Taigh Moran Chat
RR 2, Northside Road
Wading River, NY 11792
10 May, 1988

Unto the members of the College of Arms and any others who may read this missive, greetings from Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane, Laurel Queen of Arms!

The April meeting was held on 23 April to consider the letters from Trimaris (11/30), Outlands (12/30), Atenveldt (1/10), Caid (1/10), West (1/13), East (1/25), East (1/26), Outlands (1/28), Ansteorra (1/29) and Meridies (1/29). Of 312 actions 229 were positive and 83 were negative for an overall percentage of 73%. However, the actual success rate was considerably higher than this figure implies since it is our custom to count submissions withdrawn by the heraldic representative of a Kingdom as a return and there was an unusually high number of withdrawn submissions on the letters considered at the April meeting.

In response to the number of calls and postal cards from commentors indicating that they cannot get their commentary completed for the scheduled date of the May Laurel meeting (but will definitely have it done for the "overflow" meeting", the meeting has been moved to the Memorial Day weekend. This will allow more leisure for a proper evaluation of the considerable number of letters to be considered: Calontir (1/1A), Calontir (1/1B), Atenveldt (2/1), Caid (2/7), Middle (2/7), West (2/10), Middle (2/14), East (2/20), Meridies (2/20), Atlantia (2/21), Outlands (2/28) and Calontir (2/28). Due to some procedural problems and reports of its late arrival in some areas, the letter from Atlantia dated 27 February has been postponed to the June meeting.

The consideration of letters in June will be split into two parts: at the Symposium in Calontir, the College will consider the letters from Trimaris (2/29) and Ansteorra (3/11). On the following weekend (25 June) we will consider Atlantia (2/27), Atenveldt (3/1), Middle (3/9), Calontir (3/15), West (3/16), Caid (3/18) and Meridies (3/18).

The July meeting is very tentatively scheduled for 16 July. At that meeting we will consider the letters from Atenveldt (4/1), Middle (4/3), East (4/7), Ansteorra (4/12), Calontir (4/12), West (4/13), Caid (4/26) and Middle (4/29) as well as the Laurel Letter of Intent.

With the beginning of year XXIII of the Society, there are significant changes in the roster of the College of Arms. For a complete listing of these, you should carefully consult the attached roster. However, it is appropriate to take note of several changes which may be said to mark "the end of an era" for the College.

Aelfwynn Gyrthesdohtor finds that the press of time and shifting priorities restrain her from commenting and has requested that her name be removed from the commenting heralds of the College. As Vesper and Batonvert, she has contributed more than nine unbroken years of wise advice and learned commentary to the College and we shall miss her voice sorely, but must accede to her request. Her lord, Thomas Longshanks, has requested that he be restored to the mailing list so that he may comment in his own right.

The eve of the new year saw the retirement of the two most senior Principal Heralds in the College. Under Frederick of Holland the Western College of Heralds maintained its considerable reputation for strong principles, consistent competence and dedicated service to heraldry in the Society. As far as we can determine, not a month during his tenure failed to see a letter of intent and a significant letter of commentary from the West, a record no other Kingdom can match. Master Frederick does not wish to comment on a regular basis, but has indicated that he may comment on issues from time to time. We certainly hope that this is the case since twenty plus years of experience in the Society and his strongly-held (though sometimes idiosyncratic) opinions lend a flavour to correspondence and debate that we would miss.

On the same day Master Allyn O Dubhda retired as Triton Principal Herald, also after four years of service in that office. This period was in many ways a difficult transitional period for Atlantia and it is to his credit that heraldry in Atlantia has persevered and advanced during that period. Master Allyn has assumed the title of Nereid and will be commenting in the College.

In both cases, the process of "phasing in" the new Principal Herald had been carried out over a period of some months so it will come as no surprise whatsoever that the new Vesper Principal Herald is Alison von Markheim while the new Triton Principal Herald is Hilary of Fairhaven.

