November 30, 1981 XVI

To: All members of the College of Arms

From: Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel, Laurel King of Arms

Greetings:

Enclosed is the Letter of Acceptances and Rejections for November, along with a supplementary list of acceptances for branch names. I went through my reject files and dug up those branch applications where the arms had been rejected while the name appeared acceptable. Nowadays the name would be approved by itself, but in the past either both or neither were approved. So that the branch's names would be approved I have reprocessed all rejected branch applications. Counting these acceptances there were 97 acceptances and 26 rejections.

My next meeting will be on Sunday, December 20, 1981, at which time I will process all letters of intent dated before October 20, 1981. Please have your comments reach me by December 17, to allow me to file the Christmas rush delay in the Berkeley Post Office. My January meeting is tentatively scheduled for January 17, 1982.

There still seems to be confusion over how I want Letters of Intent done, so I will review it. All submissions should appear on the Letter of Intent, so be sure to cross check the LoI with the submission forms. Be sure also that for every entry on the LoI there is at least one form. A name submission needs only an information sheet. A change of device needs only a picture sheet if the change is minor. Be sure to sort the forms in the same order as they are listed on the LoI. The entries in the LoI should be properly alphabetized. All entries, whether they-are new submissions, resubmissions, appeals, corrections, etc. should be grouped together and alphabetized. After each name indicate the status. I need to know if I have a file for that person or group, and 1f so whether the name is approved. The rest of the CoA needs to know if the name is approved so they know whether or not to check out the name. Indicate whether the submission is a resubmission, a new submission, a correction, an appeal, whatever. If the submission is an appeal with attached documentation, give a short summary of the documentation for the benefit of the rest of the CoA. (Example: I have included copies of pages from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition, p. 56-59, to prove that this charge is in period.)

When you alphabetize the entries, remember that personal names are sorted by the first letter of the first word that occurs in the name. Thus English names are sorted by the first given name, while Japanese names are sorted by the family name, which comes before the given name. For the names of households and groups where the name and/or badge is being registered to a person, they should be listed under that person's name. (Example: John of Trent, badge for House Breakrock.) For branches and groups registered under their own name they should be sorted by the first letter of the first word that is not an article, preposition, or type of branch (barony, canton, etc.). Thus the Barony of the Green Forest is listed under G for Green. Be sure that the names on the the forms and on the LoI agree with each other. If they don't change them so they do. We will assume the name on the information sheet is correct. Be sure that the blazon in the LoI matches the emblazon on the picture sheet. We will assume the picture sheet is correct unless told otherwise. Be sure that the information section on the name (translation, language, etc.) is filled in on the information sheet. The intent of all of is to reduce confusion, prevent errors, and make things more efficient for my staff. I enclose a copy of the current Atenveldt information sheet, which I think is a good one, for you to look at.

Black Lion has passed on to me some documentation sent to her by Conrad von Graz, which casts doubt on our current policy on the use of "von." He sends a copy of an article from the Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1910, Vol. 26, p.1029, on Titles of Honour. It states: "In Germany a distinction is drawn between those titles derived from estates still held by the head of the family and those that are landless. The latter are simply "of" (von), the former are "of and at" (von und zu)." Thus a Lord of Köln would be "von und zu Köln", while an armiger in Köln would be "von Köln." The article also mentions that a similar situation exists in the French use of "de". From "A Dictionary of Modern German Prose Usage" from the Oxford University Press, 1961, p. 368, we have: "The word after von was originally not a surname, but the name of a locality with which the person was associated, and in such a case one should obviously say 'das Leben Götzens von Berlichingen.' Quite different is the modern insertion of von before a surname: correct here are die Werke Leopold von Rankes, das Zeitalter Otto von Bismarcks,etc. Actually, as the original idea of adding von and a place-name as a distinguishing mark has now lost its force, the tendency is to give the last word the -s ending, and this is quite fixed in the Saxon gen.: Wolfram von Eschenbachs Dichtungen."

It would seem from all this that the use of von plus à place name was the normal useage for an armiger of that place, equivalent to the English form John of London. The actual lords of a place used von und zu. Thus our current policy is incorrect. We can thus A) allow the general use of von, B) allow only armigers to use von and only before a place name, or C) forbid its use altogether. The last just won't work, and the second is more trouble than it is worth. Therefore I hereby remove the restriction on the use of von and allow its use without restriction I also hereby restrict the use of von und zu. As we have no landed titles other than King, Queen, Prince, Princess, and Territorial Baron and Baroness, only the holders of these titles could use them, with the name of their branch used as the place name. Such usage would hold only so long as they held their office, and therefore while they may use von und zu they may not register it as part of their society name. If any of you have rejected submissions for the use of von, please pass them now. If any of you have had submissions rejected by me for the use of von please resubmit them. I apologize for the confusion this will cause, but it is better to switch than to continue an incorrect usage.

For the benefit of those who do not know, it is an SCA convention that charges placed along a line of division behave like charges placed upon the corresponding ordinary with regards to default positions. Thus two swords on a bend are by default bendwise unless otherwise specified. By SCA convention two swords in bend are by default bendwise unless otherwise specified. The mundane sources disagree on this subject. Since we have our choice on which is default, it seems better to not have to say two swords bendwise in bend, which sounds redundant. Note that this does not change the default positions for a set number of charges where the arrangements or orientations. Swords are tall thin objects naturally drawn palewise, so two swords are by default palewise in fess. Similarly two fish naiant are by default fesswise in pale.

