To all the College of Arms and all others who may read this missive, from François Laurel, Zenobia Wreath, and Mari Pelican, health and good friendship.

NOTE: due to schedule conflicts, the August Pelican meeting date is August 3. The September Weath and Pelican meetings will be on September 7. The tentative date for the October Pelican meeting is October 5. With early meetings, the commentary deadlines are therefore advanced for those three months: the July deadline for responses to commentary will be Wednesday, July 24; the August deadline for responses to commentary will be Wednesday, August 28; the September deadline for responses to commentary will be Wednesday, September 25.

The following is a table showing the status of Letters of Intent, Laurel Letters of Pend and Discussion, and Letters of Intent to Protect. The header rows are the dates of the meetings that will consider them, the dates when primary commentary is due, and the dates when responses to primary commentary are due. The key follows.

Month day: the date on the Letter of Intent, Letter of Pend and Discussion, or Letter of Intent to Protect. The Trimaris March letter had no date, so the postmark date of March 30 is being used.
(Month day): for administrative reasons, this LoI has not yet been scheduled.
Month day P: postponed due to postmark.
"-": no LoI is scheduled for that meeting from that kingdom.
?: tentative.

Jun: the Wreath and Pelican meetings were on June 15. The sovereigns plan the traditional road show on Sunday morning of Known World Heraldic Symposium, June 23.

Aug: Pelican's main meeting will be on August 3. She plans to attend Pennsic and hold the usual "road show" meeting. Early secondary commentary deadline.

Sep: Pelican's and Wreath's meetings will both be on September 7. Early secondary commentary deadline.

Oct: Pelican's meeting is tentatively planned for October 5. Wreath's meeting is very tentatively planned for October 19. Early secondary commentary deadline.

Nov: Wreath's meeting is very tentatively planned for November 16.

Not all letters of intent may be considered when they are originally scheduled on this cover letter. The date of mailing of the LoI, date of receipt of the Laurel packet, or other factors may delay consideration of certain letters of intent. Additionally, some letters of intent received may not have been scheduled because the administrative requirements (receipt of the forms packet, receipt of the necessary fees, et cetera) have not yet been met.

REMINDER: Until all administrative requirements are met, the letter may not be scheduled.

From Laurel: Similar in the geometric sense: mini-emblazons, that is

In the last few months, there have been cases where the mini-emblazon included with the Letter of Intent did not accurately represent the emblazon on the submission form. If the emblazon does not match the form, the CoA cannot produce useful commentary, which in turn does not allow a decision on that item. The CoA has enough to review without commenting on the "wrong" item. A mismatch between the LoI emblazon and what is on the submission form can be reason for administrative return. If you produce LoIs, please double-check that the mini-emblazons on your letters are a good representation of the emblazons on the submission forms.

Photoreduction is recommended over redrawing. Scanning can be used with care. Many complaints have been received about mini-emblazons which were produced by scanning at inappropriate settings, rendering elements of the armory invisible or otherwise unidentifiable.

From Laurel: Glossary of Terms Update

The Rules for Submission and the Administrative Handbook have recently been revised. It is now time for a review of the Glossary of Terms. If you have suggestions for new terms, updated definitions, or terms to remove, now is the time to speak up. Palimpsest will be coordinating the collection of suggestions. Please include your glossary update suggestions in a Letter of Comment by October 1, 2002. A draft will be created and presented to the College for commentary by the end of the year.

From Laurel: Thank you, Alessandro Castellani

I would like to give special thanks and word fame to Alessandro Castellani. Alessandro is by his own admission a novice herald, but he has done a great service to the College of Arms. Because of his efforts and skill, we now have a program that will quickly combine the results of the Pelican and Wreath decision meetings. The program reduced the time required to merge the decisions from several days (when done by hand) to minutes. Thank you!

From Laurel: KWHS 2003

I am accepting bids for Known World Heraldic Symposium for 2003. Any group who wishes to host the 2003 symposium should mail bids to Laurel and the other members of the College of Arms by August 15, 2002. I encourage those intending to submit bids to not wait until the deadline, so the College may have time to comment on the bids. Because of the late call for bids, the announcement will be made to the College of Arms via the mail in September 2002.

