arontius | Thoughts On Champions and Serjeantry.

.....If you know me and my writing style, I warn you now that what is below the cut is almost 'Ian-esque' in style. I have a rather large jumble of thoughts on how the concepts of Champion, Championship and Serjeantry should work and interact. What is here is just the highlights of that jumble of thought as I wanted to get something down in writing to read later and organize. I also warn you in that what is here is only about twenty-five percent of what I was thinking. :-) Just those words I could capture as they were rolling around in my brain. :-) And it is very confusing in parts, especially when I jump from one concept to another. But if you think you understand what I'm thinking and where I'm going with it I would welcome your thoughts, even (and especially) if you disagree. Or can clarify something I've said in language that makes the concept easier to understand.

.....It was a lively and interesting conversation on the concept of being a Champion the other evening after the Baronial Business Meeting. There are many different ways of looking at it, especially within the context of the SCA. But for us last night, at least in my mind, it boiled down to two extremes. One being a more wholistic approach (for lack of a better term) and one being more singularistic. In other words, should the basic concept be something that is approached from the standpoint of "I represent the best of all who would compete." or "We all meet the STANDARD for what should be considered at the level of a Champion.".

.....This is more complicated than it sounds, for a variety of reasons. The current model generally used in the SCA is that of a straight martiallate 'best of the best'. All who enter are in competition with each other to 'win' the Championship and that one singular title. The very first gathering of the SCA is famous for having a Tournament where the victor named his inspiration as the Queen of Love and Beauty. But he was still considered the best of the best and it was the basis for all that followed. This is the model on which I grew up in the SCA. It is the foundation of my knowledge and what I'm used to. But it has flaws. It relies on several factors that allow chaos into the equation. What if the person who truly excels in this art has a flat tire on the way to the Tournament and misses it all together? What if that same person has an illness that day? Then the Tournament in question wasn't a true gage of the Champion simply because the person who truly excelled could not play and someone not-quite-as-good is named as the Champion.

.....That model is not limited to just the martiallate though. The Arts and Sciences tend to fall into the same scenario. Again for a number of reasons. The first 'Champion' was a martiallate champion, who also holds a sub-title of 'Defender'. Which I believe means that if the Kingdom is challenged as an entity, this person is supposed to accept that challenge and defend the Kingdoms ability in the area of the Arts and Sciences. I suppose, in addition, there is some ego involved. Only the Heavy Champion of the Kingdom can step in and become 'King' should it become necessary. This dictates the Heavy Champion as probably the most important Champion in the list. It stands to reason that all others would want to emulate this model as much as possible.

.....If this is true, then what do the peerages represent? This can certainly be debated exhaustively without really reaching a final conclusion. My best definition is that they also represent the best-of-the-best. They excel in that field of study for which that peerage was created (combat, arts and sciences, and service), with the ever popular 'peer-like-qualities' being the other half of the equation. Are they Champions? Were the Peerages the answer to the wholistic versus singularistic king-of-the-hill scenario? This is a hard one, and it really just muddies the waters of the whole equation as the 'standards' for the Peerage orders are really nebulous. Laurels who have been in the order for decades routinely say that the knowledge bar has risen over the years (for various reasons). What is required to be a Knight has certainly changed (read the articles in the Elf Hill Times and The Crier from the late seventies and early eighties to see just how different the 'standards' were then). And, really, define what 'service' really means. This one alone has led to the desertion of many follicles of my hair. :-)

.....Lately, a number of people have been moving in a different direction to define a Championship. Here in Dragon's Laire we're calling it 'judging against a standard'. It is rather self-explanatory in that experts in a particular field define what it means to be a 'Champion' or an expert in any particular field or endeavor and than when a person 'competes' they are competing to see how their actions or product compares against what is considered the standard for an action or product that is produced to that level. This requires that several (more than one) technical experts gather and actually quantify what that standard is, prior to the presentation of the submitted action or item. This model still allows for the vagaries of the day, especially in a Championship that requires physical action on the day of the presentation. But what it now allows for is much more scientific approach and depth in approach to a given or chosen field of expression.