With the help of Lady Mariposa de las Montoyas I have checked Master Yrjö Kirjawiisas' listing of SCA Branches against the armorial and files. I have annotated the list to show which branches have registered their name, their name and arms, or neither. The results are shown in the table on the next page, which gives a summary by kingdom. Out of the 354 current branches of the SCA listed (which doesn't count those branches that once existed but are now extinct), almost half (46.1%) have not registered either their name or arms. Another 12.8% have only registered their names. Only 41.1% have registered both name and arms. While Corpora does not require subsidiary branches to register arms, it does so require baronies, provinces and principalities, and all branches are required to register their names with the College of Arms. The number who have not done so is shocking.

Kingdom Neither Name Only Name and Arms Total

------- ------- --------- ------------- -----

Ansteorra 9 2 10 21

Atenveldt 13 4 14 31

Atlantia 10 4 16 30

An Tir 12 2 12 26

Caid 3 1 13 17

East 39 6 25 70

Meridies 23 9 17 49

Middle 45 14 22 81

West 11 4 18 33

--------- ----- ----- ------ ------

SCA Total 165 46 147 358

(46.1%) (12.8%) (41.1%)

Clearly something needs to be done. If any Principal or Principality heralds have held up a branches name because the arms were rejected, but the name itself was acceptable, please forward the name on. From now on I ask that branch names be expedited. There is no excuse for almost half of the branches not registering the name they have chosen, once they have chosen one. I hearby decree that from now on all Principal and Principality heralds are responsible for seeing to it that all branches in their jurisdiction have their name submitted to the CoA. If they won't do it, do it for them. Make sure that you know what the name means and what they think it means or intend it to mean. You have three months, at the end of which I want to see all of the branch names on the current list submitted, and either passed or rejected at your level. I will send each Principal and Principality Herald a copy of the page listing their kingdom's branches, with their armorial status. I ask you to push the baronies, provinces (and one principality) that have not submitted arms to do so. If they are using arms which they have not submitted yet then get them to submit or submit them yourselves. Subsidiary branches do not have to register arms, but make it clear to them that they are very much encouraged to do so. There is no fee for registering the name and arms for a branch.

I urge all Principal and Principality Heralds to cooperate with the Kingdom and Principality Seneschals to ensure that henceforth when a group sends their change of status form to the seneschals they also submit their name to the heralds. The Kingdom Seneschal should not approve a branch's request until they have done so. I have communicated with the Steward on this matter and she agrees. In order to keep up our end on this I ask that consideration of a group's name be expedited, so the heralds don't wind up being the one's who hold up the process. The idea here is to allow the Kingdom Principal Herald to veto the obvious bloopers before the groups were approved and before they became too well known by those names. A group which wanted to become a Barony, Province or Principality would have to have submitted both their name and arms before they could have their change of status approved at the kingdom level. The Steward would not act on it until I told her that they were approved, or we agreed, in the case of the arms, that the process was properly in effect. I ask all Principal and Principality heralds to check over list of branches and to let me know of any that are not listed.

On a separate topic, I would like each of you to send me your telephone numbers (privately if you wish) so if I need to contact you by phone I can do so. I still want to have current rosters, Orders of Precedence, Ceremonies, Scroll Texts, and styles of achievements from each kingdom, as they become available. I am working on rewriting the SCA Heralds Handbook, and Clarion is working on a new Armorial and Ordinary. I am writing an article on what I look for in a submission, which you will be able to distribute to your heralds. I should have it done by my next meeting. I commend the new heraldry quarterly to your attention. Remember that there will be another heraldry symposium next year so plan your papers for it. I would like each Principal Herald to tell me how many armigers there are in their kingdoms, and how many of these have registered arms. You will be surprised.

Now that we have finished the massive review of the rules (which will come out in the March T.I.) we can turn out attention to cleaning up the other bits of paperwork and improving our efforts at research and education. I encourage all of you to write short articles for your local newsletters or the heraldry quarterly or T.I. on heraldic matters. We owe it to the populace to educate them on heraldry and its rules before we can validly expect them to follow those rules. T.I. plans to start a series of pamphlets on various subjects. This will allow them to accept longer articles for more limited audiences. Here is an opportunity for those longer heraldry articles that just don't fit into the other sources of publication.

I want to make it clear to everyone that my mind in never closed on any subject, and I am always willing to read letters on any topic. If I make a ruling which you think is wrong, then write me a letter. If you amass enough convincing documentation or arguments you can cause me to change my ruling. I freely admit my lack of omniscience. If you don't tell me your opinions, I won't know them and therefore they will have no effect. When you are commenting on submissions and you find an interesting fact, go ahead and put it in. If you think the submission is acceptable anyway say that. Then I will know that the item is not an objection but is instead a point of information for our benefit. I encourage such.

As we approach the Christmas holidays I take pride in the fact that the College of Arms is in the best shape of all of the bureaucracies in the SCA. You are all doing a good job. Let's keep it that way and strive to do better.

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

Your Servant,

Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel

Laurel King of Arms