APPROVALS 1 15 September XX (1985)

THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS ARE APPROVED:

Kingdom of Ansteorra

Aelfric Dromundr. Name only (see RETURNS for device).

Anebairn MacPharlaine of Arrochar. Badge. Gules, in pale two straight trumpets bendwise, the bells alternatively in chief and base, Or.

Anebairn MacPharlaine of Arrochar. Release of badge for the Household of Iarghalte. Sable, a pile inverted azure, fimbriated and in chief a mullet of six argent.

Anebairn MacPharlaine of Arrochar. Release of badge. Gules, a cross potent gyronny Or and sable.

Diego Alvares da Rosa. Name only.

Gytha Figlina. Name only.

Lora Leigh Hamlin. Name change (from Lora Hamlin).

Swein the Well­Scarred. Name only.

Kingdom of An Tir

Akayama Yoshitatsu. Device. Sable, issuant from base a rising sun of five rays argent eclipsed sable, the center ray a ken blade all within and conjoined to an annulet argent.

DISCUSSION: This differences from KOMURA SHIMITSU (Sable, two chevronels couped counterchanged within an annulet argent) by two major points, one for type and one for number of primary charges. The two are visually dissimilar, so there is no conflict.

Edward Ian Anderson. Device (correction). Argent, on a cross nowy quadrate couped sable a great helm pierced through the eye­slit by an arrow fesswise point to sinister argent within a bordure per saltire sable and gules.

Kingdom of Atenveldt

Gyera della Farfalla. Device. Per fess enarched azure and Or, in base a butterfly displayed purpure, a bordure vert.

Kingdom of Caid

Alexis la Bouche. Name and device. Quarterly ermine and sable, a cross between in bend sinister two towers Or.

Arwen Mildthryth Dafydd. Badge. Per bend azure mulletty Or and Or, a unicorn passant, head lowered, gules.

Aethelwulf of the Grey Forest. Name and device. Or, in pale a lute fesswise reversed and a cobra erect all within a bordure wavy gules.

Caid, Kingdom of. Chevron Herald (name only).

Cei Myghchaell Wellinton. Badge. A fool displayed guardant argent, vested lozengy gules and Or.

Cennydd Lombard. Name and device. Vert, on a saltire cotised argent, four rose twigs interlaced vert.

Ceridwen Dafydd. Badge. Per bend argent and vert, a unicorn passant, head lowered, gules. NOTE: Her old badge (Argent, on a lozenge vert, an equal­armed Celtic cross Or) is released.

Dubhessa MacLochlainn. Device. Quarterly argent and purpure, a lozenge sable between in dexter chief three trefoils, two and one, and in sinister base an estoile purpure.

Dun Calma, Canton of (submitted as Calmadun). Name and device. Per pale azure and Or, a tower, the base environed of a laurel wreath, all within a bordure all counterchanged.

NOTE: According to Brigantia, an adjective in Gaelic comes "after the noun which it directly modifies." (MacKinnon, Gaelic, p. 9) We have corrected the word order to Dun Calma. This may not, in fact, be the adjective they want to use:

It means "thick­set, brawly, powerful, strong" and clearly is personal in sense (it derives from the masculine noun "calma" which means "pillar" both in the literal sense and in the sense of a "well­built person", Mac & Mac, p. 68). "Strong" in the sense that a fortress is strong is better expressed by "daingeann" which means "firm, strong, unmovable, tight" and is cognate with the noun for a fortress as well as with the verb "daingnich" (i.e. "to fortify", Mac & Mac, p. 118).

Please pass this information on to the submitters.

Hrorek Halfdane of Faulconwood. Badge. A unicorn's head erased azure.

NOTE: His old badge (A unicorn's head couped azure) is released.

Jean Paul du Monde. Name and device. Or, a winged sea­griffin passant gules between three cramp­irons sable.

DISCUSSION: According to Clarion, mundane sea­griffins don't necessarily have wings, so we thought it better to mention this in the blazon.

Jennifer of Cats Leap. Name and device. Per saltire azure and Or, a cross quarterpierced counterchanged.

Jesca of Pentraeth. Name and device. Per fess wavy argent and azure, a tree blasted and eradicated azure and in saltire a lute and a recorder argent.

Lambert de Sur. Badge. Argent, a talbot dormant within a bordure gules.

Meagan Windemere of Oakwood. Name and device. Argent, a peacock pavonated to base proper maintaining a needle point in chief sable, threaded gules, and on a bordure azure three thimbles argent. (Pavo cristatus)

Megan Maria Gonzaga. Change of name (from Brian Ramsey of Rosewood) and change of device. Per fess wavy azure and argent, in chief on a sun argent a phoenix azure and in base a griffin sejant, maintaining an estoile, azure. NOTE: Her old device is released.

Peter of Dun Calma (submitted as Peter of Calmadun). Name and device. Per pale embattled vert and argent, two swords inverted counterchanged.

NOTE: Nice and simple. We have modified his byname to agree with the form registered for the branch. See DUN CALMA, above.

Renard de l'Arc. Name and device. Azure, on a fess Or between three foxes rampant to sinister argent a strung longbow sable.

