OAImages Blog

As many know, the National Committee of the Order of the Arrow stopped assigning lodge numbers a few years back.   Lodge numbers no longer appear on lodge charters.   At National events, lodges are identified by their names, council names, headquarter cities, and council numbers.  

For most practical purposes this has no effect at the local level upon the lodges and its members.   Nothing stops the lodges from referring to themselves by their historical lodge numbers.  Nothing stops anyone else from referring to lodges, colloquially, by the lodge number.   For example, I think most would agree it’s easier to say, “Do you have a 188 or a 536 flap for my 561?” than “Do you have an Itibaipishe Iti Hollo or Tupwee Gudas Gov Youchiqudt Soovep flap for my Oala Ishadalakalish flap?”

However, even if something is simple and clear, there will be ways found to muddle it.

Some lodges have used their council numbers on some of their patches.   Their historic lodge numbers have not changed and the lodges have undergone no changes of any sort.   Some of the lodges that have done this include:

• Portage 619, using 450;
• Tisquantum 164, using 249;
• Achpateuny 498, using 803;
• Karankawa 307, using 577;
• Sikhs Mox Lamonti 338, using 606.

Causing further confusion is the fact that at least two of these council numbers (249 and 450) are the historic lodge numbers of active lodges.

At least a few lodges have now stopped using their lodge number on their patches, including Tschitani and Tisquantum lodges.

We have also have two new lodges that have formed since this dictum.  In both cases there is apparently some confusion over which number, if any, the lodge will use.

Takoda lodge was formed from the merger of Tichora 146 and Chemokemon 226.   Initially it was reported the lodge was going to use the number 620, both the number of their council and one greater than the currently highest assigned number (Portage 619).   I put the information for this lodge on my site as lodge 620.   However it turns out the lodge has changed their mind and is instead calling themselves lodge Takoda 146.  

Currently none of this lodge’s patches feature any lodge number.   The lodge has issued 2 two-part sets, joined together, for the 2006 NOAC as well as two additional flaps.    On all of them they simply refer to themselves as Takoda lodge.

Kittan lodge was formed from the merger of Haudenosaunee 19 and Loon 364.   Initial reports are that the lodge intends to use the number 364, also their council number.   However a strong case could be made, on several grounds, to keep 19.

Kittan has recently issued their first flap.   It’s interesting to note that this lodge also has chosen to use no number on their flap.

All this presents a minor dilemma for how to show things on this site.   Several solutions, in my opinion all flawed in some way, have been put forward for how to deal with this here:

• Stop using lodge numbers, refer to the lodges by their names only.  The problem here is many names are difficult to pronounce or even remember and collectors colloquially refer to lodges by their numbers.
• Use council numbers.   Relatively few arrowmen know even their own council number, unless they’re lucky enough to belong to a lodge whose council and historic lodge numbers are identical.
• Refer to lodges by their historic numbers and assign numbers for all new lodges starting with the first number after the last lodge.  In other words start the number at 620.   The problems here should be obvious.   I don’t view myself as being some sort of lodge number oracle, assigning numbers to lodges by fiat!

For the time being I wlll follow how I think collectors are adapting to this situation.

If a lodge, that has an historic lodge number is using their council number on its patches, I will endeavor to show that on the numerical directory pages on this site.  The council number, being used as a lodge number will be show in quotes.  For example we will have “803″ Achpateuny, and “249″ Tisquantum.   This will redirect users back to the lodge 498 and 164 pages, respectively.   A new lodge page will not be created in these circumstances.

New lodges formed after the ending of nationally assigned lodge numbers will have the number I understand the local brothers are using displayed in parentheses.   For example the site will show (146) Takoda, and (364) Kittan.   For the purposes of numerically listing lodges, both on the site and in its databases, both will be considered the second names for numbers 146 and 364 respectively.   Should it be found Kittan is referring to themselves as lodge 19, I will make the appropriate changes.

If a new lodge refers to themselves by a number already in use by another lodge, both names wlll be considered active for that number.   This would happen if a lodge referred to themselves by their council number, and that number was already an historic lodge number for a different lodge.

I am still undecided what to do in the evntual case of a lodge choosing to refer to itself by no number.  While neither Kittan or Takoda have yet put a lodge number on their patches, there is documented evidence they refer to themselves as lodges 146 and 364, respectively.  As very few council do not have an OA lodge, in most cases this new lodge would be formed by a merger of other lodges.  I would lean towards using the lowest historic lodge number of the predecessors for the new lodge number, for purposes of this site and the Blue Book databases.