ARCH - What If

[Archie/Sebastian]

Damn well said.  Thank you for doing so.

Don Sebastian Frobishire
Royal Huntsman of Ansteorra
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick J. Cuccurello <pat at adtelusa.com>
To: <ansteorra-archery at ansteorra.org>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 3:19 PM
Subject: RE: ARCH - What If


> >  Old age is setting in -- I'm not sure what you are asking me.....
> > If you are saying that I'm presenting a case that archers should be
> > considered for Centurians - why yes, I am. I think they should be
because
> > archers are invalid in melee combat.  Of course I haven't read the
by-law,
> > laws, folkways or mores on what it takes to be a Centurians so I imagine
> > that I will probably get shot down in a minute gleefully by and archer.
> > Currently Centurians don't think that is a good idea.  They like
thinking
> > combat is only sticks being held in the hand and hit not thrown....
> > My personal take is combat is combat and should be judged by the
> > fighter and the weapon choice.
> > Of course, wait until you hear my opinions on art versus craft, art
> > versus science, etc. etc.
>
>
> I understand <<grin>>
>
> My point was an earlier argument was that Archery should be covered under
> the existing structure because target archery should be an art, and combat
> archery should be combat.   The fact that the Chivalric community
considers
> this as a completely separate art precludes it from being part of it.  It
> was for that reason the White Scarf was created for the rapier community.
> The fact that performance on the target archery field is not considered in
> Arts and Sciences competitions precludes it from involvement in that area.
>
> That being the case, it is difficult to not use rapier example for the
> archery area.  The parallels are the same. Consequently the only remaining
> argument is whether archery is as "main stream" as rapier was when the
White
> Scarf was introduced.   My opinion is that it is for these reasons:
>
> 1.  It requires it's own administrative structure, and that structure is
> already in place and has matured over the years  (the archery
marshallate).
>
> 2.  It requires it's own logistics at events and area duly separated and
> differentiated from other area  (they have their own archery field, list
> boundaries, archery targets, conventions on conduct, and
waterbearer/support
> personnel.  They also have their own social gatherings within their group
> with the "Archery Flight" pot-lucks sponsored at events).
>
> 3.  It has created it's own sub-culture within the SCA that many times
does
> not interact with other aspects of the game. They are their own defined
and
> recognizable group within the game. (Chivalric units camping together,
> Rapier combatants camping in the same area, Equestrians camping with their
> horses, Coursing people camping in the Kennel Lands, Archers camping near
> the target field).
>
> 4.  When it does interact with other subcultures within the SCA, it
impacts
> them in a sizeable manner. (It is such a telling force upon the
battlefield
> that it is usually limited to only certain scenarios in order to not
> infringe on the enjoyment of the Chivalric fighters).
>
> 5.  Involvement at SCA function is by a great enough number of people that
> they are readily identified by what they are doing.  (This usually isn't
two
> or three people shooting at a target butt on the other side of the trees).
>
> 6.  Finally, in Period, where it was not a venue for the Nobility (except
> for hunting), it was a documentable part of medieval society and was a
focus
> for much of history and pivotal battles.  Yet by its nature, was held
> separate in medieval society from everything else and seldom entered into
> the nobility of the Knightly class or Arts and Sciences of the time
(except
> in construction--which is not what we are discussing).
>
>
> Now many can draw parallels with other portions of the SCA that fulfill
many
> of these criteria.  My point is that Archery fulfills *all* of these, and
> has been doing so for many years.  Hence it is not only a distinct part of
> the SCA but a mature one as well.
>
> By saying that we don't need any more Grant level awards you purposely
limit
> your ability to change as society and people's perceptions change.  And
for
> what purpose, one less possible award given away at Court?  Can archery
fit
> in under any number of other areas?  Yes, if you are willing to place it
> there and  **change the perception of the entire populous to match yours.
> Even though most look at archery as something completely different than
> combat or Arts and Sciences.**  This is also despite the fact that
> historical documentation of the art and the SCA's societal dealing with
> archers does not support the idea of lumping them in with another area.
>
> Pet.
>
>
============================================================================
> Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.
>

============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.