[Ansteorra] Seeking information: Order of the Knights of the Sable Garland

[Michael Silverhands]

Your Grace and Your Excellency,

Thank you both for your courteous but frank replies. I can certainly  
see your points.

Willow asked whether "the peerage or nobility needs to create more  
awards for themselves?" On one side of the coin, that's a trick  
question. The crown creates and bestows awards, not the peerage or  
nobility. :-)

But I see the point, I think. And my opinion is, yes, there should be  
more ways to recognize those who've gone above and beyond. How do you  
thank someone who earned their peerage 20 years ago and is still  
serving? I named a few in a previous message (augmentation of arms, a  
simple "thank you", "so-and-so appreciation" events, etc.), but I see  
nothing wrong with creating more. It's important to publicly and  
officially thank our newer members when we bestow their Award of  
Arms. It's important to publicly and officially thank our more  
seasoned members with the higher awards. It's important to recognize  
(with peerage) those who embody our highest ideals. And I think it's  
important to continue to acknowledge their valuable support, years  
after they've received all the awards our society otherwise has to  
offer.

We do this in subtle ways, too. For example, having the Lions defend  
the throne and sword of state between crowns. This is an honor and a  
privilege exclusive to the Lions, and seeing them standing there is a  
sight to behold! I know that even if there was no Populace to see  
them, they would still *be* Lions and all they represent; they don't  
need an "audience" to be who and what they are. But when we look upon  
them, that's our way of saying "we see you, our Lions, and we  
remember you".

Just so by having the Sable Garland escort the Queen. It's a singular  
honor (if requested), and both a way for *them* to show that they  
still remember *us* (and their service to our Queen), and a way for  
*us* to see them, remember them, and honor them.

With kind regards,
Michael Silverhands

On Apr 15, 2007, at 8:22 PM, willowdewisp at juno.com wrote:
> Thank you for your impute Michael
> Just because I believe there were some mistakes in forming the  
> order doesn't mean I think it is wrong. I stated that I believe  
> that this dream is good. I would like to mention something about  
> the candidate process of the order. Technically it takes an  
> unanimous vote to bring a member in. There was no arrangements made  
> for people going inactive or dieing. There are no arrangements for  
> modifying the Charter. In other kingdoms this has resulted in a  
> "closed order" because the mechanics of the Order can not be gotten  
> around. I tried to explain this to His Grace, but he didn't listen.  
> I am not knocking the people who are in it. I respect them all. I  
> am not knocking the idea. What I am knocking is the mechanics of  
> the Order. I think they should have thought more on the idea. I am  
> also complaining that if something uses the Ladies of the Rose as  
> its beginning then the Ladies of the Rose entirely should have been  
> asked. I don't mean they had to take our advice, but it would have  
> been nice if they had asked. <snip>


On Apr 15, 2007, at 6:52 PM, Lisa A. May wrote:
> Michael,
>
> For what it's worth, I didn't see Her Grace as denigrating the
> order.  I did see her comment (unfavorably) on how it was presented
> and how it is perpetuated, as well as describe the perception of some
> of the populace with respect to the order.  I myself distinctly
> remember, when the order was announced, wondering how the order could
> have been "created by the Ladies of the Rose" when I was not
> consulted nor had my opinion asked, and I knew quite well that
> several other Ladies of the Rose were taken by surprise as well.   
> <snip>
>
> Maggie
>
> Countess Margaret ny Connor
> Barony of the Steppes
> Kingdom of Ansteorra
>