I still stand by my comment on the Faceyspacey post. :)
The contract is held valid according to the desires and emotions of those involved. I agree that the "obligation" of fealty should terminate upon the death of the Knight, and I would extend that to the situation where the Knight leaves the society as well. However, the "commitment" of Fealty to the Knight, his House and memory continue.
As a squire, I have found that the bond among siblings is as strong and potent as is the bond from squire to Knight. Granted, not everyone has this and this is where the "squirings are unique to every relationship" bit comes in. But in my experience, the FAMILY that is created by the relationship is as essential to the person as the teacher/student relationship itself. If the fealty bonds end upon the death of a Knight, then so too would be the only bond holding "squire brothers" together.
I would also point out that just "being a squire" is not a hindrance to accepting guidance from others. As a child of two houses, I don't feel it is either inappropriate or unreasonable for a squire to continue to wear the belt or exhibit the active fealty to the deceased. When Loric moved to Meridies, he offered us (his squires) the option to leave his service, transfer, or stay. We all chose to stay. We also all know that I found another certain group to work with that could continue my training, and I gave them my service and loyalty relative to their acceptance of me. A familial bond was formed, but no spoken oath was ever given. There were never any conflicts of interest and I was the fortunate benefactor of two families.
There is no reason for this to be the situation for any squire of a deceased. The Loyalty to the traditions, memory and ideals of the Knight is something the squire can hold dear and hold openly by the wearing of his belt, and he can also pursue training and teaching and guidance of others. It may or may not be for everyone.. but like *any* Knight-squire relationship, each is correct according to their heart.
The contract is held valid according to the desires and emotions of those involved. I agree that the "obligation" of fealty should terminate upon the death of the Knight, and I would extend that to the situation where the Knight leaves the society as well. However, the "commitment" of Fealty to the Knight, his House and memory continue.
As a squire, I have found that the bond among siblings is as strong and potent as is the bond from squire to Knight. Granted, not everyone has this and this is where the "squirings are unique to every relationship" bit comes in. But in my experience, the FAMILY that is created by the relationship is as essential to the person as the teacher/student relationship itself. If the fealty bonds end upon the death of a Knight, then so too would be the only bond holding "squire brothers" together.
I would also point out that just "being a squire" is not a hindrance to accepting guidance from others. As a child of two houses, I don't feel it is either inappropriate or unreasonable for a squire to continue to wear the belt or exhibit the active fealty to the deceased. When Loric moved to Meridies, he offered us (his squires) the option to leave his service, transfer, or stay. We all chose to stay. We also all know that I found another certain group to work with that could continue my training, and I gave them my service and loyalty relative to their acceptance of me. A familial bond was formed, but no spoken oath was ever given. There were never any conflicts of interest and I was the fortunate benefactor of two families.
There is no reason for this to be the situation for any squire of a deceased. The Loyalty to the traditions, memory and ideals of the Knight is something the squire can hold dear and hold openly by the wearing of his belt, and he can also pursue training and teaching and guidance of others. It may or may not be for everyone.. but like *any* Knight-squire relationship, each is correct according to their heart.
Reply
Leave a comment