Main > The Campaign

Creating a society/order?

(1/88) > >>

Sir Edward:
I figured since people were interested in discussing this in another thread, I'd start a thread where we can have a discussion about it. This is more of a "let's discuss options" thread rather than "here's what we're going to do".

I've toyed around with the idea of trying to start an order of knights, or something along those lines, off and on over the last few years. But I've been hesitant, not just because I wasn't sure how many interested folks we'd have, but for a few other reasons too which I'll describe here. Finding enough people to get started is always a challenge, since it frequently falls to one or two people to do everything as organizers until a certain critical mass is reached, and the group can function on its own.

But here's where my background has made me cautious. Aside from various online forums/clubs and the like that I've participated in before, I've also done the medieval society sort of thing as well. Sir Wolf and I were part of a group a number of years ago called the UEMA (United Empires of the Middle Ages). I don't think it lasted even a year before politics ripped it apart, and our local area splintered off and formed another group. It was called DAGGER (Distant Ages, Guilds and Garrisons, for Education and Reenactment). It also fell apart after a year or so.

This is ironic because a lot of the members of these groups were ex-SCAdians who left the SCA to escape the politics and bickering. But it's human nature to take things seriously, and when titles and ranks and awards and knighthoods and badges and so on start getting taken too seriously, politics ensue. "Why is he a duke and I'm only an earl". "Who made you king?". "Why did he get X award when I've been doing it twice as long?". Etc.

So we need to think about what it is that we want.

Being able to gather up and do a charity event from time to time, or movie nights, is always a cool idea, but what happens between those?

And is it to be a local in-person-only group or do we have a broader national or international membership? How do you deal with distant members?

At the simplest end, there can be simply a "club" of knightly folks, which is kept informal in terms of rules and membership details. We can meet up for movie and dinner nights, and also group up at the renfaires as we do now. There would just be a name attached to it.

At the more complex end, there can be a charter, and a set of by-laws. Rules for earning ranks. Membership is tightly controlled, and titles have meaning. Ceremonies for promotions, symbolism and regalia.

A while back for fun I tried creating a sample charter for an order of knights. One thing I had to work on was membership requirements. I thought about the idea of requiring knights to have a sword and armor. But that also raises another complex set of questions. Do they have to be functional, or is aluminum OK? What level of authenticity? Where do you draw the line? If the rule is just a vague statement like "armor and sword, any material", then does it let people in with plastic roman armor or mail made from soda-can rings? Is there a rule that enforces adherence to chivalry. To what extent?

Anyway, I figured I'd start a discussion here, and let you guys think about what level of involvement you'd want and what sort of organization you'd like to be a part of.

Thoughts?

Sir Wolf:
well, you know I always got your back.

what about a charter of an existing group. like Selohaar. i don't know all of there ins and outs but they seem like a low key group of friends that garb up, hang out, do battles, and have dinners.

that is the key: having fun with friends. when running an event it often becomes tiresome for the host and they get burned out.

my land is always open for anything. (as long as I'm king hahahah jkjk ehhehe)

and that doesn't need to be there either. kings, earls dukes barons that just gets in the way. a simple knight, page or squire etc ranking until you get your kit together or something hmmm i dunno, how does selohaar do it ehhehe

but a great focus is around the sword play too. i would love to learn stuff but dont have time for Das Bills classes (plus the distance hehe) maybe we could have lessons at events etc as well as play time.  maybe have duals using the good latex weapons until everyone is in the same boat for steel etc

Sir William:
I'm in, whichever way you go.  If I had my druthers, it'd be less formal and more about the camaraderie of knights than the rush for titles, as it were.  I have little experience w/SCA having been 'warned off' by one of its more zealous members and figured it wouldn't be worth the hassle at the time.

Having said that, I would be honored to be part of an officially chartered group of knights...what I've always aspired to, if you will.  I think as far as ranks go, if we keep it to knighthood with the principle(s) being referred to as the Knight Commander would go a long way to keeping politics out of it.  Maybe the KC can be a rotating position...that is, they keep the position for a year or two, then the next one on the rolls becomes KC for a term.  That way, no one gets burned out by being the host at every event every year, and all get a chance to lead so none feel left out.

I think with the present company, we can all consider ourselves knight-initiates; has any of us except Sir Edward received the Accolade?  I know I have not, even though I have given it, once.  For the wedding it was.  For all subsequent new members, Novitiate rank maybe, then Squire, then Knight-Novitiate after which they can receive the Accolade and be considered full-fledged knights and get their name inscribed in the charter maybe?  What would be the requirements for advancement?  Skills in the knightly arts, maybe, with the exception of horseback?  As for the Charter, we could have an actual scroll (or maybe wooden plate) on which the names of the Knights of our Order get inscribed for all eternity...that'd be pretty cool, I think. 

I'm all for movie or any other sort of get together, schedules permitting...for those of us who are reasonably local would of course have the advantage of continued exposure to one another so we're bound to be tighter knit than farther-flung members...not a problem for me, but it might be so for others so how should that be addressed?