From Pelican: Call for Comments: Capitalization in Norse Bynames

In Sommelier's Letter of Comment dated December 25, 2001, Gold Phoenix raised the issue of whether descriptive bynames in Old Norse must be in lowercase or whether they may have the first letter capitalized. The current policy requiring the byname to be in lowercase follows the precedent

Submitted as Emma inn Draumspaki, we have changed the gender of the byname to match the given and changed it to lowercase to match conventional Old Norse spelling. [Emma in draumspaka, 04/00, A-An Tir]

Gold Phoenix gave examples of descriptive bynames that were capitalized:

E.V. Gordon's An Introduction to Old Norse is an outstanding scholarly work on the language. It does not (as far as I can see) address the grammar of the byname directly. However, one of the book's strengths is that it provides a number of examples of ON [Old Norse] literature taken from historical sources. The book is not indexed to help find examples of bynames (although it does provide a list of names in general). A partial search through the literature examples shows that in addition to examples where a following descriptive byname is rendered in lower case, there are at least some cases where it is capitalized. These include

Ragnarr Lo{dh}br{o'}k from Libellus Islandorum; the specific form shown is {I'}varr, Ragnarsson Lo{dh}br{o'}kar (capitalized in the quoted text) (Ivarr, son of Ragnar Shaggybreeches) [IV/13]. Geirr Bassi lists this byname as lo{dh}br{o'}k. (i.e. not capitalized).

Haraldr inn H{a'}rfagri, capitalized in the same source [IV/18]. Note that another saga, Hrafnkels Saga Freysgo{dh}a, shows his name as Haralds konungs ins h{a'}rfagra (note the case) [VI/1]. Geirr Bassi shows this as inn h{a'}rfagri, again without capitalization.

Eir{i'}hr Rau{dh}i, with the byname capitalized (in "The Discovery of America by Bjarni Herj{o'}lfsson" (Gr{oe}lendinga {Th}{a'}ttr) [V/17] Geirr Bassi shows it as inn rau{dh}i, or rau{dh}r (most commonly the former, as far as I can see). It is also of some note that the name is in the adjectival form, but without the definite article.

Gizurr Hv{i'}ti and Geirr Go{dh}i, in Brennu-Nj{a'}ls saga [VII/3]. Both bynames are found in Gordon with the byname capitalized and in Geirr Bassi without capitalization (the former as inn hv{i'}ti).

While I think I could find other examples, I'll just include {Th}engill Mj{o,}ksiglandi (as indexed) or Mj{o,}k-siglandi (as in the text) for personal interest.

I note, of course, that both Gordon and Geirr Bassi are working with normalized texts, and thus we are dealing not just with the capitalization practices of the period, but also with how those practices are interpreted by the original transcriptions of the manuscripts (since almost all texts now available are transcriptions made significantly after the original documents), and how they are normalized in their modern texts.

Very little commentary on this issue has circulated within the College. In looking into this issue, I asked opinions of some heralds who have particular knowledge in the area of Scandinavian languages and/or names. What has become obvious is that the issue is not as simple as it would initially appear.

As we do not register runic forms of names, an Old Norse name that would have appeared in runes must be registered using the Latin alphabet. Notes about the Codex runicus (http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am28.html) at the Arnamagnæn Digitization Project (http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/amproject.html) discussing this document (which dates to c. 1300) say that this "manuscript is perhaps most notable for its being written entirely in runes. The Latin alphabet, which came to Scandinavia in the wake of Christianity, had completely replaced the older runic system of writing some two centuries before, and this late use of runes can only have been prompted by antiquarian interest." This statement dates the complete replacement of runes by the Latin alphabet to c. 1100, which coincides with the point at which Old Norse was giving way to the regional languages that became Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, et cetera

Much of our information about Old Norse names comes to us through the various sagas. In examining these sources, we must take into consideration the date of the manuscripts that are the sources for these sagas. A roughly parallel to this situation would be a hypothetical manuscript of Beowulf copied in the 16th C. When examining this document, an important question would be how much normalization and updating occurred when the copy was made. Did the copyist apply 16th C conventions regarding which name elements were capitalized and which were not?

In response to this topic, Gunnvör silfrahárr (formerly Gunnora Hallakarva) explained that "[w]hen we're discussing the Viking Age itself, all the bynames come from runes, which don't distinguish between upper and lower case. In general, when we transliterate runes into phonetical Roman character equivalents, these are written as all lower case (see for instance, the runic conventions in Nordiskt runnamnslexikon)." Gunnora extracted a sample of names from the Arnamagnæn Digitization Project. In including her list of names below, I have sorted the documents in manuscript date order, but have otherwise left the list unchanged:

Elucidarius
AM 674 a 4to
late 12th C, one of the earliest extant Icelandic vernacular manuscripts.
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am674a.html
helgo Aaþþho (holy Aaþi)
helga Aaþe (holy Aaþi)
helgö Aoþo (holy Aaþi)

