October 1980 Letter of Acceptances and Returns Cover Letter

October 20, 1980 XV

To: The Members of the College of Arms

From: Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel, OL, OP, OLM, QOG, Laurel King of Arms

Greetings:

Here is the October Letter of Acceptances and Rejections. My staff and I have just finished checking the files against the ordinary and armorial and we have found a number of cases where the files are missing, and a number of files that were not entered into the armorial. These are also listed after the acceptances and rejections. Each Principal Herald should check these. I need copies of each of the missing files. I also found a number of files which did not seem to be either passed or rejected. I have placed them into a Laurel Letter of Intent. Please check these out and comment on them. I will process them in December. The next College of Arms meeting will be on November 16, and the following on either December 14 or 21. I enclose a copy of the roster in a format suitable for photocopying onto address labels.

The Protectorate of Thairis is now the Principality of Drachenwald. The Drachenwald Herald is Charles Stewart O'Connor, (c/o Capt. Patrick Hughes, DPCA, Military Community, Mainz, APO, NY 09185. Drachenwald is based in Germany. Charles is now in the College mailing list. Another addition to the list is Cinhil MacAran, Blue Tyger Herald for the Central Region of the East Kingdom (Pennsylvania, Delaware, New York, New Jersey and Maryland). Cinhil MacAran (Gregg Palmer) 700 Kirkwood Hwy. #F-7, Newark, DE, 19711. His address is on the roster sheet. I invite the East and the Middle to submit the names and addresses of the rest of the Regional Heralds for inclusion in the mailing list. They are doing the work of a Principality Herald, and so could benefit by the process.

In my August letter I very carefully described the difference between dancetty and indented except that I got the two reversed. Indented makes a bar into a series of lozenges and dancetty makes a bar into a zig zag line. A mnemonic is that a bar dancetty "dances" across the field.

I also brought up the idea of the collar of SS's. It has been clearly shown to me that because the collar of SS's was a Lancastrian badge during most of our period and, because it is a specifically English badge and the SCA covers the whole world from the fall of the Roman Empire to 1600, it is not a good idea to use the collar of SS's. I agree. Do not use a collar of SS's. On the other hand what I had actually had in mind and what Kraken has verified is in period is the use of livery collars, of which the Collar of SS's is just one example. These are the great collars you see Great Lords wearing about their shoulders with a large medallion of office depending from the collar. They are also used in some of the orders of knighthood. The collar consists of a number of letters or badges linked together to form a metal collar, with the front ends of the collar connected by a trefoil link, with a medallion pendant from the third lobe of the trefoil link.

What I propose is to allow each kingdom to choose whether or not to make use of livery collars. These could be used by members of any of the orders of the peerage to display their medallion of the order, or by a Great Officer who has a Grant of Arms to display the badge of the office, or by a Baron or Baroness who has a Grant of Arms to display the arms of the Barony. A person who belonged to several orders could display more than one such medallion on such a collar by depending more than one pendant from the collar, or by working the medallions into the collar itself. I have done this with my medallions for the four orders I belong to and it is much better than wearing four separate medallions around my neck. The collar could be made of the letters SCASCASCASCA or of the first letter of the kingdoms name, or of some special badge of the kingdom (the star of Ansteorra). I am not requiring anyone to do this. I am merely allowing it if you choose to do so. It would be nice to have some regalia for a Grant holder to wear, and to be able to handle multiple medallions.

It has been pointed out to me that the blazon of the Order of the Silver Crescent should have the crescent inverted and the Eastern crown in pale, instead of having the crown surmounted by the crescent, because the crescent is not on top of the crown but is instead above it. Please correct your files.

The votes are not all in but it is clear that it is the consensus of the College of Arms that we continue to allow the use of names and place names from fiction and mythology. So be it. The fantasy source must be compatible with our period. A culture with post sixteenth century technology is not compatible. The fiction must be about a place where mortals dwelled and the name or place used must not violate the prohibition against claiming to be non-mortal. If the fiction deals with events on Earth it must be using a pre-1600 time period. Barbarian tales of the far future are not compatible.

