collegium

Contributed by Dame Toireasa McBridge, July 2004

What is your role as a judge?

• As a judge it is your responsibility to impartially critique projects submitted by the artisans
• If for any reason, you cannot impartially judge a project it is your responsibility to step down from judging that particular project. The reason makes no difference and no reason need be given why you feel you should not judge a particular project.
• You are not to judge a family member or other close tie, i.e., knight/squire; direct vassals etc.
• At no time will refraining from judging a particular project be looked down upon.
• It is your responsibility to be familiar with the Arts & Science Manual and the Judging Manual
• Projects being presented are important to the artists; they have put time and effort into something and that project should be given the proper consideration during judging.
• You cannot fairly judge a project if you are not knowledgeable about the manuals.
• If you do not feel you have sufficient experience in a particular craft, ask for assistance from someone who has more experience.
• Read carefully the written documentation presented to you for each entry.
• Talk to the artisan. Remember that direct questions are allowed and encouraged as part of the documentation process. Documentation can be a combination of oral and written. The artisan should always be given the chance to present oral documentation in conjunction with their written. If you are taking off points for some item of information missing from the documentation, ask the artisan about the information. Confirm you have not missed it in the written documentation and make sure you give the artisan the opportunity to fill in any thing missing in their oral documentation. Remember, it is in the manuals that direct questions are not only allowed but encouraged.

The Use of Comment Cards

• The reason for any points being deducted must be noted. Please make the comments constructive. This is to be a learning process.
• Bonus points are available in each scoring category. The reason for each bonus point being awarded must be documented on the comment card
• There are four areas that are taken into consideration when judging a project. These are outlined below.

Authenticity

• The first question that needs to be answered is: Is the general concept for the entry appropriate to the Adrian context? Would it have been found in Europe during the time period of 1066 - 1603? If the answer to this is "No" Then the project MUST be withdrawn. A reason must be given on the score cards and all judges must agree to this.
• There are five questions to be answered when judging authenticity: If there are no substitutions, the score defaults to the point indicated.
  • If there are modern substitutions used in the project for period materials, are they good substitutions? (1 point)*
  • Are the materials or subject used in the project appropriate to a single period and culture? (1 point)
  • If there are modern construction techniques used, do they provide a period effect?* (1 point)
  • Are the design elements, style, and function appropriate to a single period, geographical area and/or culture and correct for this item? (1 point)
  • Are the finishing and decorative details appropriate to a single period, geographical area and/or culture and correct for the item? (1 point).
• One (1) bonus point for authenticity may be awarded when an entry:
  • Is reasonably complex, but uses no substitutions in materials or techniques (other than what an artist in period would have purchased from other sources)
  • Is created using completely lost art (the entry creates a starting point for future redaction)
  • Is created using complex and difficult period techniques or difficult to use materials in lieu of perfectly acceptable modern substitutions.

Craftsmanship/Functionality

Each region may choose its own method, but this method must be standard for that region. At Imperial events, the 10-point system is the standard method.
• Craftsmanship can be scored in two ways.
  • Starting at 10 points: This uses a 10-point starting point where the artist is judged down for flaws in either craftsmanship or functionality. A constructive comment must be provided for defects causing point deductions. The number of points deducted must be specified for each corresponding comment. Comments and criticisms must still be worded in a constructive manner. This does not preclude the judge from adding points back when the artist has executed difficult or complex parts of the project particularly well.
  • Starting at 5 points: The second way is to start at five (5) points and add points for positive things about a project, and deduct points for negatives or defects in the project.
• One (1) bonus point beyond ten (10) may be awarded for craftsmanship when a reasonably complex project is executed to a much higher standard than normally is seen in the region.

Complexity

• Complexity should be scored on a 1 to 10 scale for that type of art. Complexity includes difficulty, complexity of detail, time to complete, and scope of the project created, of the process, the techniques and materials used. Time to create an entry should not account for the time a particular artist took in creating a project, but the time an average modern journeyman in that craft would take to create a similar entry. A "Journeyman" is a person with some training and moderate experience in that craft. Additional points are added to a basic "type of project" difficulty score based on additional details and complexity, such that a basically simple project, with a high level of complex detail added can score very well. Entries that combine multiple types of art can combine scores for each type of art up to 13 points total. For example if you make an item composed of 3 different arts, they may all be added together to gain your complexity score.
• Bonus points can be added if the judges warrant. Additional points can be added for scope above and beyond a normal entry that would score a 10. Points awarded beyond 10 should be no more than 3. To score a project greater than a 10 complexity, a judge should look for an entry that is:
  • Exceptionally complex or difficult according to the standards in the region
  • Exceptionally complex or difficult detail and finishing
  • Exceptionally time consuming for a modern journeyman in that art to achieve
  • Difficult or complex enough to require a great deal of training and learning to create
  • Created of multiple components that could be entries in and of themselves
• Regarding additional points for complexity - if you feel a project is more complex than where it falls on the matrix; you do not need to classify the additional points as "bonus" points unless the complexity score is at a 10 already.
• Each kingdom may choose to modify the tables to meet standards appropriate to their kingdom or choose not to use the tables at all. If no tables are used, the Imperial MA&S suggests that judges be carefully chosen who have knowledge in the entry's art or science. If another set of tables are used by a subdivision, or the tables are modified significantly, copies of the tables must be sent to the Imperial Minister of Arts and Sciences for review.
• These tables are a guide to figuring out how complex a project is, which in turn is a guide to a judge assigning the complexity points. The theory is simple: Plain and simple is at the low end of the complexity scale. Very detailed and complex is at the high end.