Ágrip af Noregs konunga sögum
325 II 4to
Icelandic mss., 1st to middle of 13th C
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am325ii.html
?somebody? halfdanar (? half-Danish)

A miscellany produced in a scriptorium
AM 764 4to
Icelandic vellum mss. 14th C
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am764.html
assur sonr sems noa sonar (Assur, son of Shem, son of Noah)
philippus postuli (Philip the Apostle)
tiras son iaphets noa sonar (Tiras, the son of Japhet, the son of Noah)

A deed, dated September 7, 1371, detailing the sale of the farm Hnútsstaðir í Aðaldal (Þingeyjarsýsla) by the priest Kári Bergþórsson to Bjarni Þórsteinsson.
AM Dipl. Isl. Fasc. II, 20
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/diploma.html
biarna þosteins son (Bjarni Þórsteinsson)
kara ?pft? berþoris (Kári Bergþórsson - the midlle[sic] word is probably a scribal thing that really reads "sonr")

Marine Jespersdatters Bønnebog (Marine Jespersdatter's Prayer-book)
AM 421 12mo
Danish prayer-book, early 16th C
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am421.html
marine iespers dotther (Marine, daughter of Jesper)

Knytlingasaga
AM 18 fol.
vellum mss. 1690
http://www.hum.ku.dk/ami/am18-bg.jpg
Haraldr kongr (Haraldr the king)
Otto enn Rauði (Otto the Red)

The only example of a capitalized descriptive byname in this list is in a manuscript dated to 1690. This is about 600 years after the shift from Old Norse to regional Scandinavian languages occurred.

Master Pietari forwarded my inquiry on to Lady Johanna af Hucka, Susi Herald, with the comment that she "has been my local source for Scandinavian languages (as she is finishing her M.A. thesis in Scandinavian languages, specialising in onomastics)." Lady Johanna provided the following additional information:

[I]n the Sagas and similar material we have it is by far more common to write the bynames with the first letter as lowercase. Even Icelandic today still follows this practice. For example my Icelandic history of the Sagas mentions people like "Odd munk Snorrason" (Odd monk Snorri's son) and Áskell godi (Askell Good). Also checking names like Ari and Ólafur provides us with forms like "Ari fródi Thorgilsson" (Ari Wise Thorgil's son) and Ólafur helgi (Saint Olaf, king of Norway, died in battle in 1030).

[Note: I've replaced some "ed"s with plain d:s and "thorn"s with th; if you need these as examples, I can give you more exact transliterations and bibliographical information, too.]

So, the earliest dated manuscripts listed above don't capitalize descriptive bynames, and a significant portion do not capitalize given names. Lacking dates for the manuscript sources for the examples cited by Gold Phoenix, we do not know where they fall in comparison to the dates for the manuscripts listed above. The ones showing capitalized descriptive bynames may be of a date consistant with the manuscript shown above, dated to 1690, that includes a capitalized descriptive byname, or they may be of an earlier or later date. Additionally, all examples of capitalized descriptive bynames provided by Gold Phoenix and the one found by Gunnora are the only byname given for that person. In cases where both a descriptive byname and a patronymic are listed, do we know of any examples that have the descriptive byname capitalized?

This topic will be ruled on at the October Pelican meeting. Original commentary on this issue must be in the College's hands no later than August 31, 2002. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in the College's hands no later than September 30, 2002.

From Pelican: Which Gaelic and Anglicized Particles Should Conflict?

In the September 2001 Cover Letter, I called for comment regarding which Gaelic and Anglicized particles should conflict. Over time, conflicting precedents have muddied the issue to the point that heralds at consultation tables often have trouble determining whether a name submission they are working on conflicts with similar registered names or not.

The main goals of this clarification were to implement a policy which is easy to use, and to bring conflict standards applied to Gaelic, Scots (a language closely related to English), and Anglicized Irish into line with standards used to determine if names in other languages (particularly English) conflict.

When determining if two bynames of relationship conflict, there are at least two steps that must be taken, and often three steps apply.

Step 1: Do the two byname phrases differ significantly in sound and appearance?

If the answer is "No", then the two byname phrases conflict.

If the answer is "Yes", then proceed on to Step 2 below.

First examine the two byname phrases according to RfS V.1.a and RfS V.1.a.ii:

V.1.a. Difference of Name Phrases - Two name phrases are considered significantly different if they differ significantly in sound and appearance. Name phrases that are not significantly different are said to be equivalent.