I need the Society name of William Litrak, Commander of the Legion of the Black Fist. He lived in the Middle at last account. In July I mentioned in my letter (point 8) that branches could fly the banner of the larger branch of which they were a part, to indicate their acknowledgement of their status. For example if a Barony which is part of a Principality held an event and the Prince is not there, the Barony could indicate their membership in the Principality and the presence of the authority of the Prince by flying one official banner of the arms of the Principality next to the banner of the Barony. What I didn't make clear is that this requires the approval of the Prince because these are his arms. If he chooses to express his approval of the event by allowing this to be done, then this can be done as I said. Similarly the arms of the Kingdom could be shown, with the approval of the King, if desired. It would be better if the Kingdom and Principality had registered each a badge for use as a banner by the populace, similar to present day national flags, so that these could be used instead, without requiring specific permission. In their absence, however what I described would allow a new shire to display some colorful banners in a revel hall so as to show the new members the arms of the branches they belong to and to be a show of approval and interest on the part of the ruling nobles.

Please note that the arms of a branch technically belong to the head of that branch. If the branch wishes to have a war banner which can be carried into battle by several companies of fighters at the same time, it must register a badge for that purpose. Technically the arms of the SCA are Vert, a laurel wreath Or, and these belong to the Board of Directors, as is proper. The ensign of the SCA is therefore technically a badge, and is Or, a laurel wreath vert. This is available for use by the various branches to fly at events to indicate that it is an official SCA event. The emblem of the Society offices (Heralds, Seneschal, Marshals, etc.) are also badges registered to the SCA (and hence to the Board) and are for use by the members of each office. They are all classified as arms because with regards to potential conflicts they are to be treated as arms and accorded the full two points of difference protection from conflict. The reason this was not mentioned at the beginning is that the early College did not understand how the system actually worked and registered them all as separate arms. Please note that there is not at present a set of arms for the College of Arms itself. Instead we have the badge with the two trumpets which is usable by all heralds. We could of course assign as Arms for the College Or, two straight trumpets in saltire, bells in chief vert, but I don't see the need.

One point that seems not to be clear is the need for Linnean names. When a living thing is termed proper and only the standard coloration is desire, not any particular species, then the Linnean name is not necessary. An example here is the basic fir tree proper. It shows a green conical top and a brown trunk. If you specifically want a Douglas Fir Tree, then you must give the genus and species for it. In those cases where there is no standard coloration for a living thing, such as for butterflies the Linnean name must always be given if the charge is termed proper. Where necessary to properly identify the coloration the breed and color phase must also be identified.

When a charge is not termed proper the Linnean name is optional. If it is specified we know that a particular species is meant, and the correct outline is determined, with the tincture specified. If the Linnean name is not specified then we know that the owner of the arms does not care which species is used. This is often the case when a stylized form is used. If the horse is the basic heraldic horse, then to have a red horse one just says a horse gules. If you want a Shetland pony gules then the breed must be specified, even though it isn't proper. If you want an owl sable you either settle for the standard heraldic owl, which is the great horned owl, or else you specify the Linnean name so that the correct outline is used, even though the owl is not proper.

The West has sent me a list of its awards and orders. I still want all of the rest of you to do the same. Once I have them all I will collate them and mail the compilation out to you all. Then we can prevent the use of identical names of orders in two kingdoms, as has happened in the past. All orders and awards should be submitted to the College of Arms for review of the name to see if it conflicts. That is the only thing I will check.

A person may not place his or her own badge on an inescutcheon, lozenge or cartouche on his or her device, as that would seem to be a form of marshalling or else an augmentation. A person could place his or her badge upon a roundel and place this on his or her device. This is the proper shape for a badge, after all, and will not be considered a form of marshalling. You could also place the badge on the sail of a ship, or the sleeve of a maunche, or some other non-marshalling usage. In any event the addition cannot cause the device to exceed the limit on complexity.