A couple things to think about...having an established rule set give the appearance of order, an established meeting location gives it a semblance of a realistic group rather than idealistic, such as what we all share now.  Having the website goes a long way in continuing to build rapport between us members, it would seem logical for this to be the next step.

I also like Sir Wolf's idea of having sword play involved...we all aspire to be knights so why not?  It has been my intention for the last 3 years to attend one of Das Bill's classes...I'd be more inclined to do so if I felt that one of the results would be to pass on what I've learned to my brother knights.  Great idea for using latex wasters...no need in beating eachother to death by accident!

I like the idea of having requirements...so that it doesn't seem like every Tom, Dick and Harry can join (even though, realistically, they can) - that they need to come with something other than just themselves.  I see it being big on FB, too- we could even have 'companions' to our Order...people who may have a cursory interest or just want to be attached but unofficially?  The current 'Templar Order' has such a rank in their lists.  Just some ideas.

Armor/Accoutrement requirements...for this I think it should be what suits that particular knight.  Maybe we could exclude plastic or rubber armor simply because it wouldn't be representative of what a knight wore in that the weight and materials would be incorrect and I see us as being a repository of information as well so maybe we could allow aluminum because it does have the look and feel (but not the weight).  Maybe if it looks reasonably plausible?  How far would we take it?  Must it be constrained to a specific period/era?  Guess we'd have to vote on which period we all want to adhere to, or can we be as we are, a representation of roughly 300 or 400 years (1100AD-1500AD) of knighthood?

Sir Edward:
(Heh, I was typing this but didn't hit 'post' before going out to lunch, just replying to Sir Wolf's post here):

Well, Selohaar functions as an Order, with degrees that have to be earned. From the look of their Roll of Arms, not many of them rise very high. I know they have a lot of mysticism worked in, with rituals and ceremonies as well. Not all of them are interesting in knights and combat, as there are others who are there for other medieval interests or for the mystical magick side of things.

Of course our previous groups, UEMA/DAGGER, were meant to be like mini-SCA organizations. So while knights and combat were only a small part of those as well, they were more broadly focused on medieval re-creation and included titles of nobility.

I think for us, something focused just on knights makes sense. A narrow, well-defined scope will certainly help. But there are so many different ways of approaching this sort of thing, it's not funny.

The Fiat Lux down in the Carolinas is another knighthood order in the region that we can look at as an example as well. They do armored combat with steel weapons, for charity events and the like, and treat it as a serious Order.

---------------------------------

(Additional after seeing Paladin's post):

I think that's more of what I've been thinking lately as well-- something more informal. I think most people who get into all this knightly stuff tend to arrive at it on their own. It makes them a bit of a "Knight Errant", and so the solidarity of an Order isn't 100% compatible with that.

I should point out that my Accolade was in DAGGER, which doesn't exist anymore. And the only reason it happened was because I stepped up and said we needed to have an order of knights in the kingdom, who could organize our combat system. We knighted a few people, and did nothing else with it before the group failed.

I thought about the idea of new members being an initiate, or aspirant at first. Knighting comes as full membership once they've shown they're here to stay. To me "squire" is really a job and not a rank, since back in the day, that's really what it was. Perhaps an initiate can be squired to an existing knight until knighted. Something like that.

As for swordplay, I'd love to have some days where we can get together and do that. I'm happy to teach what I know. I still highly encourage people to learn at VAF if they can, or with whatever group is local to them, as they'll learn much more that way. I can teach, but I'm better at doing than teaching, and I only consider myself "capable" at the doing part, not necessarily "good". :)

Also, some groups have the main entrance requirement simply as being sponsored by two existing knights. That might be good enough.

I'm all for keeping things simple and informal. Just some rules about how to get in, etc, so that there's an established way of doing things, but without the ranks and titles and politics and.. and.. and..

We'll have to think on the equipment part for sure. I like the 1100-1500 sort of idea, though I'd probably extend that to about 1600 since there are some really cool harnesses in the 16th century too. So maybe 1066-1600 (battle of hastings as a starting point).

Great discussion and ideas. Let's keep the ball rolling.

Sir Patrick:
I've been thinking about this today and Sir Edward and I seemed to have reached the same conclusion about eliminating ranks and titles.  Everyone was equal at the Round Table right?  I also like the idea of knighting after someone has been in for a set amount of time, for it shows commitment to the group.  A few points I might add:

1.  As far as kits and garb go, assuming everyone makes a contientious effort to do their best, maybe something like a "five foot" rule would make it easier for new memebers still getting their kits together.  Several groups use the rule, and it just means the kit/garb should look "period" from about five feet away.  Obviously, if we are talking about live steel demos, or more dangerous activities, that will need to be tweaked.

2.  Say someone doesn't have the means or desire to participate in fighting, but would rather demonstrate some living history in a camp setting.  Just because this individual's public personna may be "Walt the Weaver" or something like that, he is still Sir Walter in organization circles, no different than those members who may choose to portray a knight personna for the general public.  I think this would really open up the group to individuals who possess skills and talents that are always invaluable in these types of organizations, and it would allow people not inclined to more martial activities to still join in the fun.

Anyway, that's my two cents.  Back to my yardwork.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page