ANST - one Peerage (was "It's Not Period")

[Mark.S Harris]

Michael Tucker wrote:
> Suppose - just suppose, mind you - that there were _truly_ only one Peerage, and
> - for the sake of argument - suppose we called it "Knighthood". 

<snip of the basics of a wonderful idea to simplify and make more authentic
     our SCA Peerages>

> The only real difference I can see is: what forms of address would you use?
> Personally, I like the idea of calling _all_ Peers "Sir <x>", just as it's done
> in "real life". If you wanted, you could differentiate the insignia (as we have
> done) and append an honorific, such as:
> Sir <x>, Knight of the Realm
> Sir <x>, Master/Mistress of Arms
> Sir <x>, Master/Mistress of the Laurel
> Sir <x>, Master/Mistress of the Pelican
> 
> I fully realize that this is just a "thought exercise" - I'm not proposing a
> change to 34 years of tradition. But I've heard this "model" for our Society
> discussed by friends who've been in the Society since the _very_ beginning. I
> haven't heard it brought up within the context of our current discussion - i.e.,
> whether to expand the Peerage to include other activities.

Personally, I think this is a great idea. Unfortunately, the current
system as you
mention, probably has too many embedded privileges and emotional baggage
to be
changed this much no matter how much more logical and authentic the new system
might be. 

I believe some of the earlier proposals to change things to something
similar to
this made these subgroupings orders under the Knighthood. I can't
remember the
details of the proposal that was circulated Known World wide a few years
ago, 
but I think it was similar.

I encourage you to continue refining this proposal even though it brings to
mind a late-period Spaniard tilting at windmills.

Lord Stefan li Rous
stefan at texas.net
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.