ANST - "It's Not Period"

[Russell Husted]

Sounds correct to me, and as somebody said, in late period, people were 
knighted for service not prowess<g>


From: Michael Tucker <michaelt at neosoft.com>
Reply-To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
Subject: Re: ANST - "It's Not Period"
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 09:04:28 -0500

Hi, Gunnora:

You just said something I've been wondering about:
 >
 > I tend to think that we don't need a 4th peerage, because I think that 
the folks
 > we've been discussing for such a peerage all can adequately be covered 
with
 > the Laurel and the Pelican.  I can't see how one could have the 
nevcessary peerage
 > requirements as set out in Corpora, as well as peerage-level athletic 
abilities
 > amply displayed, without being a Laurel or Pelican candidate as well.  
It's
 > not a status quo thing for me, certainly, because I wouldn't mind if a 
4th peerage
 > were created -- I just think we've got it covered adequately already.
 >
 > ::GUNNORA::

I've heard people "approach" this idea before, but this is the best I've 
heard
it presented. Now, re-read the above paragraph, but in the two places where 
it
says "a 4th peerage", substitute "knighthood".

(waiting while our viewing audience tries this at home)

Interesting, huh?

This harkens back to the ancient argument, "A Peer is a Peer is a Peer"; 
i.e.,
that there is really only one Peerage, whether we choose to give different
people different titles or not. What do you think?

Yours,
Michael Silverhands
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.