.....What it really introduces though is the ability to have more than one Champion at any one time if that is so desired. If three presentations are made that are considered as meeting the standard for Championship level quality work, you can now have three Champions. This is rather an exciting approach as it allows you to have more people whose job it is over the course of their tenure promoting that which they are championing. You could have three Arts and Sciences Champions who can cover more events around the Kingdom, arranging to hold more classes, speaking to that many more people to promote Arts and Sciences activities in the branch. One could argue that this action should be done anyway. But it might carry more weight with the emphasis of 'Champion' to back it up.

.....This need not fit just an Arts and Sciences mold either. If a Rapier Championship is held where those taking part was judged against a standard and a number of entrants exceeded that standard and were named as Champions for the term, we could again have a number of people whose job it would be to promote the arts of rapier combat. To serve as rapier champions at Tournaments around the Kingdom (thereby being able to cover that much more territory in the process). The only thing I haven't personally reconciled with this approach is the history of the SCA itself. The first Tournaments were always fought for an inspiration to be named as 'Queen of Love and Beauty'. The inspiration was really more important than the combat itself, or the combatant. In keeping with the Chivalric aspects of Arthurian romance. The SCA has really moved away from that line of thought in many ways. I sometimes wish we could go back in that direction, but I don't know if the younger generations, those who are going to continue the concept of the SCA into the future, would really even want to buy into that.

.....The Arthurian Romance does bring up something though that ties a couple of the above thoughts together. All of those Knights who sat at the Round Table of Arthur's Realm (in the Mallory tradition) were considered the Champions of Camelot. In that aspect they fit the mold that there could be multiple Champions at the same time. That there didn't have to be just one 'best of the best'. They all met the 'standard' of Knighthood or Champion. They gained their position at the Table through some extreme act or devotion that demonstrated to all (especially Arthur and the orther Knights at the Table) that they had met the standard of those already sitting at the table. This also harkons to the fact that maybe the original concept of the Peerages was that of the Round Table and the Champions of all that that the SCA was. Many of the early writings of the original SCA members allude to this fact. Attitudes really change in fourty to fifty years though.

.....As the concept of the Serjeantry Program here in the Barony takes its new shape, I'd like to think it fills in some of the gaps that have grown in the concept of 'Champion' over the years. Some of our base definition of what a 'Serjeant' is incorporates being a 'Champion' of the Barony, in a larger sense. As Serjeants they will Champion the causes of the Barony and the essence of the Barony itself. They have studied hard to learn of all the different aspects of what makes up the SCA. They have devoted time and energy to become something of an expert in a particular field or endeavor. They have become inspirations to the Populace, as well as leaders to whom others look for advice and someone to break the path in front of them. In this way they have demonstrated their right to sit at the Round Table of the Barony. And as the Round Table of Mallory's Arthurian Realm had Quests for the Knights to undertake, these Quests are now currently the requirement of Serjeants who wish to sit at the Round Table of the Barony.

.....That is a rather lofty thought though. Some people want concrete admission standards with black-and-white checklists. Every individual Quest is unique to the person. Any one can't be judged against any other. There is an inherent risk in this approach in that those on the 'outside' looking in on the Table WILL judge one against another and possibly find one or the other lacking in their opinion. If they do not know the entire story or picture, will this view and judgement be detrimental against the whole concept? There are parts of the Serjeantry process though that are more black-and-white. Namely the Trials period. Which makes it that much more important that the process itself be that much more open, accessible and black-and-white.

.....This concept really relies on the Baron and Baroness keeping faith in the bigger picture. There may be hard choices to be made. It is important that any 'Champion' actually be a 'Champion' or the entire process is cheapened. I find this a little discomforting as I face the next six weeks leading up to our Serjeantry Trials on August 18th. In some ways I'm really glad that we started down this path. But if I had known how hard it would be I might have thought about it more before really making it one of the planks of our nomination process. Will our successors even want to 'keep the faith'? It'll be a prime question of mine during the polling process, that's for sure. :-)

.....Hopefully you do not now have to schedule a visit to talk to your favorite psychologist. :-)

.....Thanks, Aaron / Arontius.