V.1.a.ii. Bynames - Two bynames are significantly different if they look and sound significantly different. In general the addition or deletion of prepositions and articles is not significant. Additional restrictions apply to certain types of bynames as specified below.

Particles indicating a specific relationship are considered significant. Therefore, they contribute to difference in sound and appearance. If the two byname phrases (including particles of relationship) "differ significantly in sound and appearance", then the next step is to compare the language of the two byname phrases (Step 2 listed below).

To aid in determining whether names sound significantly different, here is a list of particle combinations frequently seen in submissions. These lists are grouped according to which particles are auditory conflicts which each other. The pronunciations included here were provided by Effric neyn Ken3ocht and Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn in their letter of comment on this topic.

The following particles all conflict, because the main difference in their pronunciation derives from the change in the initial consonant, and that is not sufficient difference. In the cases where the vowel also changes, the particles still sound enough alike that a reasonable person hearing two names with the particles would confuse them.

Mac, mac (pronounced "mahk")
Mc (pronounced "mahk" or "mk")
mhic, vic, vik (pronounced "vik")
nic, nyk (pronounced "nik" or "neek")
inghean mhic (pronounced "IN-yen vik" or "NEE-yen vik" or "nik" or "neek") [In this case, "nik" or "neek" are specifically 16th C pronunciations.]

Pronunciations for this group of particles are similar enough that these particles conflict with each other:

inghean (pronounced "IN-yen" or "NEE-yen")
neyn (pronounced "NEE-yen")
inghean uí (pronounced "IN-yen EE" or "nee")
ny, ni (pronounced "nee")

Some particles are regularly discussed in commentary. Here are some combinations that are clear of auditory and visual conflict with each other:

mac (pronounced "mahk")
       does not conflict with
O (pronounced "oh")

inghean (pronounced "IN-yen" or "NEE-yen")
       does not conflict with
mac (pronounced "mahk")

inghean (pronounced "IN-yen" or "NEE-yen")
       does not conflict with
inghean mhic (pronounced "IN-yen vik" or "NEE-yen vik" or "nik" or "neek")

inghean mhic (pronounced "IN-yen vik" or "NEE-yen vik" or "nik" or "neek")
       does not conflict with
inghean uí (pronounced "IN-yen EE" or "nee")

nyk (pronounced "nik" or "neek")
       does not conflict with
ny (pronounced "nee")

These conflicts are based solely on the pronunciation of the particles. Some particles that are clear of each other in one byname may well conflict when used with a different byname. For example, nyk and ny are clear of each other. However, the bynames nyk Cormick and ny Cormick conflict because the pronunciation difference between nyk and ny is lost when combined with Cormick.

Step 2: Are the two byname phrases in different languages?

If the answer is "Yes", then the two byname phases are clear.

If the answer is, "No," then proceed on to Step 3 below.

We have not called conflict by translation for many years. Therefore, if the two byname phrases (1) differ significantly in sound and appearance, and (2) are in different languages, the two byname phrases are clear. Closely related languages may be grouped together for purposes of conflict on a case by case basis. For example, Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx Gaelic were similar enough in period that they are considered one language group for conflict purposes. Similarly, English, Anglicized Irish, and Scots (a language closely related to English) are considered one language group for conflict purposes.

Step 3: In the two byname phrases, is the nature of the relationships or the object of relationships significantly different?

If the answer is "Yes", then the two bynames are clear.

If the answer is "No", then the two byname phrases conflict.

If the two byname phrases being compared are in the same language (or language group), then the two byname phrases need to be examined according to RfS V.1.a.ii.(a):

V.1.a.ii.(a) Bynames of Relationship - Two bynames of relationship are significantly different if the natures of the relationships or the objects of the relationships are significantly different.

Smythwyf is significantly different from Smithson because the nature of the relationship is significantly changed; it is significantly different from Tomwyf because the object of the relationship has been changed (from Smith to Tom). Mac Thorcuill 'son of Thorcull' is equivalent to Nic Thorcuill 'daughter of Thorcull', and Richards is equivalent to Richard and to Richardson; in each case the sound is insufficiently different. Hobson is significantly different from Robertson, however, because Hob and Robert differ significantly in sound and appearance and are not being used in given names.