DISCUSSION: When one set of animate charges is replaced with another in a different position, I have been allowing difference for both type and position. The same is not true between animate and inanimate charges. Philosophically, I think it boils down to a perceived similarity between the charges, which causes the eye to record two degrees of change (first of type, then of position), rather than one (replacing one thing with another). A lion rampant is one point different from a boot reversed, but it is more than one point different from a dragon passant to sinister. (This suggests that animate isn't the right qualifier to use. I don't think you can claim any difference for position between a lion and a salmon.) This submission is both visually and technically clear of FULK DE WYVERN: Azure, a fess Or between three wyverns argent. (SCA)

Rhys Britannicus Sagittarius. Name and device. Per bend sinister potenty argent and purpure, a tree eradicated sable and a unicorn's head erased to sinister argent.

NOTE: According to Brigantia, "For some reason most medieval Latin names which use more than one by­name in a non­classical manner tend to put the national or other place name last." The more likely form of the name would thus be Rhys Sagittarius Britannicus.

Tuvor Sabledrake. Name change (from Tuvor of Seareach).

DISCUSSION: The byname Sabledrake does not imply non­human descent. Drake occurs mundanely. See either A Dictionary of British Surnames or The Origin of English Surnames, by P. H. Reaney.

Kingdom of Calontir

Aldgyth atte Appelyard. Device. Or semy of apples gules, on a chief triangular sable a ram's head erased to sinister Or.

Aron of Katharinenstadt. Device. Per pale azure crusily argent, and argent crusily azure, a cross crosslet fitchy throughout per pale azure and argent.

Axed Root, Canton of. Device. Or, a double­bitted poleaxe sable between two boars' heads couped respectant gules all within a laurel wreath vert.

Brom Blackhand. Device. Or, on a bend sinister between two sinister gauntlets fesswise reversed fists clenched sable a sword inverted Or.

Calontir, Kingdom of. Habicht Herald. Name only.

Calontir, Kingdom of. Badge. Argent, a bat­winged bison volant sable.

Chrystofer Kensor. Name only (see RETURNS for device).

Chrystofer Kensor. Badge for House Winter Wolf. Per bend sinister argent and azure, an axe head and a wolf's head erased to sinister counterchanged.

Corwin Fidelis. Name only.

Elspeth Modlen ferch Dafydd. Name change (from Elspeth o Ddwnborth) and device. Or, a torteau charged with a sea­horse erect Or, in base a ford proper.

Ewen MacGillipadraig. Device. Or, a lion's gamb inverted palewise affronty gules holding and entwined of a serpent erect to sinister vert.

DISCUSSION: A jambe is normally seen from the side and has its claws in base, so it is necessary to specify that this one is affronty and inverted. (Parker 282-283; Woodward 222)

Gavin Valbairn of Deeside. Name and device. Azure, on a saltire engrailed between in pale two hunting horns bells to sinister Or and in fess two hearts argent, a heart purpure.

DISCUSSION: From the arms of AUTRET (Azure, a saltire engrailed argent between four buckets Or), cited by Virgule, I count three minor points of difference: one for type of part of a group of secondary charges, one for tincture of the same partial group of secondary charges, and one for the addition of a tertiary charge. (The distinction between a hunting­horn and an bucket is too slight to be worth any difference, and the charge has no clear default position, so the orientation is also negligible.) This makes it a borderline call.

I am uncomfortable with this point count. My personal feeling is that the combined difference for changing type and tincture of part of a group of secondary charges is really only a minor point; and that therefore the two coats should conflict. (Part of the difficulty, I must admit, is that I'm not certain one should be able to obtain "sufficient difference" by totting up nothing but minor points.)

Since there is some question, however, and since the potential conflict is with a mundane rather than an SCA coat, I am giving the submitter the benefit of the doubt.

Hywela Frech ferch Wyddel. Device. Per bend sinister vert and vair, in bend two griffins segreant Or.

Katharina die Schneiderin. Name and device. Vert, a bend wavy between two quills of yarn Or.

NOTE: Brigantia has suggested that Katharine Schneider would be the more likely period form of the name.

DISCUSSION: Embroiderer's quill appears to be the generic name for the charge, with quill of yarn being used to specify that the quill is wound. (Shield and Crest, p. 227; Parker 226) Since this affects the outline of the charge, it is probably better to be specific. There is some possibility of confusion with the SCA usage of quill for quill pen, but embroiderer's quill of yarn is cumbersome, and the tag 'of yarn" ought to be sufficient warning that this is no mere feather. The charge is period; a quill of this sort appears in the 1558 grant to the Broderers' Company. (The Armorial Bearings of the Guilds of London, p. 33) An excellent device, and a nice choice of charges.

Renee Merci du Taro. Name only

NOTE: The names of rivers generally take a definite article; in French, this would be either de la Taro or du Taro. There does not appear to be a specific Gallicized form of the name, so we assume it would be assimilated directly, probably as a masculine noun. We have therefore replaced de with du. Please note that the accent goes on the first e in Renee, not the second.

See the cover letter for some observations on the agreement of place names and prepositions.

Rolf Eichmann. Name and device. Quarterly sable and Or, an oak tree proper and a label gules.

Three Rivers, Barony of. Badge. Per bend sinister azure and Or, a hippogriff rampant, the aquiline half argent and the equine half sable.

NOTE: Please draw the wings so they lie primarily on the azure half of the field. As submitted, they are mostly on the gold half, and do not show up well.

Kingdom of the East

Barak Elandris Mago. Name only.

Catherne Giselasdottir. Name change (from Elspeth Fortescue).

Caw ap Rhys. Name only.

Derrick Falkaner. Name only.

Deyvid Albrecht. Name only.

Eoin Mac Eoghain. Name change (from Eoin Mac Saighdeora).

Fiona Berwyn of Skye. Name only.