While these changes have been occurring, there have been some other changes to the mailing list. Codex, in his guise as Pale Herald of the Middle, will resume commenting. Black Lion also has requested that you add Gleowine Barding of Bardingham to your mailing lists (he may be reached at the mailing address for Drogo the Forgetful: Paul Stratton, 12617 NE 110th Street, Kirkland, WA 98033. Crescent asks that you add the Seraph Pursuivant, Zenobia Napthali to the mailing list (Leslie Schweitzer, 3775 S. Canfield, #2, Los Angeles, CA 90034; (213) 0820

In the course of compiling the current roster, we realized just how many changes there had been in the composition of the College over the past few months, indeed over the past couple of years.

To gain some idea of the magnitude of these changes, consider the following facts. On 1 May, A.S. XXIII, only one Principal Herald was in office who had held the same position on 1 May, A.S.XXI (Aten, in case you are wondering). Laurel, who is accustomed to considering herself something of a newcomer to the Society and certainly to the College, realized that, with several recent departures from the College she has the second longest unbroken tenure on the College's mailing list (the longest, of course, belongs to Master Wilhelm) and that only goes back some seven years. Better than one-third of those now on the mailing list, including several Principal Heralds, were not even subscribing to the Letters of Acceptance and Return two years ago.

These changes have implications for the future of heraldry in the Society, of course, and have already had some repercussions.

Some of these are inevitably negative. An influx of relatively inexperienced administrators and submissions processing heralds in some areas has led to more work for members of the College as they "fill in the blanks" of documentation and/or conflict checking or deal with accumulated backlogs. As the "Old Guard" passes, more and more of our heraldic history fades away with sadly predictable results: the names of those who created the system of heraldry we use today are lost (how many members of the College have ever received an "Alfgar letter", much less remember the particular prejudices of Ioseph of Locksley or Karina of the Far West which lay behind the decisions so coldly enshrined in Precedents?). What is even more disturbing, solutions derived from serious heraldic research and hard-fought discussions that involved the College (and, in some cases, the Society at large) for years are at best a dim rumour and at worst totally forgotten: "the history you forget, you are doomed to repeat". These are serious problems which were bound to occur as the "first generation" of heraldic administrators aged out or burned out. We were aware of that two years ago, but the problems seemed to be problems which could be addressed in the future. Well, the future is here now and, hopefully, we shall try to address some of these issues and possible solutions to the more devastating negative aspects of the phenomenon at the Symposium and in the months that follow.

However, if these changes offer problems, they also offer unparalleled opportunities for the College and heraldry in the Society in general. The new voices and eyes in the College have added significantly to the diversity of outlook available to the College. With this diversity, hopefully, will come the flexibility to make the changes in both underlying philosophy and administration that will be required over the coming years. Coupled with new rules, new educational programs and a new commitment to enlarging the array of informational resources available at all levels, the new personnel in the College offer us the means of reaching more directly and more positively to a much larger proportion of the Society's membership than was ever possible before. If we are willing to do so. . .

Amidst all these changes of personnel and policy, there is always the fear of lack of continuity. Those who have expressed such fears will hopefully be glad to hear that at least one position on the College's roster will not be changing in the immediate future: a telephone call from the Laurel Ombudsman shortly after the recent Board meeting conveyed the news that the Board has elected to extend Laurel's warrant through the third quarter of 1990.

Deciding whether to continue in office was rather difficult. It was fairly easy to determine that "burn out" was not a factor and that sufficient enjoyment and satisfaction were derived from the job that continuing in office would not be an unbearable sacrifice.

However, whether this would be in the best interests of the College and the Society was a much more difficult issue. To all those who provided feed-back, positive and negative, thank you! There was some negative feed-back , largely derived from one or two geographic areas, but the degree to which the response was positive was both surprising and frightening: even the two eminently qualified volunteers who indicated that they would take the job if necessary supported at least two more years of the current administration.

