I here present the Acceptances and Returns from the Laurel meeting of 25 July 1993. The following Letters of Intent were discussed: Atenveldt, 28 Feb 93; Caid, 8 March 93; East, 10 March 93; Middle, 11 March 93; Atenveldt, 15 March 93; West, 15 March 93; Atlantia, 16 March 93; Calontir, 19 March 93; Trimaris, 22 March 93; An Tir, 24 March 93; and Meridies, 29 March 93.

Schedule

The August Laurel meeting was held on Sunday, 15 August 1993, where the following Letters of Intent were considered: Atenveldt, 31 March 93; Caid, 2 Apr 93; West, 5 Apr 93; Outlands, 7 Apr 93; Middle, 8 Apr 93; Atlantia, 11 Apr 93; An Tir, 14 Apr 93; East, 23 Apr 93; Atenveldt, 24 Apr 93; and Meridies, 25 Apr 93.

The September Laurel meeting will be held on Saturday, 11 September 1993, where we'll consider the following Letters of Intent: Ansteorra, 12 Apr 93; Ansteorra, 13 Apr 93; Ansteorra, 14 Apr 93; An Tir, 5 May 93; West, 10 May 93; Middle, 11 May 93; Caid, 14 May 93; Calontir, 17 May 93; Atlantia, 17 May 93; East, 20 May 93; Atenveldt, 26 May 93; and Meridies, 27 May 93. Responses and rebuttals to commentary on these LOIs should be in the College's hands by 31 Aug 93.

The October Laurel meeting will be held on Sunday, 17 October 1993, where we'll consider the following Letters of Intent: Trimaris, 1 June 93; West, 7 June 93; Outlands, 10 June 93; Calontir, 14 June 93; East, 15 June 93; Middle, 15 June 93; An Tir, 20 June 93; Atlantia, 20 June 93; Atenveldt, 24 June 93; and Meridies, 28 June 93. Commentary on these LOIs should be in the College's hands by 31 Aug 93; responses and rebuttals to that commentary, by 30 Sept 93.

The November Laurel meeting will be held on Sunday, 7 November 1993, where we'll consider the follwing Letters of Intent: Outlands, 31 May 93; Caid, 28 June 93; Ansteorra, 7 July 93; An Tir, 10 July 93; West, 12 July 93; Middle, 15 July 93; Atlantia, 16 July 93; Calontir, 18 July 93; and Atenveldt, 21 July 93. Commentary on these LOIs should be in the College's hands by 30 Sept 93; responses and rebuttals to that commentary, by 31 Oct 93.

The December Laurel meeting is currently scheduled for Sunday, 12 December 1993. To date we have received the following Letters of Intent for consideration at that meeting: Caid, 27 July 93; Meridies, 28 July 93; Ansteorra, 29 July 93; and Outlands, 10 Aug 93. (I suspect more will be in the mail immediately after Pennsic War.) Commentary on these LOIs should be in the College's hands by 31 Oct 93; responses and rebuttals to that commentary, by 30 Nov 93.

Roster changes

In last month's Roster Updates, I mistakenly gave the name of the Dragon Principal Herald as Thorvald Redbeard. That's certainly an apt epithet, but it's not his name. It should, of course, be Thorvald Redhair. Sorry about that, Thorvald.

The Beacon Principal Herald of Meridies has a new address: Sionyn Muirgen ní Dhomnall (Jackie Watkins), 3532 Winding Wind Cv., Bartlett, TN 38135; (901) 385-2423. (The Pennon Herald of Meridies would like to remind some of you that she moved back February. Her address is Brenna Lowri o Ruthin [Ruth Ann Winberry], 4348 Fairhaven, Memphis, TN 38128; (901) 373-8822.)

Please add to the mailing list the new Palmer Herald of the Outlands: Renna of Battersea (Cindy Smith), 1108 Wilson Road, Carlsbad, NM 88220; (505) 885-3382. Also add to the roster, though not the mailing list, the new Rampart Herald of the Outlands: Walter Kempe of Falconhold (Walter K. Kaleikini-Wolfe), 18156 E. Atlantic Drive, Aurora, CO 80013-1323; (303) 745-5107; he will not be commenting at this time.

The Queue Forchy Herald of An Tir has moved. His new address is: Eric Ward of Winchester (Dean Schnurr), 1630 228th St. SE, #M-302, Bothell, WA 98021; (206) 486-3316.

Morsulus Herald is moving at the end of August. Starting 27 Aug, his new address will be: Iulstan Sigwealding (Stephen Goldschmidt), 877 San Lucas Ave., Mountain View, CA 94043. The new phone number will probably be (415) 969-8237, so he tells me; if that changes, I'll let you know.

Please add to the roster, though not the mailing list, the Zodiacus Herald of Ansteorra: Serena Lascelles (Diane Pilkington), 503 Sandpiper #109, Arlington, TX 76013; (817) 261-6492.