Gwyddon Alexander MacGregor of Settmour. Name only.

Igraine Torr de Valere. Device (appeal). Per chevron vert and lozengy purpure and argent, in chief a horse couchant Or, crined sable.

NOTE: See Appendix for discussion.

Katarina Helene von Schonborn. Name only.

Lynnette de Clermont. Name only.

Mara Teodora Kolarova. Name change (from Mara Kolarova).

Marie de Clermont. Name only.

Mary Wood of Hamfield. Name only.

Nordmark. Name and device. Per pale sable and azure, a chevron argent and overall a laurel wreath Or.

NOTE: Very nice. They have received permission from Sir Aldric of the Northmark to conflict with the name of his household.

Rebecca bat Reuven. Name only.

Sibyl Cairnfalcon. Name only.

Thorstein fra Agnefit (submitted as Thorstein von Agnefit). Name and device. Azure, a chevron throughout argent between two gouttes d'Or and a bear statant erect argent.

NOTE: We have changed the preposition von to fra (which is both Danish and Norwegian for 'from'), so it agrees in language with the rest of the name.

William Blackheart. Name only.

Willow of the Cliffs. Name only.

Zuzana Tichova. Name only.

NOTE: According to Treblerose, the Slovak for "Susan the Quiet" would be Zuzana Ticha. Tichova is an acceptable byname, but it is a family name ("of the family Ticho"), not an epithet.

Kingdom of Meridies

Aldo Ferrari. Name only.

Archon the Seeker. Device. Sable, in chief a lozenge fesswise argent charged with a mascle fesswise vert, all within an orle argent.

Border Vale Keep, Shire of. Device. Per bend sinister Or and gules, a tower sable, masoned Or, enflamed within a laurel wreath counterchanged.

Brian of Crystal Keep (submitted as Ryan Gunther). Name and device. Argent, a cobra's head erect affronty couped sable, bellied argent, between two swords inverted sable, and a chief checky sable and argent.

NOTE: Ryan appears to have begun life as an Irish surname, and was not used as a given name name until recent times. We have substituted a holding name in order to register the device. Please ask the submitter to make the couping on the cobra's head more definite.

Caitlin di Berrona. Name change (from Caitlin di Verona).

Carlwyn George Ordragoun of Canterbury. Device. Azure, a pall argent and overall a swan statant, wings elevated and addorsed, and a dragon rampant to sinister addorsed Or.

Catherine the White. Device. Azure, three bendlets sinister enhanced and in sinister base a bell argent.

Catriona Muireaghan of Carlingford Lough. Name and device. Per pale vert and argent, on a chevron inverted cotised three trefoils palewise counterchanged.

Colin Regehr. Device. Per pale gules and counter­ermine, a trefoil slipped and couped counterchanged and in dexter chief a mullet argent.

Gerraint ap Llywellen. Name and device. Per bend embattled azure and Or, in sinister chief an oak sprig bendwise fructed Or.

Gerraint ap Llywellen. Badge. Azure, an oak sprig bendwise fructed Or.

Lion's Keep, Shire of. Name only.

DISCUSSION: This does not conflict with the Barony of Lion's Gate. A keep is not a gate, and the two names neither look nor sound the same.

Novus Matisco, Shire of. Name only (see RETURNS for device).

Red Marsh, Shire of. Name only.

Saxus of Arunshire. Device. Per pale azure and argent, three tau crosses counterchanged and a chief vair.

Kingdom of the West

Arian of Shadowvale. Name only.

Avarr of the Misty Seas. Name only.

Beorstan Hunigbin. Name and device. Or, on a pall vert, a mullet of three greater and three lesser points Or.

Briony of Nyentrees. Name and device. Purpure, a bend between two wheels Or. NOTE: Classic heraldry.

Canale, Shire of. Device. Sable, a ladle reversed and, on a gore dexter Or, a laurel wreath sable.

Caroline of Glen Gowan. Device. Per bend dovetailed azure and argent, a trefoil and a rose counterchanged.

Dirk von den Schwarzenkatzen (submitted as Dirk von der Katzenschwartze). Name and device. Per pale sable and argent, a fess counterchanged, three hearts argent and three cats rampant­counter­rampant guardant sable.

NOTE: According to the heralds commenting on this submission, (1) in German, the adjective precedes the noun, (2) the adjective agrees with the noun in gender, and (3) von takes the dative case. We have amended the name accordingly.

Everett of Seven Jays. Badge. Per bend sinister argent and purpure, a fleur­de­lys within an orle counterchanged.

Falan Cantus Venti of Duskhaven. Name and device. Per pale azure and argent, in pale a crescent inverted and a compass­star counterchanged Or and sable.

Jade of Starfall. Change of device. Per chevron inverted wavy ermine and vert, a double­headed eagle sable and a compass­star argent.

NOTE: His old device (Vert, on a pile wavy ermine, a double­headed eagle sable, a bordure ermine charged with three compass­stars sable) is released.

Karolyn Johnston of Lindley. Badge. Azure, a chevron disjoint, and in chief a roundel argent.

DISCUSSION: There are various forms of broken chevrons; the blazon and emblazon for this one are from page 109 of Parker.

Leofric Flamatopp. Name and device. Vair en pointe, a bat­winged salamander statant, wings elevated and addorsed Or, enflamed gules.

Morgana Starbridge. Name only.

Oertha, Principality of. Oerthan Order of Grace. Name only.

Oertha, Principality of. Order of the Snowy Owl. Name only.

