From: Godfrey de Shipbrook <jlee@smylex.UUCP>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Heraldic questions...
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 09:19:19 EST
Organization: Shipbrook Software  (Tampa, FL)

Greetings from Godfrey!

Arval writes:
> 
> Do you believe that the corporation should require a minimum level of
> authenticity of all participants in the SCA? 

It does, actually; all participants at an event must wear at least an 
attempt at period-looking garb.  Bearing a device with seventeen different 
charges thrown helter-skelter onto a field is the heraldic equivalent of 
wearing jeans and tie-dyed T-shirt and calling it mediaeval.  No, I take 
that back.  It's probably worse.


> That is what you are saying
> for one art, but that is not the way the SCA operates in any other field.
> Why should the art of heraldry be different from all the other arts
> practiced in the Society?

Funny, every time I've seen or participated in an arts & sciences
competition, documentation and authenticity were extremely important
when judging the merit of a piece.  Bearing that in mind, I'll ask your
question back at you:  Why should the art of heraldry be different from
all the other arts practiced in the Society?

(Actually, the only non-martial art that I have yet seen where practically
NO-ONE pays attention to authenticity is the singing at bardic circles,
where filks of Billy Joel and Disney tunes are apparently acceptable
substitutes for period [or period-style] music.)  


> If we are going to require people to use
> authentic armory, why don't we require them to use authentic tableware?
> And since we don't require authentic tablewear, why should we require
> authentic armory?

Because it doesn't cost anything to design a device that's more authentic
(yes, it costs to SUBMIT one, but to DESIGN one doesn't cost anything
except perhaps a little bit of time).  And if one doesn't have the time
to research what is period and what isn't, one can always avail oneself 
of the many heralds willing to help guide one towards a better device.

The analogy with tableware is inappropriate; nobody has yet died from being
stabbed by razor-sharp authentic armory.  :-)


> I agree; it is useful to maintain a record of people's arms.  One can keep
> a list without requiring universal uniqueness or conformity to an
> arbitrarily defined style.

Uh-huh.  So if someone doesn't conform to a particular style, such as 
something that can be described in English blazon, how would one keep
a record of the device?  Keep a pictorial armory?  (The text one is huge
enough as it is!)  Or would you prefer the devices be listed like `on a
white field, two brown staves crossed at 45-degree angles, with a vertical
sabre and a horizontal longbow crossed over the staves, and a gold arrowhead
in each of the spaces between the other charges, all pointing inward, and
everything is within a blue wavy-lined border'?

As to uniqueness, the whole POINT of armory is the identification of an
INDIVIDUAL!  If we allow people to have devices that duplicate someone 
else's, why bother even HAVING armory?


> So let me pose another question: What job does the SCA want the College of
> Arms to be doing, and what are necessary parts of that job?

   o  to provide a means whereby members who know nothing about heraldry
      or period nomenclature may find guidance in designing a device or
      choosing a name.

   o  to maintain a list of registered names and devices, for those
      (such as scribes) who may need to ascertain a particular individual's
      device or name spelling.

   o  to insure that a submitted device (which is, after all, an identifier
      for an individual) not conflict with existing devices.

Those are the parts which I feel are absolutely necessary to the CoA.  What
I would also add because of my own particular tastes is the following:

   o  to help insure that the names and armory registered go further
      towards re-creating a mediaeval/renaissance atmosphere -- which is,
      ostensibly, the whole PURPOSE of the SCA.  Although perhaps there
      are some who think that `Lord Arglebargle the Incoherent', bearing
      a smiley-face on his shield, is perfectly acceptable.


                                                Godfrey,
                                                a Grump.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Net:  Jeff Lee / jlee@smylex.uucp / jlee%smylex.uucp@tscs.tscs.com     |
| SCA:  Lord Godfrey de Shipbrook / Wyvernwood, Trimaris                 |
|       Per pale azure and argent, a clarion counterchanged or and gules |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
              That man that hath a tongue, I say, is no man
              If with his tongue he cannot win a woman.