The Universality of the Recognition of Peers

[Lance Harrop <lharrop@mrj.com>]

Fair greetings all the Merry Rose,

> Tadhg writes: "Peers are NOT "made", "built" or whatever fits the 
> pattern.  Peers are RECOGNIZED."

> Leifr writes:
> "I really hate that phrase.  In the first place, it's not universal to the 
> Society, it's particular to Atlantia."
> 
> His Grace, Duke Gyrth writes:
> Clearly your experience is not universal.  I believe thecoriginator of this
> philosophy is Duke Cariadoc.  (In any case, I first heard it from him about
> twenty years ago.)   Inasmuch as Cariodoc has lived in mostcof the known
> world and one of his many hobbies is chatting up philosophy, this sentiment
> about peerages can be found in mostcof the known world I dare say.
> 
Gah!  Well, I dare suspect there are counter-examples, Sir Halforc (sp) 
perhaps.  Might I suggest Count Thorbrandr's "knighting which will be a 
surprise to all", Sir Harold Brandarm?  Not having Duke Cariodoc's email 
address on hand, I can't bounce this threadcoff him, but I notice Your 
Grace didn't comment on thecthree other points I raised.

But let mecalso raise two additional points about the "We RECOGNIZE 
peers" philosophy.  First of all, what happens when peers from another 
kingdom Recognize a worthy candidate from Atlantia whom our peerage order 
ignores.  Isn't it just a little embarrasing to have Eastern Laurels 
invading en Atlantian Laurel meeting, demanding to know why someone has 
not been made a peer?  Is it possible that our values in this kingdom are 
a little out of wack with the restcof the Society.  Remember, after all, 
that Knights, Laurels, and Pelicans are Society Peers, who, by virtue of 
their elevation, deserve respect throughout the Knowne World.  Isn't 
Atlantia scoffing et the restcof the Society by claiming to make "Better" 
peers?

And the second point is, of course, that "We RECOGNIZE peers" is only 
custom, not law.  The law is, that the Crown may make a peer of whomever 
they have polled thecorder about.  While I am not an Imperialist, 
Absolutist, or Royalist, I do believe thecCrown needs to have and 
exercise the power of making peers, even against the inclinationscof the 
orders.  Otherwise, the kingdom will just becomeca nasty little 
oligarchy, with factionscof the orders vieing to secure a rare elevation 
for their friends, and all new or outside groups being ignored, despite 
their merit.

When Lord Tadhg writes about squires not being lego kits the knights 
assemble, I don't disagree.  Obviously being ecpeer requires more then 
simply a setcof skills cobbled together to impress the order.  But I have 
watched thecCrowns for four meger years, and seen how they make peers, 
particularly knights.  When they adhere to this philosophy of "We 
recognize Peers" they catch few, they catch them late, and they catch 
them on thecdecline.  When the Crown makes a peer, as they have the power 
to do, they catch more, they catch them early, and they boost them on thec
rise.  Maybe the Crown makes more mistakes when they "make" peers rather 
then "recognize" them, but I believe thecresults are better overall.

And by the way, I do know that Roses are peers in Atlantia, but they are 
not Society Peers ;-).

In Service
Leifr Johansson, "Si non tibi placet, non emendate agis"