DISCUSSION: This is sufficiently different from the Order of the Velvet Owl in Meridies. Names of orders conflict "if they are the same with only spelling differences, or if they differ only by the addition of one word or by an exact translation into another language." (RFS VI.4; emphasis added) A change in adjective is generally sufficient.

Rolynnda of the Azure Stone. Device. Argent, a bend wreathed Or and azure between two doves volant bendwise vert.

Siobhan of Cloverdell. Badge. Or, a peacock feather bendwise sinister vert debruised by a decrescent azure.

Stephen of Northfield. Name and device. Vert fleury argent, a bear passant Or holding a mug argent, a bordure Or.

NOTE: One of the forms lists the given name as ' Stephen, the other as Stephan. We have used the spelling given in the letter of intent.

William of Wolfscape. Name only.

THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS ARE RETURNED:

Kingdom of Ansteorra

Aelfric Dromundr. Device. Azure, three lobsters tergiant Or.

REASON FOR RETURN: This conflicts with PRIEUR DE CHANTELOU: Azure, three crayfish Or. (Rietstap) It is also visually similar to FRANCE MODERN: Azure, three fleurs­de­lys Or. We accord national arms and flags (especially well­known ones, such as France) an added degree of protection; and since there is a reasonable chance that the two might be mistaken at a moderate distance, I'm afraid I have to agree with the commenting heralds who felt they conflicted.

DISCUSSION: The lobsters were submitted as "tergiant displayed." I don't believe that displayed adds anything of value to the blazon, for the artist or for the herald. How much variation is possible in the limbs of a lobster tergiant, and at what point does it stop being displayed and start being something else?

Theresa of the Ebony Rose. Name only.

REASON FOR RETURN: The name is too close to that of THERESA OF THE BLUE ROSE, and we have not received the copy of the letter of permission we requested.

Kingdom of Atenveldt

Mark of Hole Sand. Name only.

REASON FOR RETURN: We never received an information sheet for this submission.

Kingdom of Caid

Dreiburgen, Barony of. Badge for the Dreiburgen Bards Guild. Per pale azure and argent, on a pile inverted throughout between a drinking horn palewise and a quill, a tower, all counterchanged.

NOTE: This is too complex for a branch badge. Please simplify.

Kingdom of Calontir

Chrystofer Kensor. Device. Azure, a wolf rampant to sinister maintaining an axe argent hafted Or.

REASON FOR RETURN: This conflicts with ALAIR OF THE BLOODY FOUNTAIN: Azure, a wolf and a unicorn combattant argent. (SCA) There is a major point of difference for removing the unicorn, and a minor for the addition of the axe.

DISCUSSION: The point­and­a­half rule does not apply here because one of the coats consists of two dissimilar primary charges. I am not altogether convinced that this is a reasonable conflict, but it is consistent with our system of counting difference. This may be something we need to think about.

Garth Allmann. Name and device. Or, on a mullet purpure, a sabre­toothed tiger's head caboshed Or.

NOTE: Garth is a surname, 'of the garth', i.e. the yard or the enclosure. (Bardsley 310; Reaney DBS 141) Withycombe posits that it is a modern form of Gareth, but she doesn't support her contention, and I suspect she overlooked the surname. Dunkling and Gosling arrived at much the same conclusion; they discuss this at some length in The New American Dictionary of First Names, pp. 153­154.

The device conflicts with the badge of ASTRA CHRISTIANA BENEDICT: On a mullet a cross crosslet. (SCA) Because Astra's badge is tinctureless, it reserves all colors. There is thus a single minor point of difference, for replacing the cross crosslet (a tertiary charge) with the tiger's head.

DISCUSSION: There is precedent for the use of prehistoric animals in SCA heraldry. "This is a borderline case, in that the mammoth was extinct in the Middle Ages. . ever, there were pictures in French caves which could have been seen, and a trade in Siberian mammoth ivory. (KFW, 22 Oct 76, p. 5; in Prec II:26) Master Wilhelm later admitted a saber­toothed tiger. "N. submitted this many years ago, when prehistoric animals were allowed. (In point of fact, there are cave paintings of sabre­toothed tigers, so this particular beast could have been known in period.)" (WvS, 14 Oct 82, p. 8)

Master Wilhelm's first sentence implies that, between 1976 and 1982, prehistoric animals had been banned; he was admitting one as a hardship case. I have not been able to find a ruling establishing this change. His second sentence invokes the same principle Mistress Karina used ­ that the animal in question could have been known to medieval Europeans, since it appeared in cave drawings. This suggests that, although he believed the charge no longer to be legal, he had not altogether abandoned this principle.

The Rules for Submissions (IX.7) specifically permit "any object, living thing, or design element known to humanity before 1601" to be used as a charge, so long as the College feels its use is "consistent with period heraldic style and practice." It can easily be argued that prehistoric animals, not being readily recognizable by the common swain­on­the­road, are not suitable tokens for purposes of identification, and are therefore inconsistent with period armory. There aren't enough instances on the books to establish a clear precedent, and the most recent acceptance I found intimated that such approvals were a thing of the past. On the other hand, the rule is worded in such a fashion as to encourage inventiveness ("any [thing] known to humanity" is a rather sweeping invitation). Rule IX.7 is more a statement of general principle than an out­and out rule ­­ it provides caveats in both directions ­­ so there isn't really a "letter of the law" to adhere to.