Documentation

• Use these questions to determine the score of the artist for documentation. Documentation must include some minimal written documentation (a sample is shown in manuals) for the judges' records, but can be embellished with oral documentation. Judges are obligated to ask questions when they feel that an artist may not have covered an item adequately. Direct questions are appropriate.
  • 1. A PHYSICAL ENTRY THE ARTIST CREATED
    This type of entry was previously considered Fine, Crafted, or Culinary.
    • Does the artist provide enough source information to the judges to determine that this entry could have existed in the period 1066-1603? - 1 point.
    • Does artist provide sources and document the materials used in period to create this entry? - 1 point
    • Does the artist provide sources and document the techniques used in period to create this entry? - 1 point.
    • Does the artist document the techniques they used to create this entry? - 1/2 point.
    • Does the artist document the materials they used to create this entry? - 1/2 point.
    • Does the artist explain the rationale behind the choices of the substitutions used? - 1/2 point
    • Does the artist explain the period aesthetic that would help judge the piece, (examples: size, artistic style, form, style, color, taste, texture, belief, preference, fashion.)? - 1/2 point.
  • 2. PERFORMANCE
    This type of entry is a poem, speech, story, musical piece, play, song, etc.
    • Does the artist provide enough source information to the judges to determine that the entry could have been performed in the period 1066-1603? - 1 point
    • Does artist provide enough sources to document the style and the technique of the performance done in period? - 1 point.
    • Does the artist document the techniques they used to create this entry? - 1point.
    • Does the artist explain the rationale behind the choices of the substitutions used? - 1 point
    • Does the artist explain the period aesthetic that would help judge the piece, (examples: performance style, embellishments, projection, harmonies, rhythm, accompaniments, popular culture.)? - 1 point
  • 3. WRITTEN COMPOSITION
    This type of entry is a poem, speech, story, musical piece, play, song, etc.
    • Does the artist provide enough source information to the judges to determine that the entry could have been composed in the period 1066-1603? - 1 point
    • Does artist provide enough sources to document the style and the technique of the composition done in period? - 1 point
    • Does the artist document the techniques they used to create this composition? - 1 point
    • Does the artist explain the rationale behind the choices of the substitutions used? - 1 point
    • Does the artist explain the period aesthetic that would help judge the piece, (examples: artistic or musical style, form, embellishments, meter, language, rhyming pattern.)? - 1 point
  • 4. ARTICLES AND PAPERS
    Research papers and articles are not normally written in period persona. Additional points may be achieved in the Complexity and Craftsmanship scores for papers written as or for a period persona.
    • Research Papers - Points Question:
    • Does it document its premise as within the period 1066-1603, describing and documenting period methodologies, materials, technology, practice and culture? - 1 point
    • Does the article provide pictures and quotes from period sources that support the subject of the paper? - 1 point
    • Does the article evaluate its sources? - 1 point
    • Is the bibliography complete and provided in a standard bibliography format? - 1 point
    • Does the article express each topic or theory with supporting source information? - 1 point
    • "How-To" Articles Points Question
    • Does the artist provide enough source information to the judges to determine that the subject of this paper is within the period 1066-1603? - 1 point
    • Does artist provide sources and document the materials used in period to create this subject? - 1point
    • Does the artist provide sources and document the techniques used in period to create this subject? - 1 point
    • Does the artist document what modern substitutions for technique would be appropriate? - ½ point
    • Does the artist document what modern substitutions for materials would be appropriate? - ½ point
    • Does the artist document the period aesthetic that would help judge the piece, (examples: artistic style, embellishments, projection, harmonies, accompaniments, size, decoration, form, color, taste, texture, belief, preference, fashion.)? - 1 point
• One (1) point for documentation may be awarded when the documentation:
  • Provides valuable information above and beyond what any judge would need to know to judge the entry
  • Provides detailed "how-to" and "lessons learned" information for artisans who also may attempt a similar project
  • Provides ground-breaking research in a field, or
  • Exceeds the standard of documentation to such a high degree as to warrant an additional point.
• Some type of minimum written documentation is required for all projects. However, several forms of documentation are allowed. IF the main form of the documentation is oral there must be a least a minimal outline of the presentation in writing given to the judges.
• The documentation can be in a number of formats:
  • Written out in paragraphs
  • Oral with the written outline submitted
  • Photocopied

Point Requirements

• No entry will be judged if it scores a 0 in Authenticity.
• Journeyman's list must receive at least 10 points to receive a participation point.
• Knights list must receive at least 15 points to receive a participation point.
• To achieve a win on the Journeyman's List the project must score at least 25 points.
• To achieve a win on the Knights List the project must score at least 28 points.
• For a Masterwork to be awarded in a Tournament it must meet the requirements outlined in the A&S manual and receive a score of 30 or more. Please be sure the requirements of a masterwork are reviewed prior to awarding the title of masterwork.