July 30, 1982 XVII A.S.
TO: The Members of the College of Arms
FROM: Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel, Laurel King of Arms
Enclosed is the July LoA&R containing 101 acceptances and 28 rejections, for a total of 129. My next meeting will be on August 15, 1982, at which time I will process the following LoIs: Meridies (5/10), East (5/10), West (5/12), Caid (5/18), Atenveldt (5/24), and An Tir (6/7). The September meeting has been moved to October 3, 1982, and will occur at the Heraldic Symposium. At that time, I will process these LoIs: An Tir (6/18) and Ansteorra (6/20). The October meeting will be on October 30, 1982, at which time I will process the rest of the June LoIs and all LoIs dated in July. There will be no meeting in September itself because Mistress Cynthia and I will be married on September 18, and then preparing for the symposium, so we won't have time for a meeting.
Enclosed also is a new mailing list. As always, there are changes. Anebairn has replaced Aureliane as Star Principal Herald. Taliesynne has replaced Edward as Archive, and Edward is now Ensign P. Aryana is now Stellanordica Herald. Eilis O'Boirno, Brachet Herald, has been added. I have removed the Pale Herald from the list for not commenting, and have therefore put the Dragon Herald onto the list in his place. I have added Vergil back to the list, as he is commenting again.
Here are some miscellaneous procedural matters: the Laurel fee for names and name changes is $1 each, not 50¢. Everything that I process that has a fee is $1 each. For those kingdoms that are sending on the names to me when the devices are rejected at kingdom level, I will offer a grace period to avoid paying twice. If the device is submitted within three months of the date the
name is submitted, then I will not charge an extra $1 for the device. (Had they been submitted together, a $1 fee would have covered both name and device.) If a delay of more than 3 months occurs, then I will charge a second $1 fee. This will allow kingdoms to pass on the names by themselves without losing too much money on the deal, and will provide an incentive to the submittor to resubmit the device quickly if the kingdom chooses to pass on the extra $1 fee. Also: when you submit a branch name, be sure to include on the information sheet a description of the mundane territory encompassed by the branch. If it has a definite capital city, include that too.
Contrary to Lantern's statement in Popular Chivalry, most kingdoms do not have heraldic backlogs, Only one-third of them do. These are Ansteorra (just changed Principal Herald), Meridies (recently changed Principal Herald), and Middle (planning to change Principal Herald). The other two-thirds are current. On the subject of LoCs, there are only three individuals in danger of being dropped from the mailing list for not commenting. These are Aryana (last LoC was in May, with a long gap before that), Rhonwen (commented in November, March, and April, and nothing since), and Anebairn (last commented in April). Anebairn has an additional three-month grace period beginning from the day he took over as Star PH. Aryana and Rhonwen will be dropped from the list if I do not receive LoCs from them before my August meeting. The Middle and Meridies are way behind in commenting, but I have already removed Pale and Pennon from the list, and Dragon and Beacon are still within their grace periods. Thus, of the 30+ people on the mailing list, only 10% are in trouble. To the 90% who are not, good show!
On the question of mon, in answer to several comments, mon may be regis- tered as either sable on argent or argent on sable, representing dark on light or light on dark, respectively. The choice you make determines how it will be emblazoned on a scroll and which of the two alternatives will be reserved to you. If you choose argent on sable, then somebody else having sable on argent has a difference. (The outlines must still be different.)
Proper usage for mon is to have all charges be of one tincture and to place these charges on a contrasting background or fabric. Just as in the case of a European device, a mon may be used as a tinctureless seal without also registering it in that fashion. In this case, the tinctures involved are the color of ink used and the color of background the seal is applied to. Proper usage here would be red ink on white paper. It is certainly legal for you to use a counterchanged form of your mon. For example, if you register light on dark by submitting a sable field with argent charges, and later want to make a yellow kimono., there is nothing wrong with placing your mon on the kimono using a dark color for contrast. However, the College of Arms will only protect one of the two possibilities. Since 2 points of difference are always required between two SCA devices, there will always be at least 1 full point other than tincture between two primary mons in the SCA, which is all that was really required in Japan.