The upshot is that we have no clear policy on the use of prehistoric animals as charges. The comments on the present submission vary widely, and do not give me enough material to offer a reasoned decision. If the applicant wishes to resubmit with a saber­toothed tiger, please ask him to present his arguments for the use of such a charge, and the College can have it out at that time.

Stanislaus Blachuta. Device. Ermine, on a mullet azure between three wolves courant sable, a plate charged with a decrescent sable.

REASON FOR RETURN: The central charge is too complex. As most of the commenters pointed out, it is visually four layers. In addition, the ribbons or scrolls issuing from the wolves' mouths do not appear to be correct. I believe I have seen such in the attributed arms of saints, but I can't lay my hands on any examples at the moment, and I doubt this is an appropriate usage for mainstream heraldry. (The SCA usage howling or ululant indicates that the beast's head is thrown back, as if baying at the moon.) Please simplify the coat, and remove the scrolls from the wolves' mouths.

DISCUSSION: Gold Falcon noted in his LoI that "There was considerable comment within the College of Arms that the crescent within the mullet [on his previous submission] was not period style but this point was not mentioned in the return." Actually, none of the comments I have on file mentions this at all ­ one comments on the number of layers, one on the blazon, and all of them on conflict. There was a problem with the miniature emblazon, which showed the two conjoined ('pierced' in perspective); but the full­sized emblazon had had some corrective surgery performed on it with Liquid Paper. Discrepancies of this sort are not uncommon, and I assumed it meant that the submitter had been advised of the problem.

Since the question has been raised, I will note that the mullet, as drawn, does look like an attempt to represent perspective. There should be an appreciable gap between the two charges. I would also prefer that the decrescent be drawn in the conventional heraldic manner, with a ridge down the middle and the horns tucked in, although Mistress Eowyn tells me that crescents are not always represented in this manner in period drawings.

Kingdom of the East

Efan Gwyrddcalon ap Rhydderch. Name change (from Evan ap Rhydderch).

REASON FOR RETURN: According to Mistress Keridwen o'r Mynydd Gwyrdd, the proper form for the byname would be Calonwerdd " : "The noun comes first, and the adjective takes the soft mutation, which changes 'gwyrdd' to 'werdd'." The submitter has asked us not to make any spelling or grammar changes to his name.

Kingdom of Meridies

Aylwyn de Tregarth. Device. Argent, five chevronels gules interlaced with three crosses crosslet fitchy sable.

REASON FOR RETURN: Conflict with BAKISLEY: Argent, three crosses crosslet fitchy sable. (Papworth 670) The addition of the chevronels is a major point of difference. There is no additional difference for interlacing them with the crosses crosslet.

DISCUSSION: The submission was originally returned because "The College of Arms felt that this design was not consistent with either SCA or mundane heraldry." Pennon has appealed this decision, citing examples of charges interlaced with ordinaries and with other charges, drawn from Bossewell's Workes of Armorie, Berry's Encyclopedia Heraldica, Parker's Glossary., and Papworth's Ordinary.

Of the examples cited, only the one given in Bossewell is demonstrably period, and the publication date (1572) is almost a century after our putative 1485 cutoff date for heraldic style. This is important, since the question being considered is one of style. The examples are almost all simpler than the present coat; and the College's original objection was founded in part on the visual complexity of the design.

I should note, however, that the presentation of the mundane examples (particularly the one from Bossewell) swung most of the College in favor of the appeal. I am willing to sustain the appeal on these grounds.

Adding a bordure (as was suggested in the LoI) would remove the conflict with BAKISLEY; but the device is already on shaky grounds as far as complexity is concerned, and I feel this would push it over the edge. I would suggest reducing the number of chevronels from five to two or three, and then adding either a chief or a bordure. This would bring the interlacing more into line with the examples cited, and ought to unclutter the center of the coat enough for it to sustain an addition on the periphery.

Geoffrey fitz Alain. Device (appeal of blazon). Or, a scarpe between a winged lion passant gules and a Celtic cross sable.

SYNOPSIS: Pennon noted in her letter of intent that "He originally submitted a scarpe gules but it was passed as a bend sinister; he would prefer the scarpe, please."

REASON FOR RETURN: In the Fall of 1982, the College of Arms adopted the convention that the diminutive names of ordinaries are used only when there is more than one of the ordinary in question (or when the ordinary is otherwise reduced in importance, as in a "bar enhanced"). Since there is only one diagonal stripe, it is blazoned as a bend sinister rather than a scarpe, no matter how wide it is.

DISCUSSION: Artistic convention allows a certain amount of latitude in the width of an ordinary; it will tend to be wider when it is charged, and narrower when there is more than one, or when there are other surrounding charges. This submission may correctly be drawn with either a wide bend sinister or a narrow one (i.e., a scarpe); the blazon remains the same.

Novus Matisco, Shire of. Device. Per pale azure and argent, a tower within a laurel wreath counterchanged.

REASON FOR RETURN: This conflicts with WYNFLAED OF HAWKSMIR: Per pale azure and argent, a tower and in chief two hawk's heads erased addorsed counterchanged. (August 1985) There is a point and a half of difference for change in type and number of a single group of secondary charges. It is also visually quite similar to the PROVINCE OF SILVER DESERT: Per pale azure and argent, a ram's head cabossed within a laurel wreath, all counterchanged. (August 1985) The two are technically clear under the "transparent laurel wreath rule" (XII.6), but the West has argued that the "color patterning" is strong enough to offset this, and Rule XII.6 is specifically applied (in chorus, now) "on a case­by­case basis."­, Adding a bordure would take care of both potential conflicts, but it would bring the device into conflict with that of the CANTON OF DUN CALMA: Per pale azure and Or, a tower, the base environed of a laurel wreath, all within a bordure all counterchanged. (September 1985)

* We have some doubts about this, which is why it is mentioned as being "visually similar" rather than an out­and­out conflict. As one of the heralds at the meeting noted, "This argument virtually excludes simple branch arms ­­ so long as color is unchanged, a [blank] within a laurel wreath will conflict with any other [blank]. A sweeping conclusion. Do we wish to maintain this?" We promote this type of design by requiring the arms of a branch to contain a laurel wreath, prominently displayed. Rule XII.6 was intended to offset the conflicts this requirement creates.