To all the people who wrote or sat around a campfire and told me that the best thing would be to continue, but only if I wanted to, thank you! Thank you not for any warm fuzzy feelings of approval I might have derived from your insistence that I was my own worst critic and should beware hyperperfectionism, but for the clear statements of support, whatever decision I would make. Not a single person, as they did two years ago, "but there is nobody else". Not a single person pulled a "guilt trip" on me (well, yes one. . . ) so I can honestly say that the decision made was a free will decision. It is my own fault and I have noone to blame but myself, if it seemed that doing the job for two more years seemed less wearing than packing up the files before Pennsic!

In return for all this support, a few promises are owing to the members of the College. I will try not to "go weird" on you, but make no guarantees that my definition of "weird" and yours will always coincide. Continuing the commitment to be responsive to the consensus of opinion in the College, I will try to remain open and accessible to the ideas of all, but cannot promise that "majority rule" will dominate in all cases. As in the case, processing of submissions will continue to be the highest priority for the Laurel Office, even when relatively urgent and distinctly more alluring philosophical issues hover on the horizon. Most of all I promise that I will never be unwilling to make a just and equitable decision, even when I know that it will render me (or the even the College at large) unpopular.

Believe me, I enter my second term of office knowing that it will not be easy. In some respects, the first two years were very turbulent and so many outstanding issues remain that the next two years are likely to equal them. I am fully aware that the new rules for submission and the parallel administrative guidelines which will follow will not satisfy everyone and (probably) some of the compromises reached will satisfy noone completely. Undoubtedly, over the course of the next couple of years, some who have urged me to continue will regret that they did so. Equally undoubtedly, if I do my job properly in this period of rapid change, I shall be far less popular as A.X. XXV dawns than I was at the outset of A.S. XXIII. That will grieve me, but not surprise me. Two years hence both you and I must remember what I say now: I have counted the cost and, if I were not willing to bear that cost, I would have left the job.

Enclosed with this letter you will find a Laurel Letter of Intent to be considered at the July meeting. Since this consists of only two proposed group designations and the Steward considers the matter urgent, we have "shaved" the normal amount of time required for commentary. Hopefully, this will not overly inconvenience anyone.

The autocrats for the Heraldic Symposium to be held this June in Calontir have asked me to remind everyone to get their reservations in as soon as possible. Many members of the College and others who have told members of the Laurel staff that they are attending have not yet told the autocrats. Advance notice is particularly vital if you are planning on staying on campus or if you are flying into Kansas City and must have transport to and from the airport.

A number of people have asked about the availability of accommodations for the weekend. Housing on campus will be available from Thursday night through Sunday night inclusive so that those wishing to come in Thursday to enjoy the tour of the Nelson and stay for the last "dead dog" postrevelry need not have fear they will find themselves homeless. (Note that airfares for those arriving Thursday and departing Monday may also be cheaper!)

The formal "issues" session is presently scheduled for Sunday, the same day that the "on-the-road Laurel meeting" will be held. However, informal discussions will continue for much of the weekend and Laurel has made a commitment to keep herself free and accessible for such meetings as well as a significant amount of disorganized revelry. The autocrats indicate that there will be ample space available for both activities.

The turnover in submissions processing heralds over the past few months has been so great that it seems appropriate to address once again the requirements for letters of intent and Laurel packets. While a "handout" in this subject was sent out in autumn, 1986, many of those now responsible for submissions were not members of the College at that time. Additionally, some requirements have been slightly modified.

Therefore, enclosed with this letter you will find a summary of the requirements for letters of intent and Laurel packets. If these look familiar to some of you, there is a good reason: they were adapted from the standards issued in 1986. (Aren't word processors wonderful?)

If even those who are not directly responsible for submissions processing at the Kingdom level bear these requirements in mind when consulting and producing documentation, the work of the College and the Laurel Office will greatly be eased.

Your servant,

[Alisoun]