[Scriptoris] of Grant level fighting awards

[lizdenpeters at juno.com]

Centurion Morgan,

Thank you for your explanation.  As I said in my initial query, I have
not been part of the SCA long enough to understand many of the
intricacies related to the various orders.  I really appreciate the
information you have provided.  I will be making some of this information
(with credit given) part of my personal scribal book so that I don't need
to ask near as many dumb questions in the future.

YIS,
Nuala

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:49:29 -0600 "Michael Smith"
<morganbuchanan at hotmail.com> writes:
> [/de-lurk]
> Greetings to the list do send I, Centurion Morgan Buchanan.  I lurk 
> many lists via the archives to see what I can learn, but on this 
> occasion I hope to offer some illumination on a subject near and 
> dear to my heart.  :)
> 
> Zubeydah stated her perception of the Order of the Centurion of the 
> Sable Star of Ansteorra .  To paraphrase, we're given our 
> recognition of rank more for leadership on the melee field than on 
> the singles field.  This perception isn't WHOLELY wrong, but is far 
> from being the literal truth.  Our order is definded by the members 
> of the order.  As a polling order, we each give our King our 
> opinions on prospective members.  Some of my brothers and sisters 
> are more interested in melee combat than singles, and some more in 
> singles than melee.  Some of us don't really care, as long as we're 
> in armour fighting.  But the final analysis is that every candidate 
> is discussed with their fighting "package" in mind.  Someone who's a 
> fantastic war leader can probably get by being a less accomplished 
> tourney fighter.  Someone who's an incredible tourney fighter can 
> get by with less war leading experience.  But we do indeed look for 
> a balanced individual in terms of fighting.  We are, however, 
> looking at so many other factors as being more important.  Ask a 
> different centurion which is more important, and you'll get another 
> answer.  We used to debate the "nature" of our order.  We've come to 
> the realization that the order does best to define itself by its 
> members than by debating it in the circle.  :)  I don't think I've 
> let out any big secrets there.
> 
> On the nature of the White Scarf, I must respectfully disagree with 
> the notion that it is, was, is supposed to be, or could be an 
> "equivelant" of knighthood.  It is not, and was not meant to be.  It 
> is a Grant Level award, and CERTAINLY one that we in Ansteorra hold 
> in VERY high esteem.  But I have never personally heard from any 
> White Scarf that they felt that it was peerage like.  I've heard 
> from many White Scarfs that they feel it should NEVER be a peerage.  
> Certainly there are folks who think we should have peerages for 
> everything.  There are people who believe that we should have a 
> peerage for the rapier community.  I'm not debating that.  But 
> please don't suggest that Ansteorra as a whole believes the WS to be 
> the equivelant of a peerage.  That's simply not the case, as I think 
> you'd find if you asked 20 different WSAs.
> 
> Respectfully submitted,
> Centurion Morgan Buchanan
> Central Regional KM
> [/re-lurk]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Scriptoris mailing list
> Scriptoris at ansteorra.org
> http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/scriptoris
> 
>