Volsung Redbeard of Kimaden. Name and device. Gules, a wolf salient to sinister argent.

REASON FOR RETURN: According to Virgule and Brigantia, Volsung is the eponymous ancestor of the tribe of the same name in the Volsunga Saga. If the submitter can find other instances of Volsung used as a given name in period, he should be able to use it; otherwise, I'm afraid we have to treat it as a byname. (Master Wilhelm's original rejection states that "The Volsung were a particular group of heroes," which suggests that, even as a byname, it may still be off limits. I don't have enough information on hand to tell.) Mistress Alisoun has suggested Valgard (from Njal's Saga) and the Saxon name Wulfstein as possible alternatives; Master Wilhelm has volunteered Wolsind or (as an anglicized form) Volsind. Perhaps he'd like to try one of these.

The device conflicts with LOWE: Gules, a wolf statant argent (Papworth 98); and with WEISSENWOLF: Gules, a wolf rampant argent. (Woodward 228) In each case, there is a single point of difference, for the position of the wolf. ("Salient to sinister" is a position, just as "passant" is. The orientation is not counted separately.) Adding a bordure ought to take care of the conflicts cited, but the device will have to be resubmitted with one added, so it can be checked again. (We only consider one version of a submission at a time.).

Kingdom of the Middle

Ragnarr Arnbjornsson. Name only (appeal).

REASON FOR RETURN: We have not received any documentation to support the appeal.

Kingdom of the West

Anne Fawnehaven. Device. Argent, semy of hearts purpure, a unicornate pegasus passant, wings elevated and addorsed, sable.

REASON FOR RETURN: This conflicts with KATHLEEN OF RIVERROSE: Or, a unicornate pegasus statant sable. (SCA) There is a major and a minor point of difference for the change in tincture of the field plus the addition of the semy. We do not feel the change in the position of the pegasus is sufficient to bring this up to two full points.

Kareia Talvi Madchen. Name and device. Azure, vetu, a long­haired domestic cat dormant argent.

REASON FOR RETURN: According to Brigantia, Kareia is the Greek name of a geographical district in Asia Minor. (The Biblical Kareah, it should be noted, was male, not female: NCE 1453.) The byname appears to be an attempt to form the epithet "winter maiden" using an undeclined Finnish noun to modify a German noun. Place names may not normally be used as given names, and we require that adjectives agree in language with the nouns they modify. (RFS VII.1, VI.2) The applicant has requested that we make no changes to her name without consulting her. The device appears acceptable, although the cat will need to be redrawn in the heraldic dormant position.

Reynardine of Tara. Name change (from Reynardine of Lochac); appeal.

SYNOPSIS: The name was originally returned by Master Wilhelm in June 1984, on the grounds that "A man may not use 'of Tara,' as that was the seat of the High Kings of Ireland." Vesper appealed the rejection, arguing that "Neither the name alone, nor the name in combination with the device or badge, are presumptuous." The appeal was first processed in October 1984, at which time I stated that I was unwilling to uphold the current ruling (that a man could not be of Tara, but a woman might), and I requested the opinions of the College on what restrictions we ought to place on the name. Based on the information at hand, I concluded that Tara did not appear to be "the sort of place from which ordinary folk might hail" (classing it with Avalon), and in January 1985 I prohibited the name altogether.

Vesper has appealed this ruling, arguing (1) that Tara is not the Irish equivalent of Avalon, (2) there are a number of places named Tara in the world, so the name is not unique, and (3) Tara was abandoned by the O'Neills in the 6th century, and was not a royal seat after that time.

REASON FOR RETURN: The historical and mythological connotations of the place name Tara are such that it does not appear to be a normal place of human habitation. Some attribute this to the magical and religious associations of the site; others to its place in history and legend as the seat of the High Kings of Ireland. The fact remains that many perceive the byname of Tara as a presumptuous claim. Until this objection has adequately been met, I am unwilling to permit use of the name.

DISCUSSION: (1) I did not say that Tara is the Irish equivalent of Avalon. I said, "This would seem to place Tara in the same category as, say, Avalon" (i.e., a place with which humans may be associated in story, but not "the sort of place from which ordinary folk might hail"). I would suggest that Vesper go back and read the entire paragraph in the LOAR, that my remark might be taken in the context in which it was made.

The use of Avalon as a parallel example was a reference to a discussion which took place in the correspondence several years ago (precipitated, I believe, by TERREL OF AVALON) over whether one could be "of Avalon." It was suggested at one point that Avalon was another name for Glastonbury. As I recall, this was countered with the argument,that the mythological connotations took precedence over the historical or archeological ones.