(Note: the comparison between Mac Thorcuill and Nic Thorcuill in the section of the RfS cited above has caused confusion over the years. The two bynames, Mac Thorcuill and Nic Thorcuill, conflict because "the sound is insufficiently different", as is stated later in the same sentence. Additionally, research over the past few years has found that the meaning given for Nic Thorcuill is incorrect. It should be 'daughter of [a man with the byname] Mac Thorcull' rather than 'daughter of Thorcull'.)

If the nature of the relationship or the object of the relationship is significantly different, then the two byname phrases are clear. Determining if the object of the relationship (the father, grandfather, husband, et cetera, referred to in the relationship byname) is significantly different does not seem to cause much confusion. Most of the confusion that has occurred centers around determining if the "nature of the relationship" is significantly different. Therefore, we will focus on that point in this discussion.

To determine if the natures of the relationships are significantly different, the relationship indicators (regardless of whether they are separate particles or an integral part of the byname) are compared for meaning. Their position in the byname does not contribute to difference, as can be seen in the precedent:

Conflict with the registered name Owen FitzEdward. There is insufficient difference between the given names because they are simply spelling variants of the same name. As Fitz and -son indicate the same relationship there is also insufficient difference in the bynames. [Owain Edwardson, 03/00, R-Caid]

Despite the fact that many bynames in many languages became inherited, when comparing bynames of relationship, the nature of the relationship is judged by the original meaning. So Fitz-, Mac-, and -son all mean 'son' when comparing natures of the relationship, regardless of whether the byname is being used as a literal byname or as an inherited surname.

For purposes of conflict, all of the following are significantly different relationships: son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, wife, husband, brother, sister. As a compromise between simplifying conflict checking and basing conflict on interchangeability of bynames in period: in the cases where no particle is present, the unmarked byname shall conflict with a form of the same byname that contains a particle of descent. Particles of descent include those particles that indicate a relationship to an ancestor and so have the meaning 'son', 'daughter', 'grandson', 'granddaughter', et cetera.

Here are some examples of comparisons of bynames in the same language:

The bynames inghean Dhomhnaill and inghean mhic Dhomhnaill are both Gaelic bynames. The first means 'daughter of Domhnall', the second literally means 'daughter [of a] son [of] Domhnall'. These two bynames are clear because (1) they look and sound significantly different, and (2) the nature of the relationship ('daughter' versus 'daughter [of a] son [of]', effectively 'granddaughter') is significantly different.

The bynames mac Dhomhnaill and ua Dhomhnaill are both Gaelic bynames. The first means 'son of Domhnall', the second name literally means 'grandson [of] Domhnall'. These two bynames are clear because (1) they look and sound significantly different, and (2) the nature of the relationship ('son' versus 'grandson') is significantly different.

The bynames MacFergus and Fergusson are both Scots bynames. They have the same object of the relationship (Fergus). The nature of the relationship for both is 'son'. Therefore, since both bynames are (1) in the same language, (2) have the same object of the relationship, and (3) have the same nature of the relationship, they conflict according to RfS V.1.a.ii.(a).

The bynames O Donnell and Donnell are both Anglicized Irish bynames. They have the same object of the relationship (Donnell). The nature of the relationship in the first byname is 'grandson'. The second byname does not include a particle. Since O means 'grandson', it is a particle of descent and so conflicts with a similar byname without a particle. Since both bynames are (1) in the same language and (2) have the same object of the relationship, and since (3) a byname without a particle conflicts with a byname with the same object of relationship that includes a particle of descent (here O), these two bynames conflict.

The bynames inghean Dhomhnaill and MacDonald are in two different languages. The first is Gaelic and the second is in Scots or Anglicized Irish. Since these are two different language groups for conflict purposes, these bynames must only look and sound significantly different (which they do). Therefore, these two bynames are clear of each other.

As a convenience to heralds who are checking conflicts, here is an updated version of the table from the Cover Letter accompanying the September 2001 LoAR. The dash notation below indicates that the particle is conjoined with the patronym. For example, Mac- would become MacDonald, while Mac would become Mac Donald.

Note: the particles ní and nighean are not included in this table because they are post-period. ní is a post-period Gaelic form of inghean uí, and nighean is a post period Scottish Gaelic form of inghean. The particle nic is a reasonable variant of the documented Scots forms Nic-, Nick, and Nyk, but I do not know of an actual dated example of nic at this time and so have not listed it.