We come not to a very important topic. There has for many years been considerable confusion over just what the College of Arms is trying to do. Its very purpose has been unclear. The Society for Creative Anachronism's purpose is to recreate the life of the Middle Ages as it should have been. The period of the SCA is the period between the fall of Rome and the year 1601. The basis of the Society is Europe, although other cultures and areas in the world during the SCA's period are allowed. The SCA does not recreate the life of the times exactly, but instead takes from it those activities which are enjoyable and leaves the bad behind. Furthermore the SCA engages in an ongoing research program to develop new crafts which are in keeping with the period, even if they were not actually practiced. Thus we try for new methods of making armor using machinery not available in the Middle Ages and using materials not available, in order to come up with better armor which is in keeping with period.

As does the Society so does the College of Arms. The purpose of the College of Arms is to recreate the heraldry of the Middle Ages as it should have been. The period of the College is from the beginnings of heraldry to the year 1601. The basis of the College is English Heraldry, although usages from other countries' heraldic systems are used on a case by case basis. Since there were many conflicting heraldic systems in the period of the Society, we have to choose one system to base our system on, or else create our own system from scratch, which nobody wanted to do. As English heraldry is the easiest to learn about and is what we are most familiar with, it was chosen as the basis of the College. In the beginning the College did everything by Boutell's, and began to diverge. What the College was trying to do was to practice Sixteenth Century English Heraldry as it should have been. This is the Tudor era, in which many good heraldic ideas were born, but also in which heraldic practices grew away from the simplicity that characterized heraldry in the earlier years.

In part this was because the use of heraldry on the battlefield had decreased, and so it was becoming more elaborate, reflecting the rising wealth of the new nobility and the increasing complexity of life. The College of Arms chose as its example of simplicity the style of heraldry before the Tudor era at the start of the English College of Arms in the year 1485. What the College has been doing all these years is to take Tudor heraldry of the year 1600 and simplify it to the style of the previous century.

I have never seen a book that listed the heraldic practices in England before 1485. Every book that I know of dates back no further than the middle 1500's, when printed books came into wide use. It is not too hard to determine whether or not a charge or practice was in use before 1600, but it is next to impossible to determine if it was in use before 1485. Therefore what the College of Arms is actually doing is practicing a simplified version of Tudor Heraldry. We discard all of the Tudor heraldic conventions that we do not like, and add in any of our own creations that we think will help, in order to come up with a system of heraldry that will suit the specific needs of the SCA. We are not trying to duplicate pre-1485 heraldry because this is not possible. We are trying to retain the simplicity of the 1485 heraldic system and yet still have the useful creations of the Tudor century. The College cutoff is thus the year 1600. The year 1485 marks the date of our heraldic example, but is not in itself a true cutoff. We are in essence practicing heraldry as it was practiced in our period, because heraldry has always been a dynamic science and has changed to fit the needs of the times. We are not bound by our references. If we think up a convention which we find a favorable addition to our system, we add it. In many ways we are practicing the strictest heraldry ever practiced in the world.

We prevent conflicts within our system, and with mundane arms from the rest of the world. Nobody else ever did this. England never paid any attention to arms in Europe with respect to conflicts, except for civic and royal arms. We are forcing the rule of tincture to become the rule of contrast, returning to its original usage. We thereby forbid many things which the heralds in England would have passed, such as a laurel wreath proper upon a field azure. We do not allow marshalling, which greatly adds to the complexity of the device. We strive always to keep things simple and well described. We regulate the names of our members, something that was never done in our period. And we give the College total authority over arms, something which the College of Arms of England in 1600 would have loved to have had.

This then is how the College actually works and what its purpose is. This is how it will continue to work until such time as College decides to change the purpose in a clear manner. In order to avoid Tudor heraldry completely we would have to have available sources which told us what the complete system of heraldry was in 1485 England. Until then we will be continuing to use simplified Tudor Heraldry. Tudor is not a swear word, no matter what the fans of Richard III might say. It was in the Tudor era that the College of Arms of England came into existence and created the uniform system of heraldry that we see today. You cannot blame the sixteenth century College of Arms for the actions of the monarchs. You can say that certain practices are undesirable and we do. I hope that this is of assistance in explaining what we are about. If you have any questions or objections, feel free to voice them and defend them. We will all listen.

Pray believe, my Lords and my Ladies, that I remain,

Your Servant,

Wilhelm von Schlüssel, OL, OP, OLM, QOG

Laurel King of Arms