(2) None of the other Taras cited has been shown to have existed in period. The uniqueness of the name does have some bearing on the case; but we mustn't forget that the question of "presumptuousness" hinges largely on what people are likely to perceive. The assumption being made here is that Goodman Jack will think of the place in Ireland (if not the southern plantation), but not, say, the one in Yugoslavia. I must certainly conclude that Tara of the Kings is what the applicant had in mind; otherwise, he wouldn't have written "Tara is a place in Ireland where my persona was born" on the submission form.

(3) It has not been shown that Tara was a place of normal human habitation after the O'Neills departed. All we have to go on at this point is the statement that "there was a battle there in which the Danes were defeated in 980."

CONCLUSION: The association of Tara with magic and with the kings of Ireland is strong enough that, pending solid evidence refuting it, I must proscribe Tara from SCA use.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT: One of the people on my staff dug up a book (I believe it was titled Irish Kings and High Kings), part of which I found time to read. As I recall, one of the arguments made by the author is that the legends of Ireland are for the most part inseparable from its history ­ even if something didn't happen, or didn't happen the way the legend has it, succeeding generations of Irishmen accepted the legend as true, making it an integral part of their culture. If this is true, then the associations with the Tuatha Du Dannan, or with one of the royal families of Ireland (whether or not they were High Kings at the time), may be implicit in the name of Tara. It would seem to follow that any perceived associations (magical or royal) are supportable, regardless of the later history of the place. I can't prove any of this (I didn't even keep a bibliographic record of the book), but it seemed an interesting enough theory to be worth mentioning.

In consequence of the second appeal on the submission of IGRAINE TORR DE VALERE, I have reviewed the manner in which I have been demoting points of difference, and have decided to make some changes. This appendix is intended to provide some background information on the situation, to outline the decisions I have made, and to present some observations that I think may need to be addressed in the future.

Synopsis

In February 1985, I returned the proposed device of IGRAINE TORR DE VALERE (Per chevron vert and lozengy purpure and argent, in chief a horse couchant Or, crined sable) for conflict with the registered device of THEODOSIA ARCADIANA (Per chevron abased sable and purpure, a unicorn dormant argent). Brigantia appealed the ruling, and in April 1985 I returned the submission again, this time explaining the point count I had used in returning the submission the first time. Brigantia has appealed the return a second time. She summarized her arguments as follows:

1) The point count and the method of demotion used in the point count are clearly different from the published points of difference and the rules governing demotion in the Rules for Submission, as published in August, 1984, and ­­ in this area at least ­ not clearly emended by fiat or precedent by Laurel since. If Laurel did not mean this point count to indicate a change in the published system of point counting ­ and no prior discussion in the College of Arms or point count in the cover letter to this LOAR indicated a change of such magnitude ­­ then the previous rules must stand and there is ample difference.

2) If it was Laurel's intent to modify the rules for submission by this ruling, then by Laurel's own ruling in the case of Ting­nye­'dzin­gyi­seng­ge McPhee, Igraine should not suffer because the rules have been changed by a ruling as a result of the consideration of her arms.

Background

At the time I became Laurel, at the Loch Salann Heraldry Symposium in August 1984, it had been almost four years since I had paid any serious attention to the rules on points of difference. I had spent the preceding month studying the new edition of the Rules for Submissions, but I had not found them particularly enlightening; as This so correctly noted, "The point system has gotten so complex it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to sort it out."

One of the classes at the Symposium (taught by Lord Garin de Gramercy and Mistress Aelfwynn Gyrthesdohtor) was in the application of points of difference as defined in the new edition of the Rules. Master Wilhelm attended the session and participated in the discussion. At no time did he, or anyone else, suggest that the principles being espoused were in any way unorthodox. The other Symposium attendees with whom I have spoken came away with the same impression I did ­­ what was presented was the Rules as they were being applied.

In the following weeks, as I studied the correspondence, the submissions, and the Rules, I discovered that

1) No two people counted points of difference the same way, and

2) Some of the conflict calls Master Wilhelm was making in his letters of comment were not consonant with the new edition of the rules; but

3) If I applied the principles I had learned in the class in the Symposium, I could justify most of Master Wilhelm's conflict calls, and many of those the West was making.

The real question seemed to be what constituted a category of difference. The term was used in defining demotion of points, but it was never itself defined. My operating hypothesis (that the categories were the six areas of "major points of difference" detailed in section XII.A of the rules) broke down when I attempted to analyze Master Wilhelm's comments. It appeared that the Rules did not adequately explain the way difference was being counted, or else that the system was in a state of change. In either case, what I had gleaned from the Symposium appeared to be the status quo," and I took this as the basis of my interpretations. I have been applying these tenets, with varying degrees of success, for the past year.

Discussion

The categories of difference, as I have been applying them, are the six areas detailed in RFS XIII.A, except that subsequent changes in tincture (whether of field or charges) are demoted, as are subsequent changes to a group of charges.

Brigantia is correct in saying that I never announced a change to the system of point counting. (As I have noted above, I believed what I was doing to be a continuation of the status quo.) She is incorrect, however, in her conclusion that my ruling on Igraine constituted the "defining instance" of the change. Skimming back through my early LoARs, I found the following precedents: Tir Ysgithr Cook's Guild [primary charge] (28 Sep 84, p. 6), Fanuidhol Bluesword [tincture; note error in field count] (p. 15), Bjorn Rhys [secondary charges] (pp. 16­17), Alinor of Marionwood [tincture] (31 Oct 84, p. 15), Petrina the Herbalist [tincture] (p. 16), and Johann Gewitter Sonderling [primary charge] (16 Dec 84, p. 15). There may have been others; these are the ones I found.

