Greetings;
I feel that a great deal of time was wasted on the data collection and analysis on the idea of adding a "Fouth" Peerage.
I believe this is a philosophical question, and the answer is that our peerage system works quite well
It is not as though people who fence, do archery or pursue other martial activities do not have a route to peerage, they have two -- the Laurel and the Pelican.
I have been in the SCA for 16 years, almost all of that in a large fencing encampment/group. We have as many or more peers as any similar size loose household. We have fencers who have Laurels for garb and making blades and hilts, and we have at least a half-dozen Pelicans, maybe more, for whom much of the work involved teaching, marshaling, overseeing or supporting fencing.
I can come up with many examples in the archery community as well.
While I am not, nor will I ever be, a fighter, I hold the members Chivalry in slightly higher regard than I do the Laurels and my fellow Pelicans. That is not an insult to my Laurel friends and my Pelican brothers and sisters. I believe it is the "Way of the World" in a Society in which kingships are decided on the field of battle.
I urge you to keep the peerage system as it is.
In service,
William O'Donovan of Monmouth, Master of the Pelican, Baron of the court of King Darius and Queen Alethea, Companion of the Silver Crescent, Companion of the White Oak, recipient of the Queen's Order of Courtesy, the King's Cipher, the Queen's Cypher, the Queen's Order of Distinction, and proud holder of the Freedom of the Bridge.
Also known as Liam St. Liam
PS: Please understand as well, that some of us are offended by the use of the phrase "Fourth Peerage," when it would indeed be the fifth peerage. In some kingdom, including my home in the East, the Lady of the Rose is a polled and bestowed peerage.