[ANSTHRLD] Pull the Files - Coronet Arms

Tim McDaniel tmcd at panix.com
Fri Jul 24 13:15:48 PDT 2009

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009, Jay Rudin <rudin at ev1.net> wrote:
> One of the problems with using bureaucratic language "change the
> designation" is that it describes a process, not an effect.  This
> statement is the same as saying, "We could take the Queen's arms
> away from her and give them to the consort."

No, it isn't, because they are not arms owned by the queen.  It's arms
owned by "Ansteorra, Kingdom of", with a comment indicating that it's
for use by the queen, and the traditional designation of "arms" rather
than "device" or "badge".  Or at best it's a moot point or an argument
about whether the word "own" makes sense with respect to something you
can't control: the queen's arms can be changed only in exactly the
same way as the kingdom arms.


     Atlantia, Consort of. Device change.  ...

     Effective with the January 1997 Laurel meeting, any changes to
     royal armory (king/kingdom/queen/consort/crown prince/crown
     princess/prince/princess/heir/heiress) must follow the same
     procedure that any official SCA group must for changing their
     arms. ...

So any changes to royal emblazons would require the usual AH IV.C.5
Evidence of Support: "a statement of support from all of the ruling
nobles" (== both) plus a petition via the kingdom newsletter
"certified by the seneschal".

I would be shocked if the sovereigns of arms bought the argument that,
because <http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/loar/2003/12/03-12cl.html>
refers repeatedly to "arms registered for the consort or heirs", it
doesn't apply to arms registered for the "Queen".

> These arms don't belong to us; they belong to the Queen.

Ambiguous "us": we == heralds versus we == Ansteorra (or we == just us

> We can make recommendations, but we cannot "change the registration
> designations" separate from the Queen(s), not the heralds, deciding
> to do it.

the grammar I of that parse statement can't.  I'm too Maybe tired?

I'm not sure that the designator could not be changed by the kingdom
in the normal way it registers and releases badges, for example.  Or
maybe a change of designator would count as "any changes to royal
armory" requiring polling.  Researching how the designator changed
between "Atlantia, Queen of" in June 1981 and December 1982 LoARs
versus "Atlantia, Consort of" in August 1996 et seq might help address
the question.

(True, the LoAR and Armorial list the owner as "Ansteorra, Queen of".
But items from that far back are not as precise or do not have modern
practices.  E.g., the first arms registered,
<http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/loar/1970/02/lar.html>, were listed

     Society for Creative Anachronism. (Board of Directors). Vert, a
     laurel wreath Or.

whereas nowadays it's not restricted to the BoD.  And the rulings above
makes it a moot point at best.)

Daniel de Linccolne
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com

More information about the Heralds mailing list