[Archers] archery peerage

[Janyn Fletcher]

One correction, the Yew Bow is not given for only prowess with the Bow. I
know the description says that but it is pending changed wording.

 

In Service, Janyn

 

 

 

From: archers-bounces at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
[mailto:archers-bounces at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of Holly
Gibbons
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 5:14 PM
To: archers at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Re: [Archers] archery peerage

 

(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/20120217/6ba71f4c/attachment-0003.htm>