[MR] opinions on peerage

Mon May 2 10:33:58 PDT 2011

Hey Murienne,

I think you are correct, in a way. I think that there may have been
tournaments fought with rapier in history, but they were past our time
frame. I can think of no tourneys that utilized the bow outside of
fiction such as Robin Hood (not saying it didn't happen, I'm just
ignorant of it if it did). Back in the mists of time, long before I
started playing, rapier utilized foils, then epee's. I started playing
shortly after the switch to heavy rapier blades as a default. Now the
"default" blades are much closer to the tourney blades that would have
been used, although not quite there for the most part.

That being said, the sword I fight with now can be found here:

http://www.cashanwei.com/prod_Detail.aspx?id=SH2106

While under rapier's aegis, there is nothing you can call that other
than a broad sword, and it's used in the very new form of Cut and
Thrust. No, I'm not pushing for a C&T peerage - but there is also no
way that sword could not be considered a basic weapon used in
tournament combat within our time frame. I'm fairly sure that all of
the "C&T use only" type blades would fall into this category. For that
matter, I'm also pretty sure that the Long swords that we utilize as
"heavy" rapiers were also used in tournament combat, and are pretty
close in function to what is used for great swords in armored combat.
That doesn't mean I'm advocating for a "rapier knighthood" or peerage
- but there will come a time in the future where I can see C&T folks
that are not "regular" armored fighters start using that exact
argument as to why they should be knighted. They will be able to
persuasively argue that they are actually using weapons closer to what
may have been found, they are more authentic, etc, etc. I rather doubt
that it will matter in the least when all is said and done.

I would also like to gently point out that it does not say "basic
weapons of *period* tournament combat", and that not all of the
tourney's that are held within our fair kingdom are utilizing armored
combat, thus not all basic weapons of tournament combat are made of
rattan within the SCA or Atlantia.

~Estienne

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Murienne l'aloiere
<dragonfly78 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually there is a place in Corpora that has definitions of the Patent
> Orders...
>
> VIII.A.4.a -
> The Chivalry: The Chivalry consists of two equal parts: Knighthood and
> Mastery of
> Arms. No one may belong to both parts of the order at one time. When a
> member is admitted to the Chivalry by the Sovereign, the choice of which
> part of the order to join is made by the new member. The candidate must be
> considered the equal of his or her prospective peers with the basic weapons
> of tournament combat. To become a Knight, the candidate must swear fealty to
> the Crown of his or her kingdom during the knighting ceremony. Masters of
> Arms may choose to swear fealty, but are not required to do so.
>
>
> basic weapons of tournament combat....
> I do not recall ever having heard of rapier or bow being part of these.
> I may be very wrong in this so please be gentle with your correction if I
> am.
>
> Lady Murienne
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Jim/Mathias <jsfrodo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From Duke Logan:
>> [quote] sure.  elton john is a knight and i dont think he has any prior
>> military
>> service.  but that not relevant in the sca.  sca knights are just that,
>> knights of the society.  the requirements for induction into that order
>> include chivalric combat.  nobody is refusing to acknowledge any "real life
>> period examples" regarding induction into our order.[/endquote]
>>
>> Lord Karl wasn't discussing Elton John, he specifically said:
>> "real-life period examples of people getting knighted who had never
>> suited up in armor".  If you need an example, how about Sir Francis
>> Drake?  He was knighted in 1582 (within our period) for his service to
>> the crown as an explorer, ship captain and privateer.  I don't know
>> how familiar Your Grace is with maritime combat in period, but heavy
>> armor wasn't part of the equation, because swimming in armor is a
>> really bad idea.  Secondly, I've checked the Atlantian Books  of Law
>> and Policy and can find no definition of the Order of Chivalry, which
>> leaves me with what's recorded on the Order of Precedence, which
>> defines the Order of Chivalry as "One becomes a member of the Chivalry
>> through martial prowess on the field."  This says absolutely nothing
>> about what type of combat you're practicing, it simply refers to being
>> good at combat.  Can you show me a reference that defines "chivalric"
>> combat as taking place only with heavy armor and rattan weapons?
>>
>> From Her Majesty:
>> [quote] the Society mandated and tradition grounded basis of the
>> order.  The order of Chivalry in the SCA was created for and about
>> heavy fighting.[endquote]
>>
>> Your Majesty, I've seen nothing in Society documents that even defines
>> the Peerage Orders, let alone mandates anything about them.  As far as
>> tradition goes, when the Order of Chivalry started, heavy fighting was
>> the only kind of fighting in existence in the Society, so naturally
>> that's what people associate with knighthood.  However, that has
>> changed, but the peerage-level recognition has not.  There are some
>> that point to the Order of the Laurel as the proper place for
>> recognition of other martial activities, but (again from the Atlantian
>> OP), "One becomes a Laurel through excellence in the arts and
>> sciences."  Skill with a rapier or a bow simply does not fit that
>> description.  And moreover, the simple fact is that the Order of the
>> Laurel is NOT recognizing fencers or archers.
>>
>> You suggest looking at "the many ways we have of recognizing those
>> contributions." Yes, the kingdom has many ways of recognizing folks,
>> but there aren't equal levels of recognition.  The problem is that
>> while there is a route to a peerage for almost anything else in the
>> Society, there is none for martial activities other than heavy combat.
>>  It's difficult for someone in one of the several neglected
>> disciplines not to get discouraged and possibly bitter when they see
>> those of great skill in their discipline, those who have served the
>> kingdom well at events and wars, being overlooked for EQUAL
>> recognition simply because they don't swing a piece of rattan.
>>
>> There was an old joke when I was in the Navy, "200 years of tradition
>> totally unhampered by progress", a joke that was all too often founded
>> in reality when the Navy as an organization refused to accept new
>> ideas because "that's the way it's always been done".  Blindly holding
>> on to tradition and refusing to acknowledge that the world has
>> changed, including the Known Worlde, and thereby refusing to recognize
>> the skills and service of some people, is certainly not in keeping
>> with the ideal of honor that the Society has set for itself.
>>
>> Yours in Service,
>> Lord Mathias von Oldenburg
>> ========================================================================
>>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>>    List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>>  Submissions: Atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
>> Subscriptions:
>> http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/atlantia-atlantia.sca.org
>>
> ========================================================================
>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>    List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>  Submissions: Atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions: http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/atlantia-atlantia.sca.org
>

-- 
In Service,

Estienne de Condé
Argent, three falcons vert
Supremus totus, Muneris
---------------
MKA Steve Lackey

The truth is that there is nothing noble in being superior to somebody
else. The only real nobility is in being superior to your former self.
-  Whitney Young (1921 - 1971)