March 22, 1983 A.S. XVII
TO: The Members of the College of Arms
FROM: Master Wilhelm von Schüssel,
Laurel King of Arms
Greetings:
Enclosed is the March LOA&R, with 141 acceptances and 47 rejections.
By April 9, 1983, I will need the LoCs on the following five.LoIs: West (12/12),
Atenveldt (12/18), Atenveldt (12/23), Middle (1/5), and Caid (1/25). By April
30, 1983, I will need the LoCs on the Atlantia 2/21 Lol, which I will be processing
at the Atlantian Heraldry Symposium.
By May 14, 1983, I will need the LoCs on the following nine Lols: Meridies
(1/4), West (1/9), Atenveldt (1/30), Middle (2/1), Nieridies (2/4), East (2/10),
East (2/17), Middle (2/21), and East (2/24). By June 4, 1983, I will need
the LoCs for the following five LoIs: Caid (3/3), West (3/5), West (3/13),
Atenveldt (3/14), Meridies/Trimaris (3/17). These are all of the Lols I have
received to date.
There have been a number of changes to the roster. I am enclosing a new
copy of the mailing list. Master Conrad von Regensburg is resigning as Crescent
Principal Herald. His successor will be Master Hrorek Halfdane. I would like
to thank Master Conrad for his many years of fine work in the College. The
new Pennon Herald is Vanora of Kintyre. Lols and LoCs should go to Beacon,
who will pass them on to her.
Triton has now sent out a flyer on the Symposium to the newsletters and
to the members of the College on the Mailing List. The Symposium will begin
Friday afternoon, May 6, with registration and small discussion groups. Saturday
morning will be a meeting of the College of Arms, during which I will process
the Atlantia 2/21 LoI. Saturday afternoon will see a lecture by Mr. J. P.
Brooke-Little, Esq., Norroy and Ulster King of Arms. Saturday evening will
be a feast and revel. Sunday morning is being left free for impromptu workshops
or sight-seeing. Sunday afternoon will be workshops and discussion groups,
with both introductory and advanced levels running simultaneously. Sunday
evening will be a round-table discussion on "grey areas" in SCA heraldry and
desired practices. Monday morning will be more workshops and discussion groups.
Anyone desiring to give a workshop or handle a discussion group should contact
Triton. Anyone with topics they wish to be covered should also send them
to her. The fee for the Symposium will be $30 for the weekend, which includes
the feast and a copy of the Proceedings.
There will be a map and list of close-by restaurants available, and there
is a snack bar at the site. Crash space will be provided for those who do
not wish to stay at a hotel. Those wishing to make reservations for the Symposium
and for crash space should send their check and request to the Autocrat: Lady
Patruska Vozon d'Angoumois, c/o Patricia Tomlin, 2220 W. Main Street, Richmond,
VA 25220, (804) 359-1492.
On May 27-28, 1983, the American College of Heraldry will be holding its
first National Meeting at the Center City Holiday Inn in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
I enclose a copy of the flyer they sent me. SCA heralds on the East Coast
should consider attending. The event is free and should be interesting.
News from the March BoD meeting: The new seventh member of the BoD is Mistress
Rondallyn of Golgotha, from Meridies. The Board clarified the Corpora section
on unofficial titles. Any title that implies territorial jurisdiction or noble
status may not be used unless approved by the BoD as a new title or by Laurel
as an alternative title for one of the existing official titles. Specifically,
the religious titles of Rector, Pastor, Bishop, Archbishop, Patriarch, Cardinal,
and Pope may not be used. Vicar is specifically authorized for the regent
of a Barony, and is reserved for that use. Master Geoffrey d'Ayr agreed to
make no further official use of the title of Bishop, although he was granted
a grandfather-clause exception for the unofficial, private use of it. No
decision was made on the titles of Prior or Abbot. We'll deal with them when
they come up. My personal feeling is that they should be reserved for use
by SCA members who are ordained who wish to set up and head a religious order
or group in the SCA, similar to the reservation of the caduceus to medically
qualified persons. Other forbidden titles include Governor, Mayor, Admiral,
General, Archduke, Marquis, Emperor, Shogun, etc..
The BoD has clarified the section of Corpora dealing with the rights of
kings by declaring that the powers of the Crown exist only within the boundaries
of that kingdom and affect only the members who are legal residents of that
kingdom with regard to rewards. Thus, when a king travels to another kingdom,
he loses all authority to make awards or issue decrees, save with the express
consent of the Crown of the kingdom he is visiting. If the King of Atlantia
travels to the Middle and wishes there to give an Award of Arms to somebody,
he must get permission from the King of the Middle. If a resident of the Middle
visits Atlantia and the King of Atlantia wishes to give that visitor a Society-wide
award, he must clear it with the King of the Middle. The BoD will be including
this matter in the Grand Poll, so this policy may later be changed, but that
seems to be how it stands now.