A device or badge intended to be a mon should be clearly labeled as such. A mon registered tinctureless will be treated as a seal. Anyone who has previously registered a tinctureless mon and now wishes to change it to argent on sable or sable on argent may do so with no fee. If anyone feels that I am being too restrictive with mon, I would like to remind them that the Articles of Incorporation of the SCA clearly state that the SCA is concerned with pre-17th century Western culture, which means that Japanese personae and mon are outside our normal province anyway. So long as the Board continues to allow non-Western personae by not enforcing the Articles, I will continue to allow them, but they must fit in with our European heraldry.
I have received enough objections to registering aliases alone that I have decided to table the idea and continue the current practice of allowing an alias or alternate persona name to be registered under the primary Society name only, in conjunction with a badge, thus requiring the higher fee for a badge instead of a name only. I will still enforce the restriction of only one such alias per person. Käthe got her batch passed because we had not stated a limit. We will still cross-reference aliases and alternate personae, along with household names, in the Armorial. The blazons of the badges will only appear under the primary Society name. Since the aliases and household names will be cross-referenced, it will be possible to protect them, and we will do. so. 'This means that they must satisfy all of the requirements for names. Aliases must pass the same tests as Society names, and household names must pass the same tests as branch names. I am still open to comments on the difference requirements for household names.
I have decided to keep a separate list of tokens and regalia, and therefore I will not be placing such items in the Armorial. You can still register a heraldic badge for an order and then use that badge on a pendant or other item as the token of the order. This means that only heraldic badges will be placed in the Armorial. All of the tokens listed for the SCA-wide orders and titles are also badges and will remain in the Armorial, except for the knight's chain. A chain is a standard charge in heraldry and is not intrinsically restricted in devices, only in physical use as a chain around the neck. The others (white belt, white baldric, laurel wreath, pelican in its piety, crown, rose wreath, etc.) are restricted charges, as they are heraldic badges. The tokens for the Drachenwald orders will be placed upon the regalia list instead of being entered in the Armorial, as they are not really heraldic badges.
The regalia and tokens of the SCA-wide orders and titles are restricted over the entire SCA. The tokens of kingdom orders are not restricted in other kingdoms unless they have been registered as heraldic badges. It is up to a kingdom to decide whether the token of a kingdom order is restricted regalia within that kingdom. It is also up to a kingdom to decide if a token of a principality, baronial, or local award or order is restricted regalia in that kingdom. Such restrictions only apply in that one kingdom unless a heraldic badge is registered or other kingdoms agree to accept the restrictions. It is not required to register a token as a heraldic badge for an order. Most physical tokens are not suitable for registration as a badge.
All PHs are invited to send me a list of the tokens and regalia in use in their kingdoms. I will compile these into a joint list. This list will then be available for heralds and royalty to consult to see what is already in use. While a token is not restricted outside its kingdom, in general other royalty will avoid conflicting with it if they know of its existence. If we restricted all regalia at all levels throughout the SCA, it would become impossible to wear a belt or anything around your neck without conflicting. Let me remind everybody that a proliferation of orders and awards and therefore of regalia is out of period. This is the sort of thing that came into style in the 18th and 19th centuries, with the rise of nationalism and standing armies. We would have been saved a lot of duplication if the SCA had established SCA-wide orders bearing awards of arms for service and for the arts. Every kingdom has these and so we have eighteen orders instead of the two that would have sufficed. Perhaps we should someday form two blanket orders across the SCA, with local kingdom chapters. I doubt that this will happen, however.
There seems to be some confusion on the subject of charges placed on an ordinary versus those placed along a line of partition. It goes like this: Charges placed on an ordinary follow the orientation of that ordinary by default. A billet on a bend is by default bendwise. Two billets on a chevron are by default chevronwise (the dexter is bendwise sinister and the sinister is bendwise). Charges placed along the lines of an ordinary as if the ordinary were there (in bend, in pale, in fess, in chevron, etc.) retain their default orientations in the arrangement. Swords are by default palewise, point to chief. Therefore, two swords in bend are by default palewise in bend. If you want them to be bendwise, you must so specify in the blazon. Four swords in cross are palewise, one, two, and one. If you want them to all point outwards radially, then you must specify four swords in cross, hilts inward. An alternative would be four swords crosswise in cross. Three swords in chevron are palewise one and two by default.
