[ANSTHRLD] Squires, Achievements of Arms, and Ranks (Oh My!)

[Herndon, Darin]

One of Lord Seamus' comments struck a note that I feel needs to be
addressed.

Specifically: "I feel that were we to do away with this system no matter
how informal it might be would be a travesty..."

Despite opinions or discussions on this list, this list cannot change
such things.  Such comments here, however valid or not, will not result
in a mass policy or tradition change.  Something in the sound of what
Seamus wrote struck a chord with me as sounding like the Ansteorran
Heralds' List could make such a change.  If that didn't sound like that
to anyone else, please accept my apologies for an unnecessary
explanation.

Now, having said that, let me touch on a question from Timothy:
"While we have little ability to change things, what would you prefer to
see rather than the belt system?"

I don't know if I prefer this or not but...  An apprentice or squire in
the historical sense would have worn the livery and/or badge of his
master or knight (or guild if such applied).  The apprentice (squire,
etc.) became a part of the master or squire's household the same as any
servant, hired staff, etc.  While there was a mentor relationship there
that was different, in period that was best denoted by subsuming
personal armigerous display and representing only that of your knight.
Apprentices in a guild, without a personal master relationship, would
have again subsumed personal display for that of the guild which had
become a parent to them.  In the SCA, such relationships are personal so
treating all peerage apprentices like a period squire rather than the
guild stylings makes some sense.

Personally I think the badge of your peer on a belt is as appropriate as
on a tunic so the whole belt thing doesn't really bother me.  I think
that with some research a case could be made for period examples, in
certain specific cultures or wars, of certain colors of garter, or belt,
or hat band, etc. having been used to differentiate between political
allegiances or houses or somesuch.  If the SCA culture chooses to do
this with belts, while that doesn't have the period connotation that
some people seem to think it does, then it is a cultural flavor that
doesn't really bother me.

It is however not appropriate in any period context that I can find for
the arms of the peer to be on the belt or in canton on a shield.  To
bear another's actual arms instead of their badge, especially in canton
or in escutcheon, is to make a very specific claim in heraldry as
"presuming" the others arms or by emblazon asserting a claim to those
arms and all that goes with them.  So, while belts don't bother me, the
use of arms in this manner makes a period claim that is absolutely not
intended in the SCA.

Etienne
Nordsteorra Herald