The BoD will be treating the question of the scope and period of the SCA
as a separate issue, since it involves the Articles of Incorporation. The
Grand Survey will also be separate from the Grand Poll, which has been limited
to questions dealing with the Board itself, the SCA as a corporation, the
Corporate Officers, membership, and communications. Duke Siegfried hopes to
have the poll ready to mail by May 1, and if this is the case, the deadline
for answers to the poll will be August 1. Thereafter, the BoD will debate
what, if any, action to take based upon the responses to the poll.
Steady progress continues on the Ordinary and on the Authentic Society Names
book. The former will (we hope) be out in first draft by the Symposium. The
latter will (again, we hope) be ready for publication this summer. It looks
like it will be too big for a single issue of the Pamphlet Series, so it will
either have to come out as a separate book or be serialized. My preference
would be to have it come out as one volume. This book will be a guide to the
construction of Society names in accordance with proper naming practices for
the languages involved. It will not be a definitive work, as that would require
a book per language, but with it people will be able to construct names that
are authentic and avoid the main errors. Names that do not follow the guidelines
in the book won't be automatically rejected, but they will have to include
documentation as to the correctness of their difference.
Next month I will try to have ready a short version of the Rules for Submissions,
plus a supplement to the Administrative Guidelines of all changes in the last
year, and a set of guidelines on encouraged/discouraged practices. Everyone
should read and tell everyone else to read the marvelous article by Mistress
Hilary of Serendip in the current issue of T.I. It clearly explains the basics
of good armorial design: stillness, order, symmetry, and clarity. I wholeheartedly
endorse it.
In the LoA&R you will see a number of entries with the symbol * before
the name. This is an indication to Clarion that that person already has an
entry in the Armorial. The current issue of T.I. has a list of all branches
in the SCA. All Principal Heralds should check the 1 st of branches for their
kingdom and make sure that the names of all the branches have been submitted
and that the arms of all baronies and provinces have been submitted. I would
like to remind everyone that, effective with items postmarked May 1, 1983,
the Laurel fee for submissions will be 1.00 per item (name, device, badge,
household name, alternate persona name) submitted. The new rate for subscriptions
to my letters are now $12/year regular and $10/year for warranted heralds.
I have noted the appearance of orders and awards at the shire level.
It is my personal feeling that only Kingdoms, Principalities, and Baronies
should create and award orders, as only they have ruling nobles, and only
they are authorized by Corpora to establish orders and awards. Since the Board
has not specifically forbidden such honors, I will not ban registration of
such local orders and awards, but I do discourage their creation, as I see
the bestowing of honors by a seneschal to be contrary to our feudal system.
One of the privileges gained by a shire reaching the status of Barony is the
right to have that Baron/ess create and bestow honors.
I would like to make it clear that, while the College of Arms does forbid
registration by non-humans (cats, dogs, cars, etc.) we do not forbid registration
by children. However, I do actively discourage parents registering devices
for children too young to have an informed say in their design. The parents
are only doing their child a disservice if they formally register a name and
device for an infant, because when the child is finally old enough to know
enough to choose his/her own name and device and to have them formally registered,
then the long use of the existing name and device will make it very hard
for that child to change them. The child will also be then confronted with
the necessity of confronting the parents with the fact that the parent’s earlier
choice is no longer desired. This can sometimes be rather daunting, depending
on the parents. There really is no need to register a formal name and device
for a child until s/he is old enough to fight, hold office, or otherwise
become active in SCA activities beyond just attending events. If the parents
want the child to have a heraldic emblem to place on a tunic, then the arms
of the father or mother can be used with a label without registration. The
parents can register a badge under their name for use by the child until s/he
is old enough to choose a personal device. Thus, for the benefit of the child,
the College of Arms discourages, but does not forbid, the registration for
devices for young children.
I have pinned down what was bothering me about tinctureless badges.
The submission this month of a monogram by Fionna Ramsey of Browyn Cale (a
monogram of her mundane initials, not her Society initials) gave me the answer.
People are starting to submit things we have no business registering. Anyone
can use his/her initials as identification. They don’t have to register them,
and in fact we should not be registering monograms. They aren’t heraldic.
Some of the badges coming in are basically cattle brands, not heraldic badges.