I have received a formal bid for the 1983 Heraldry Symposium from the Blue Tyger Herald, Lord Cinhil MacAran, for a symposium held on August 27-29, 1983, at a private campground 45 minutes from Philadelphia. Elmet would edit and publish the proceedings. I have informally heard that the group in Atlantia that hosted Mr. John Brooke-Little, Norroy King of Arms of England, last April intends to bid for a symposium next April, with Mr. Brooke-Little as guest of honor. I have not yet received a formal bid from them. I have received no other bids or rumors of bids. The deadline for symposium bids is September 17, 1982-- they must be received at my home by that date (not postmarked, written, or what- ever else)--and I will announce the decision at this year's symposium, after I hear comments from attendees on the bids. The bids should cover the criteria I laid down in my April 21, 1982 letter.
I have recently received copies of the laws of Ansteorra and Atenveldt. The laws of Ansteorra do not mention Patents of Arms at all. According to the Corpora, this means that Royal Peers in Ansteorra do not receive Patents of Arms, while the three Orders of the Peerage do. If Ansteorra desires differently, it must so state in its kingdom laws. The laws of Atenveldt state that the Orders of Peerage shall receive Patents of Arms, but do not so state for the Royal Peers, so again in Atenveldt the Royal Peers do not receive Patents of Arms.
In answer to the question of Squire and Esquire as titles, Squire as a title rather than a job description was used in period for a landed noble of the lesser nobility (non-peerage). When William the Conqueror raised the greater Barons up to the peerage, the lesser Barons were not included, and they later became the country Squires. Esquire was the designation given to those members of the gentry who were placed above the rest of the gentry in law. This included justices, lawyers, military officers, and some ministers of state. They had the title of Esquire to indicate that they were of higher rank and so could presume to judge other gentles. Neither Squire nor Esquire as titles are appropriate for use for fighters in training under a knight in the SCA. The use of squire as a job description is appropriate.
The confusion is also in period. Squire had both uses in period, like many other multi-valued English words. In some cases, the uses overlapped. Knights were often of high rank, with a number of subordinates who were also noble. Thus a knight could have several men-at-arms under his command who filled the role of squire and of man-at-arms in battles, who actually held the rank of Squire. The nearest equivalent to the period title of Squire in the SCA is that of a holder of a Grant of Arms. I even considered allowing Grantholders to add Esquire after their names, but there was too much opposition to thise. It certainly is not proper for a non-armigerous fighting trainee to use Esquire. For Esquire to be allowed, there would have to be ranks of squires, with Esquire reserved for those who had received an Award of Arms and satisfied other criteria set down by the Crown or Corpora. To attempt to interfere in knight/ squire relationships in this manner would meet violent opposition from many of the knights. In consideration of all of this, I decided to forbid the use of Esquire entirely, to avoid the problem of defining its use, and to state that squire, like apprentice and protégé, is a job description, not a formal title.
I would like to ask you for input on where we should try to draw the line on conflicts between the names of SCA branches and the names of mundane places. We clearly do not want to see a Barony of England or a College of Oxford in the SCA. On the other hand, some place names in the mundane world are both descriptive and rather obscure. We have said before that we are mainly concerned with the important or well-known places. I would like to hear what you all feel is a reasonable definition of "well-known or important places" to avoid conflicting with.
The Board of Directors has re-warranted me for a two-year term of office. I hope that in the next two years we can continue to build upon the structure we have so laboriously forged, and reap the benefits of a functional College of Arms. I will do my best to become more consistent and to do more research before issuing judgments. I hope you will all continue to do your part. I look forward to working with you all in the next two years, and possibly beyond. Pray believe, my Lords and my Ladies, that I remain
Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel
Laurel King of Arms
WvS:CFC (Typist's note: please excuse pp. 1 & 2; the typewriter was sick--again!)