Main > The Round Table

What makes a knight?

(1/4) > >>

Sir Edward:
Brian Price wrote a couple of articles a while back, mostly with an SCA-slant, that discuss what constitutes a modern-day knight. I'm not sure what opinion folks have of him, I only know of him through these sorts of channels.

 Who is a Knight

 On Knighthood

These raise some interesting points, and I agree with his basic premise, that to me all of the types of knights he discusses are real knights. From my point of view, if you embrace chivalry and make an effort to be knightly, and improve the world around you, and accept the journey (not looking at it as a destination in itself) you have as much claim to the title as anyone else these days (not counting its use as an official title or rank within a specific society or Order).

However, I don't completely agree with his emphasis on renown, in the sense that what you think and do are more important than how many people know these things about you. There are far more unsung heroes than decorated ones, and I think it's just as important, if not more so, what you do when no one is looking. Here's the criticism I wrote on my website:


--- Quote ---I found these to be interesting reads, though I disagree with a few points, particularly making "renown" a core criterion for knighthood. I feel that the path, the ideals, the struggle for virtue... these things are key. There are serpents who come out looking like angels everyday. Reputation, as good as it can be, isn't always completely reliable. While renown may get you into a position to be knighted, it doesn't, by itself, make you knightly. In fact, he also raises the point of saying that you can't just wake up one morning and decide to be a knight. I only partially agree, in the same sense as above. While you can't decide to be knighted officially, you can wake up one day and decide to be knightly, chivalrous, and virtuous.

However it should be noted that this is written from the standpoint of defining knights through the eyes of an SCA member, and therefore is naturally influenced by a reenactment and re-creation standpoint, where "knight" is a title and standing with meaning within such societies. I don't require a pat on the back and permission to wear a white belt to know in my heart the ideals I strive to achieve every day. (please note, while I'm being curt here, I have an enormous respect for many of the SCA knights and their endeavors).

--- End quote ---

Also, there's another interesting point he brought up-- the legend that SCA knights are "real" knights (in terms of historical lineage) because of a knight early in the SCA lineage. I've seen this discussed elsewhere, and the SCA's own rules preclude the possibility, because it bans intermingling real world titles and positions with the SCA ones. :)


So what are your thoughts? What makes a knight? Who can call themselves "knights" in the modern world, from your point of view?

Sir Brian:
Well I guess it is time I share my thoughts on some of the weightier discussions on this board…  ;)


Upon reflection of my younger years throughout the journey of my life I had not always believed in a chivalric code nor behaved in a knightly manner, however those were times when I was a mere “squire” and as such still learning and maturing.

In my lifetime and transition from “squire” to knighthood I have learned not to fear death, but I have known fear in the loss of loved ones. I have told lies but it has taught me the value of truth. I have fought numerous battles; some were physical yet most were emotional or psychological and although for many of those battles they were not truly necessary to have been fought the others were fought for the very substance of my soul. I have been swindled out of money, time and stature but have come to appreciate the value of genuine friendships and simpler pleasures. I have been reckless and merciless in my ambitions and desires but have come to cherish the wisdom and compassion such foolishness has taught me.

If such reflections can be considered knightly then I suppose I am justified to consider myself to be a knight. Not solely by deeds or ideals or for the adherence to a prescribed set or morality. I consider myself to be a genuine knight simply by the fact of being unwilling to compromise my beliefs in God, of the love for my wife and in myself regardless of my virtues and vices.

Dragonlover:
Well said, Sir Brian. Although I must say, I still consider myself a "squire"
in the fact that everyday, I clean the blackboard to continue the day's
lesson.... :)

Sir Brian:
Nay my friend! You are most definitely a knight!  The modesty of your last statement only reaffirms that in my mind!  :)

We will always be challenged and called upon to demonstrate our prowess in battle, no matter what the nature or form that battle or contest comes in. It is how we comport ourselves in those battles and challenges that distinguishes us and reaffirms our right to claim the title of knight. We’ve earned our spurs many years ago my friend. It was the earning or those spurs back in our young squire days that enabled us to develop the skills and wisdom to cope and overcome the battles we fight today.

In regards to your disagreement of the importance of renown Sir Edward. I would also agree if one conducted themselves for the sole purpose of gaining recognition of their actions. That would be nothing more than shameless self-promotion which I do not think is the real significance of renown.
I consider renown important only in that it is basically your reputation in which the people you have interacted with and touched in some way hold you in the highest regard and will readily bear witness as such to all.

Dragonlover:
And a heartfelt "huzzah!" to you both! ;D

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page