Edward,
Good reply, I’ve been making this argument
for years in Chiv meetings ( both formal and informal) in another Kingdom ever
since I was that Kingdom’s KEO. And, believe it or not I made some in roads
for proposing that candidates who did regular heavy combat ( just had to be
good but not great) and were superior in skill at both heavy mounted combat AND
jousting might be considered for the Accolade. Being a relative new comer here
in Calontir I have not discussed this much with my fellow Knights. However,
being a member of the OL as well I cannot see putting either an equestrian,
archer or cut-and –thrust person in to the Order of the Laurel IF that candidate’s
main focus is doing the martial activity and NOT researching the activity. This
make the OL nothing better than a “dumping ground” for activates that “don’t
fit” in the eyes of the existing Peerages. I shall now put on my nomex braies
and await replies.
Take care,
Aleander Caithnes, Viscount, KSCA,OL , OP , etc…
From:
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014
8:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CALONTIR] Proposed
Peerage for Masters of Defense
Christian,
In your effort to distinguish equestrian activities from cut-and-thrust
and armored combat you neglected to mention mounted combat, which is virtually
identical to armored combat in terms of weapons, armor, and rules, except that
it is done while mounted on a horse. The fact that two major equestrian
activities are "martial art[s] where two combatants (or more, in melee)
face off directly against one another" kind of throws a wrench into your
argument.
And that is to say nothing, of course, of the historical fact that one
of the key distinguishing features of a knight was being a mounted
combatant. For obvious reasons of practicality that was not made a
requirement of the Chivalry, but if one is to propose creating additional
branches of the Chivalry, then surely equestrians who attain the appropriate
level of prowess in mounted combat and jousting would be at least as good a fit
as a cut-and-thrust branch.
Let me be clear: I'm not necessarily taking a position for or against
the 'new branch' proposal in general, but it is difficult to argue that it
makes more sense for cut-and-thrust than (combatant) equestrians.
-Edward de Kent
-- Manage your subscription at http://listserv.unl.edu. listserv.unl.edu lists do not
accept incoming email from Yahoo.com, AOL.com or Dropbox.com due to their DMARC
policies.