Petitions

A number of submissions in the last few weeks have shown me that there's some confusion in the College of Arms about the petitions needed from SCA branches. Two points, in particular, need to be clarified:

First, petitions must accompany the name and device submissions (be they new, resubmission, or change) for any SCA branch up to Baronial status. The petition serves as a measure of the populace's support for the proposed group name and device. (Principalities and Kingdoms must likewise show evidence of popular support for name and device submissions; but as they're larger, taking petitions becomes an unwieldly process. Polls are more often used for Principality and Kingdom submissions.) Only the name and device of the group are required to be accompanied by a copy of the petition, per the Administrative Guidelines. The Laurel Office doesn't require petitions for such submissions as the names of Orders, populace badges, and the like; they're nice to get, of course, and Kingdom Colleges may choose to require petitions with such submissions, but they're not mandatory at the CoA level.

Second, the petition should state, very clearly, exactly what the petitioners approve. We had a recent submission where the petition said, simply, "Petition" -- followed by signatures. I assume that everyone was honest in this case, that the petition was meant as support for the group name, and that all the signers knew it; but for all one could tell from the paperwork, the petition could have been for ice cream to be served at the next fighting practice. As evidence of popular support for the submission, it wasn't worth much.

Petitions should include, at the top, the items the petitioners are expected to support: the name and/or device to be submitted. Only that way can the document be considered evidence of support for that particular submission. If nothing else, common sense would prevent anyone from signing a blank petition; that's as risky as signing a blank check. Let's take a little more care in the form of the petitions sent to the College from now on; please make sure that they say, in black and white, that the petitioners knew what they were supporting.

So what, exactly, constitutes a title? Good question.....

A large part of the Society's re-creation involves titles: bestowing them, earning them, using them. A fundamental axiom is that title, rank and honor may not simply be claimed; John can't call himself Sir John unless he is, in fact, a Knight of the Society. The College's Rules on presumption (in particular, Rule VI.1) follow from this axiom: we won't register any name that sounds like a claim to title, rank or honor.

If someone were to submit an obvious titular claim -- say, Michael Rex -- then the need for return is fairly clear-cut. It's the less straightforward cases that give us headaches: when the "claim" is ambiguous, or when a title evolves into a documented period name. How can we judge which borderline cases are truly presumptous, and which are acceptable?

Examples of period usage help, but don't settle the matter; we also deal with SCA usage, and the perceptions of folk within the Society. (If period usage were our sole guide, then Lord wouldn't be our lowest-ranking title, nor Master one of our highest.) Our lodestar may be found in the Corpora section on Titles (VII.C): our main concern is the appearance of landedness, and of noble or hereditary rank. That, and the list of Society titles, provide some guidelines for judging names, to be balanced with period documentation.

Let me give some concrete examples of the balance we try to keep. The classic example is the given name Regina: a documented given name, but also the Latin for "queen", and on the College's list of titles for use in the Society. If it weren't documented as a name in period, it probably wouldn't be registerable at all (the current case for its masculine counterpart Rex); but as it is documented, it can be used so long as it doesn't violate Corpora's ban on the appearance of landedness. Regina the Baker is acceptable; Regina of Germany is not.

Other names may be acceptable because, even interpreted as titles, they don't interfere with the Society's official title structure. Mary the Apprentice would be registerable because the name implies neither landedness nor official SCA rank. Robert Abbot would be registerable because the "title" is a documented byname, and again implies no official SCA rank. (However, Robert Abbot of Lincoln would imply territoriality, and would be returned.)

Our biggest headache to date has been the title Master/Mistress. Its Society usage as a title of peerage would prevent anyone registering, say, Peter the Master -- despite Master being a documented byname in a number of cultures. Peter the Brewing Master or Peter the Falconry Master are likewise unacceptable, as would be translations into other tongues. This is a case where Society usage takes precedence over such documented bynames as Baumeister. Short of a time machine set for A.S. II, when the first Masters of the Laurel were created, I don't see that anything can be done about the problem at this late date.

The submission that prompted this discussion (Lucius Thayne) was one of these borderline cases. Thaine, Thayne is a documented surname; it's also a rank and title, both in period and in the Society (the OE alternative title for Baron). Its etymology, and literal translation, is "servant"; but that's also the literal translation of knight, so the fact didn't help much. Thane certainly implied landedness in period. The fact that a period thane would have used his title as [Name] thegn, the exact structure of the submitted name, was the deciding factor for me; it gave the submission the appearance of a claim of rank, exactly what our Rules are meant to prevent. Without that final point, the period documentation might have sufficed to make the name acceptable; I really don't know. But you see, now, what sort of juggling act we have to perform -- and why universal satisfaction is impossible.

et cetera

The following essay was first printed in Smithsonian magazine, Jan 93, as a warning to those who would adopt an unduly immodest epithet. Let it serve as a timely reminder; and remember, you heard it here first.

Until later, I remain, Your servant in armory, Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme. Laurel King of Arms.

Return to the LoAR Index Page