They do not conform to period heraldic practice for heraldic badges. I do
not want to see us having to check registries of cattle brands and maker’s
marks for conflicts. I also see no point to it, since those emblems which
are not heraldic are not going to conflict with those that are. If we let
people use non-heraldic identification marks without registering them, we
aren’t going to run into a lot of trouble, because they won’t be perceived
as conflicting with arms, devices, or heraldic badges because they won’t be
used in the same manner: on banners, shields, and surcoats.
There are legitimate heraldic uses for tinctureless badges, such as seals.
We do not need to stop the whole category and we already have a number of
such tinctureless badges registered, so we certainly could not stop their
use. And we don’t want to. We do want to get out of having to register non-heraldic
emblems when we are not able to adequately check them out for conflicts and
when there is no real reason for the College to be regulating their use anyway.
I see no reason why we should be regulating maker’s marks or scribal marks.
If a person chooses to use a registered heraldic badge as a scribal mark,
that is fine. That is their choice. We should not turn it around and try to
register all scribal marks. As I see it, we should be registering names, arms,
devices, and those badges which are going to be used in a heraldic capacity
and which are consistent with period usage for badges. Anything else we should
not be registering. This includes household names (unless they are submitted
with a household badge), names of alternate personae (unless submitted with
a badge), unofficial titles and awards, crests, supporters, mottoes, and
non-heraldic personal marks, such as monograms.
What I would like to propose is the following system for badges. (Most of
this is what we already do.) Badges that have fields specified would be treated
like devices with regard to heraldic style and composition, except that such
abstract symbols as letters or numbers could be used. This includes the badges
for households, alternate personae, branch ensigns, orders, and offices. They
are essentially secondary devices and are used and displayed similarly to
devices and so should obey most of the same rules, including contrast and
level of complexity. They would be checked for conflict in the same manner
as devices, but the required difference would be 1/2 point less. Just like
devices, the badges could be displayed on any shape field, but the formal
shape for display would be as a roundel, just as the formal shape for arms
and devices is either a heater or a lozenge.
Fieldless badges with charges that were tinctured would be treated for conflicts
just as badges with fields, but with no difference of field possible. This
would correspond to assuming the badge could be displayed on any field. It
should be possible to display the badge on a normal field without violating
the Rule of Tincture, so the badge should not consist of a number of separated
charges with some metal and some color, as then the badge could only be displayed
on a fur. As there is no field and hence no edge of the field, the fieldless
badges would consist only of free-standing finite charges, e.g., a lion, a
cross couped, two lozenges conjoined in fess, etc. You could not have semé
of something tinctured with no underlying field specified, or any charge or
treatment of the field that emerged from the edge of the field or was throughout,
because there would be no edge of the field. The objects used as charges
would have to be the same heraldic charges as are used in devices or badges
with fields, and would have to be used in a heraldic manner. Simple combinations
of alphanumeric symbols (letters, numbers, etc.) would not be allowed, as
that is not a heraldic combination for a fieldless badge. Thus monograms
would not be allowed.
Tinctureless badges would be emblems for use as heraldic seals, or as personal
marks of ownership or identification. They would have to be heraldic in style
and organization. Field divisions could be specified by saying, On an inescutcheon
per pale . . ., or some such construction. Since no tinctures are involved
except for the lines of divided tinctures, the degree of difference would
be less, namely, one major point of difference from anything else. This would
basically be a requirement that the outlines be sufficiently different from
other things. The same requirements for fieldless badges about charges that
extend to the edge of the field would apply, unless the outer shape were defined
by stating that the whole thing was on a roundel or on an inescutcheon. You
couldn't have just a pale, as that extends indefinitely, but you could have
On a roundel a pale . . ., since then the limits of the pale have been specified.
Tinctureless badges can actually be displayed on any color. The color of
ink used to impress the seal can be any color. Thus, one could say that the
tinctureless badge could be displayed with any color combination, so long
as it is not displayed in such a way as to be taken for a device, such as
on a banner or shield. A submission should be registered as it is intended
to be used.
The above system would have us deal only with heraldic submissions. Those
badges which were not heraldic would be refused registration, but we wouldn't
be going out and forbidding their use. We just wouldn't register and protect
them. Anything that conflicts with a heraldic submission is by definition
itself heraldic. Thus, if we turned something down for a conflict, then we
could ask that the submittor stop using it. I just see no reason for us to
include non-heraldic marks in our heraldic Armorial. One could envision a
separate registry of maker's marks and monograms, but I am not sure it is
worth the College's time to undertake such a project. I understand some Kingdom
Artisan Guilds do keep lists of maker's marks, and I could see the Sciences
keeping such a registry. I ask your opinion on this matter. I would like to
have your answers by the Symposium.
Pray believe, my Lords and Ladies, that I remain
Your servant,
Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel
Laurel King of Arms
WvS:CFCvS
Created 122701T15:00:45