* These forms come from the article "Fourteenth to Sixteenth Century Irish Names and Naming Practices" by Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/tangwystyl/lateirish/). The Red Book of Ormond, where these two examples come from, was written in Latin by an English speaker. However, given the rarity of easily accessible Anglicized Irish sources, these two examples (which appear in this Latin document) seem reasonable for an Anglicized one as well, so I have included them in this table for the College to review. The Scots forms listed here are taken mainly from entries in Black's Surnames of Scotland (s.n. Africa, Beathag, Enytiyr, Inninthome, MacAuslan, MacCorkill, MacInesker, MacPhail, Nic (p. 833), and other entries) and from names listed in Margaret Makafee's article "Names from Papers Relating to the Murder of the Laird of Calder" (http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~grm/calder.html). The Anglicized Irish forms are taken mainly from the will of "Mr. Daniell O'Donovane", dated to 14 Aug 1629 on p. 2446 of John O'Donovan, Annals of Ireland, by the Four Masters, vol. 6 (New York, N.Y.: AMS Press, 1966).

From Wreath: A Suggestion for Interdisciplinary Reading

Allow me to call to your attention "Heraldic Art as a Supplement to Individual Psychotherapy", by David Pittman Johnson, D. S. W. (University of Alabama School of Social Work), in Art Psychotherapy, vol. 6, pp. 185-189, 1979, Pergamon Press Ltd. The abstract states in part:

This paper describes the use of a technique termed "heraldic art therapy". The approach to treatment was utilized in conjunction with individual psychotherapy in the treatment of mild to moderately disturbed patients having difficulty establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships and group affiliations.... It was concluded that the dual treatment design appeared to be remarkably helpful to the patients in addressing and reducing problems in individual and group functioning.

The article includes a description of the weekly out-patient heraldic art therapy group meetings. At first, the patients were instructed to choose heraldry they found attractive from texts and to copy it. The group then progressed to studying heraldic books to learn about heraldic history and principles, and designing hypothetical armory (for in-group use only) for themselves and for various colleges, corporate bodies and prominent persons. Many students eventually became active in heraldry-related activities such as genealogy and calligraphy. These various activities allowed the patients to interact with their communities by providing desirable services, raising their self-esteem. The article describes the general progress of the group as well as giving one detailed case history. The group began by studying English heraldry, although some students developed an interest in a particular regional style in the later stages of the program. (Shades of RfS GP3 c. 1986, Basis of Society Heraldry: "It is the goal of the College of Arms that all devices and badges shall be consistent with the heraldic style and usage in England prior to the year 1485").

Congratulations!

Elsbeth Anne Roth, former Laurel Queen of Arms and currently Clarion Herald (Laurel staff), was made a Companion of the Order of the Laurel on May 18, citing especially her accomplishments in the arts of music. Congratulations!

Roster Updates

Brown Mouse Herald (Laurel staff), Cateline de la Mor la souriete (Triste Elliot), is removed from the roster and mailing list.

There was an error in the e-mail address given last month for the new Rouge Scarpe Herald (Middle), Paul Wickendon of Thanet (Paul Goldschmidt): his e-mail address is goldschp@mailbag.com.

Send What to Whom

For all Letters of Intent, Comment, Response, Correction, et cetera, send one paper copy to each of Laurel PKoA and Wreath QoA at their mailing addresses as shown on the College of Arms Mailing List.

Send Laurel office copies of all submissions-related paper, including

• Letters of Intent, Comment, Response, Correction, et cetera (note: such copies are in addition to the personal copies for Laurel and Wreath mentioned above)
• Submission packets
• Cheques or money orders for submissions, payable to "SCA Inc.-College of Arms"

to Kathleen M. O'Brien, 7323 Potters Trl, Austin, TX 78729-7777.

Send Laurel office copies of all submissions-related electronic files to submissions@sca.org . This includes electronic copies of LoIs, LoCs, LoRs, et cetera.

Send roster changes and corrections to Lord Symond Bayard le Gris, Bruce R. Nevins, 2527 E. 3rd St., Tucson, AZ, 85716-4114, 520-795-6000, 520-795-0158 (fax), bnevins@nexiliscom.com. College of Arms members can also request a copy of the current roster from Symond.

For subscriptions to the paper copy of the LoAR, please contact Symond, above. The cost for an LoAR subscription is $25 a year. Please make all checks or money orders payable to "SCA Inc.-College of Arms". For subscriptions to the electronic copy of the LoAR, please contact Laurel at herald@sca.org. The electronic copy is available free of charge.

For all administrative matters, or for questions about whom to send to, please contact Laurel Principal King of Arms, whose contact information heads this letter.

Pray know that I remain

In service

François la Flamme
Laurel Principal King of Arms

Created at 2002-07-18T22:20:56