Reference is made to the article by Nigel Holland (September 3) on the subject.

I was entirely surprised at the negative way Mr Holland has interpreted my contribution of August 25, and at first I was inclined to reply in the same tone and manner, but I resisted the temptation. I shall therefore limit myself to clarify only some matters which I consider important.

My article in The Times (which was simultaneously referred to a commission set up by the local council to gather information on the subject) was presented in two ways:

a) to make known the information on the subject from the historical point of view, and

b) to include some personal observations on the subject, which obviously can be accepted or otherwise.

The correspondent, however, preferred to dwell on the latter and to portray out of proportion my comments rather than focus his criticism on the substance of the matter, that is, the historical evolution of the G.M. Antonio Manoel de Vilhena's coat-of-arms, or further still, a correct interpretation of the subject matter.

It was solely my love for Floriana and not to satisfy personal wishes as Mr Holland interpreted my assignment, that has encouraged me to dedicate my time to search for information on the subject which very few people were aware of. I am satisfied that my contribution was positively acknowledged by various individuals, who have encouraged me to enhance the information on the subject.

Let us not be fundamentalists in our reasoning and base our arguments and decisions on the historical evolution of the subject matter.

We are obliged to give the community of Floriana a coat-of-arms based on the correct heraldic elements of its founder, and only through this commitment can we ascertain that the name of Borgo Vilhena, an inheritance of G.M. Manoel de Vilhena, really fulfills his true wishes and memory.