Randall's Challenge in Knightood discussion

[uuriel]

Randall challenged me to list the problems with knighthood and look for a comprehensive solution. Well I am willing to consider that route although I am not willing to get bogged down in it and end up not doing anything. On that basis I will split this post between Randall’s challenge and revisions to my proposal of two days ago.

Please respond to

Comments

[kord]

It depends on the individual in question. I would think most people would think twice about swearing an oath to accept the belt, which I hope would deter many individuals who only view knighthood as an award with no incumbent responsibilities to the game or its players. My hope is that the "good" knights already follow such principles, and would therefore not be reluctant to explicitly state them as such. However, for some people, their word is worthless, and they won't think twice about ignoring such an oath,particularly one administered in a game. But I do think it would at least give a greater understanding of the gravity of the honor which is being bestowed, and that, at least, would help to bring a greater concept of honor back to the "office" in question.

I've been playing around with some wording this morning to try and come up with at least a template of how this sort of thing would work. Let me know what you think:

"I, _______________, do hereby swear to do my utmost to uphold the ideals of the knighthood that, by the grace of my Kingdom and the acceptance of my peers, is being conferred upon me. I promise to (insert appropriate ideals here, as per the suggested discussion amongst those of the peerage). I further swear that, in the event that my Kingdom or I feel that I can no longer in good conscience uphold these ideals, I will surrender my belt back unto my kingdom, along with all the rights and privilege obtained thereof. All of this I swear, with the members of Amtgard and of the Peerage as my witnesses."

Eh. It's a rought draft. Thoughts?

[uuriel]

This oath goes much further than my proposal, never mind its not binding on people who dont care. For those who care it means giving up squires too. The heritage of mentoring that the knight/squire relationship entails is too valuable to risk that way in my mind. In my proposal I left the wearing of the whilte belt as part of the award partly out of real political considerations but my stance on squires is rooted in a ferm belief in that system.

[kord]

1) I would argue that the belt should not be the only thing holding together a knight/squire relationship. Losing the physical symbol of the relationship itself should not stop the relationship from existing, nor really change it in any meaningful way. The only substantial difference would be that one is no longer able to act as an advocate for the squire in the circle; otherwise, I see no real reason why such a relationship should be substantiall effected.

2) True, it is not binding to those who don't care. But it does give the Kingdom greater recourse if the knight does fail to uphold it, as the knight publicly and openly made a verbal commitment to surrender the belt not only on his or her own judgment, but also that of the Kingdom. How the Kingdom chooses to exercise that right is up to the individual Kingdoms, but it can be an immense amount of pressure when someone says, "look at what you swore before we gave you the belt." It provides a constantly available reminder to the knight that they are not an exemplar of our game, as the belt so indicates. That can be a very powerful tool in correcting behavior and potentially removing poor knights, despite whether or not it is binding.

And it does this by adding pomp and circumstance to the knighting ceremony, and hopefully a more memorable experience not only for the knight, but for all of those watching.

I would be inclined to say that the oath should be incumbent upon new knights, but that it should be optional for already established knights to take it in front of the populace. Those who choose not to do so can, but risk ostracism for an unwillingness to make a commitment to upholding the virtues of the office.

[uuriel]

I see what you are saying Kord. Certainly a good knight/squire relationship is more than the physical symbol thereof. On the other hand, Knight/squire relationships in Amtgard are often stronger than other normal mentor/mentee relationships specifically becasue the are explicit to the world and contain a visibile symbol of that committment. Would they generally surrvive the loss of the symbol unchanged. I would like to hope so but since I consider the relationship the greatest part of knighthood, I am not really willing to risk it.