Strictly speaking, by the time I received Igraine's submission, the changes (if in fact they were changes) had already taken place. The first argument made in the appeal does not apply.

My ruling on Ting-ge McPhee was predicated, not on the fact that there had been a change in the rules, but because I felt there had been "a change in direction in the policies of the College of Arms." It was also based on Ting­ge's submission being the one that brought about the change. The second condition is not true in Igraine's case, nor am I certain that the first condition has been met; so, strictly speaking, the second argument made in the appeal does not apply either.

Quite frankly, I have seen nothing to convince me that my original interpretations were not a fairly accurate approximation of the way Master Wilhelm was counting difference at the time. He has since repudiated this approach, but he has never been known for his consistency; and I have noted a distinct change, in the last several months, in the way he has been counting difference.

The principle of demoting succeeding changes to a group of charges has a fair amount to recommend it. As a rule, later changes to the same element of the design are less visible than the earlier ones. This kind of change is often characterized as "replacing" the element, suggesting that the action is perceived as a single alteration, rather than the product of several successive alterations.

The second principle ­ that all changes to tincture (both field and charges) should be treated as a single category ­ is more a matter of opinion. Does changing the color or treatment of the field detract from later changes to the color or treatment of the charges? Some heralds I know are convinced it does. I know it does in some cases, but feel it doesn't in others. The best structural argument I know for it is that the outline rule is no longer a special case: changing the tincture of both field and charges yields a major and a minor point, which is enough between SCA and mundane, but not enough between two SCA devices.

A problem arises, however, when you have two systems of demotion in effect at the same time, and there aren't many elements to change. If you don't pick your changes carefully, they'll diminish to negligibility in no time flat. What's more, the heraldic algebra for keeping track of the difference gets way out of hand, till we become its servants, instead of the other way around. Regardless of the legitimacy of its origins, if the system can't be understood, and if it drives people to unnecessarily complex devices, then something needs to be done about it.

Conclusion

In light of various comments that have been made, and based on my experiences in attempting to administer our system of points of difference over the last year, I am promulgating the following, effectively immediately:

1) For the purposes of demotion, the "categories of difference" are defined to be the six areas of "major points of difference" enumerated in section XII.A of the Rules for Submissions. In particular, except where special provisions have been made (as in the case of the outline rule), tincture of field is a separate category from tincture of charges. However desirable the combination of the two might seem to be, it interferes with the rest of the rules.

2) It is my judgement that the amount of difference one may obtain by changing a single group of secondary to tertiary charges needs to be limited. Straight demotion complicates matters, and interferes with the rest of the rules. A better approach, I think, it to impose a ceiling:

a) Changes to a single group of secondary charges are worth at most a major and a minor point. (This ruling is already in effect, and has been for several months.)

b) Changes to a single group of tertiary charges are worth at most a major point of difference.

Please note that these apply to "a group of charges," not "a group of identical charges."

3) In the interest of encouraging simpler heraldry, I am imposing no ceiling on the amount of difference that may be obtained by modifying a single group of primary charges. I'm not convinced this is the best solution, but if a problem arises, it can always be dealt with under the visual conflict rule.

4) Crescent Herald has pointed out that the rules do not define what is meant by "a group of charges." I found the concept difficult to put into words, but I agree that some form of definition should be attempted. I am therefore offering the following. Please note that this definition is non­restrictive; i.e., it is subject to revision if we find problems in it.

A group of charges is one or more charges, not necessarily of the same type, that serve as a single unit or element in an heraldic design. The following are considered to be groups:

a) The primary charge or charges.

b) One or more charges accompanying (adjacent to, surmounting, or arranged symmetrically about) an ordinary or other primary charge.

c) A secondary charge that is obviously not associated with other secondary charges, such as a bordure, a chief, an orle, or a brisure.

d) The charges on another charge, or a semy.

Observations

The following are observations that occurred to me in the course of reviewing the rules on difference. They are presented here, more or less without comment, as food for thought.

1) Eyeball test: RFS XII.8 states that "In those cases where the blazons of two devices or badges are technically sufficiently different (they have the correct number of points of difference) but the emblazons are visually too similar, the visual test shall take precedence and the two will be in conflict." The test works one way only, to recognize conflict; not to establish difference.

2) Question of demoting type: "Azure, a chevron between three roundels Or" technically conflicts with "Azure, a fess between three wyverns passant Or," because the second change in type is demoted from a major to a minor point. This could be dealt with by extending the complete­difference­of­charge rule, or by treating difference of type separately from the other categories of difference.

3) The complete­difference­of­charge rule should accommodate more than three charges. "Vert, six mullets Or" should not conflict with "Vert, six annulets Or."

4) Cascading demotion: The Rules do not make clear whether points of difference may be multiply demoted: do four major­point changes become a major, a minor, and two negligible points, or a major and three minor points?

5) We fail to recognize significant heraldic differences in some instances, while at the same time according difference where none exists.

6) One of the points of contention among members of the College of Arms is that we allow more than a single point of difference for changing the members of a group of charges (especially secondary charges). This is supported by Rule XIII.4, which limits itself to groups of identical charges.

7) Another point of contention is our practice of allowing more than a single point of difference for addition of a charged chief or bordure. We are actually schizophrenic about this, in that a bordure semy is worth less than a "charged" bordure, an exception that is inconsistent with the rest of the rules.

8) The changes in the demotion of points of difference outlined in this Appendix obviate the need for some of the borderline applications of the point­and­a­half rule outlined in my LOAR of 9 June 1985.