[Archers] archery peerage

[Holly Gibbons]

(1) Thank you Martelle for rallying everybody for some great archery displays! And for your well-spoken responses.
(2) To Karl and others, there IS a premier archery award for being good at archery, just pure archery skill, and it is the Yew Bow. So there is "recognition" for archers already.
(3) to Fen, that is a most excellent point, that even if a peerage is established, archers should "squire" to knights and other peers to learn what is involved. It is a lot harder to get a peerage than most of us know, takes longer, requires more on so many more levels, as Martelle says. People get peerages when they are already peers.
 
 
 
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:16:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Sprouse <sprousecp at yahoo.com>
I think everything said back and forth here have been good points, but I have to agree with a couple people more directly.? The A&S aspect of things should not be something we HAVE to do to get a peerage.? Not that I am knocking that side, in fact I personally am fairly interested in that, and have already made my own crossbow and make my own bolts, quiver, etc.? That being said, not every archer WANTS to do that, nor should they have to.? To become a Laurel, yes they would and should have to get into the A&S/history?side of things, and to be a pelican, they would and should have to delve deep into the service side of the archery community.? But the Chivalry, as has been noted already by others, get recognized primarily for their pure ability at their 'profession'.? Yes, they have their chivalric traits they are supposed to exemplify, but so would most archers at the same level of our 'profession'.? Their are knights who have not built a thing,
nevert submitted an A&S entry, never ran an event.? They are knights because they are VERY good at what they do and somebody decided that they personified what 'we' should all be striving for and that is great.? I am not taking anything away from these knights, they deserve what they have gotten.? But to translate that into our profession nothing exists to honor or recognize those who are simply VERY good at what they do and that personify what we should all be striving for in OUR community.? A good archer who excels at these other things, as Seamus, Colum, Mors, Siegfried, Godai, Janyn, Jonathas, etc. do can very well get recognized as a Laurel or Pelican as warrants, but I still come back to the fact that this would be recognizing them not for their skill as an archer, but for their skill at bowmaking, leatherwork, historical research, service, etc.? What about their pure ability?? Why is that not deserving of recognition in its own right?
Again, just the two cents of someone who is currently 'unaffected' by this discussion/decision since I am admittedly not there yet, but I do see so many who are there and it just doesn't seem right.
Karl von Konigsberg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/pipermail/archers-atlantia.sca.org/attachments/20120217/08c2de7f/attachment-0002.htm>