Re: [Mid] Questions about belt and initials

>I've been wondering about this myself. At the rate
>Peers and their apprentices have been scarfing up
>belt colors, the rest of us are going to be stuck
>with plaid (NOT tartan).

I'm not sure whether Phillippa is being serious or not; I suspect not.
However, this is a belief, and a concern, I've held for several years.
Let's try to be clear on one thing: White belts are reserved for Knights
and white baldrics are reserved for Masters of Arms. No other belt
colors are reserved. A person wearing a red/green/yellow belt _might_ be
a squire/apprentice/protegee, but then again might just be somebody who
felt like wearing a red/green/yellow belt.

I've been shocked at the amount of abuse I've seen heaped on people who
were supposedly being "unchivalrous" enough to wear a belt they weren't
"entitled" too. Not surprisingly I have never seen Knights or Masters of
Arms make a big deal about someone else wearing a white belt (or
baldric). I have, however, seen young ladies, brand new to the SCA,
berated by others for wearing a white cord with their gold-key garb.
What a tragic and ugly thing to be done in the name of "courtesy".

I can remember when a number of people of my acquaintance were made
squires and apprentices. The way they protected their supposed
perquisite of belt color, quick to chastise others for being rude enough
to pretend to be a (squire / apprentice) when they in fact were not,
soured me on the whole concept of "associates" for years. (The reason
that I've excluded protegees from this isn't that I'm now a Pelican and
am protecting my own, but because protegees were, and still are, very
rare in my neck o' the woods so it never became an issue).

To be much more clear: Squires, apprentices, and protegees _aren't_
ranks, and red, green, and yellow belts _aren't_ reserved. Any person
who takes it upon themselves to berate, or even chastise, someone for
this reason is in fact the person who is in the wrong. Of course it's
proper to explain to a person, in case they are not aware of the fact,
that in many cases those colors of belts are used by those groups of
people to identify their association, and they might inadvertently cause
someone to confuse them with a (squire, apprentice, or protegee). It is
equally as acceptable for them to decide that they like the color in
question and will continue to wear it.

Mistress Siobhan (pronounced "see-oh-buh-an" <g>) is correct that
colored belts with someone's arms on them not only are much more likely
to be an associate's belt, but they make much better symbols. I still
remember, from years ago, talking with some squires who really felt
strongly that no one but squires should wear red belts: I asked them
"Which is more important, that you're a squire, or that you're squired
to your Knight?". Every one answered that of course being squired to
their Knight was what was important. "Then which is the better symbol, a
generic belt indicating that you are a squire, or a belt indicating that
you are squired to Sir <X>?". I will note, although it might be entirely
unrelated, that most squires in the local area now appear to wear red
belts with their Knight's arms or badge on the tip.

I Remain,

Dmitrii Volkovich

From: "Polzinetti, John M." <John.Polzinetti@lexis-nexis.com>
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ to unsubscribe, send a message to
`~-, ,-~`~-, ,-~`~-, ,-~`~-, ,-~` sca-middle-request@dnaco.net with
. | | | | | | | | 'unsubscribe' as its body.
Received on Thu Jan 8 11:42:31 1998