). Unfortunately, this leaves one insurmountable problem: Cámlug is a man's name
and as such is incompatible with the feminine patronymic. Caemlug Cennfhaelad mac Fhaelain
Abann na Sailech is a registerable masculine name; but a gender change on top of the spelling
changes necessary to make the name match her sister's is much more of a change than we are
willing to make without consulting her, so we are forced to return the name.
The accompanying armory was registered under the holding name Jayna of
Eleanor Du Pré Name.
Since there was no name form in the packet, we are forced to return this name. It is registerable in
this form as a French name, but Eleanor du Pre would much better suit her stated intention to
have an Anglo-Norman name. Another Anglo-Norman form of the byname is de la Preye
The accompanying armory was registered under the holding name Eleanor of
Finn Mathie. Household name and badge for Battel of the Fang. Per bend
gules and sable, a pile between two piles inverted argent.
There was general agreement among those commenting that this was not a reasonable period name
for a warband or any other type of household. As Ensign said, Why would a medieval military
company be known as a canine tooth? And in fact this meaning of fang seems to be rather late.
According to the OED, the early meaning is that which is caught or taken . Battle in the intended
sense seems primarily to refer to a unit in a formation, or to a formation or array itself. At an
early date, therefore, a battel of the fang might be a formation of captives, or perhaps an orderly
display of booty!
The badge lacks the balance that is normally expected for period style, giving this a very
modern appearance. Though each of the individual elements of the design are period, their
combination in this way is far more reminiscent of 20th Century design than period armory. (See
RfS VIII.4.d. "Armory may not use obtrusively modern designs.")
Geoffrey Linyiue. Name.
Because there was no form in the packet, we have had to return this excellent name. (For those
who are curious: the byname has three syllables, and the u represents the sound of v.)
The accompanying armory was registered under the holding name Geoffrey of
Ghislaine d'Auxerre. Badge. (Fieldless) A fox rampant contourny sable marked
argent ravishing a goose argent.
Conflict with Conrad Stronghand, Or, a wolf salient to sinister sable maintaining a rose
gules barbed and seeded proper. There is a CD for fieldless v. fielded, but nothing for the
type of canid, for the difference between rampant and salient, or for the type and/or tincture of the
Leximus Taurus. Device. Sable, a fess argent, a triangle throughout
counterchanged between three columns argent.
The badge lacks the visual cohesiveness that is normally expected for period style, giving this a very
modern appearance. (See RfS VIII.4. "Armory may not use obtrusively modern designs.") It also
has a bit of a "field/ground" confusion: Is the field sable with an argent triangle throughout, or is
the field argent, chapéand a base sable? (See RfS VIII.3. "Elements must be used in a
design so as to preserve their individual identifiability." and VII.7.a. "Elements must be recognizable
solely from their appearance.") Though each of the individual elements of the design are period,
the way in which they are combined here is far more reminiscent of 20th Century design and the
geometrics of "op-art" than period armory. (RfS VIII.4.d. "Generally modern style in the depiction
of individual elements or the total design may not be registered. Artistic techniques and styles
developed after 1600 should not be used in Society armory. Charges may not be used to create
abstract or op-art designs....")
Sigtryggr inn Tryggvi. Device. Sable, a lion's head cabossed between three
Conflict with Miranda Flamekeeper, Sable, a lion's head cabossed between three flames of
fire Or. There is only one CD, for the change in type of the secondary
Alexandria Schaler. Name.
Although the name is fine, there was no form in the packet, so we must return it. The submitter
actually desired Schalit, an acronym formed from a Hebrew blessing. It appears that some
surnames may have been formed in this way in period, though most examples are of much later
date. However, the period examples mentioned by Kaganoff in A Dictionary of Jewish
Names and their History (p. 18) fall into three categories: honorific names conferred on
great masters of learning, abbreviations from places of origin, and abbreviations commemorating
some special event in the life of the family. Schalit does not appear to fit any of these categories,
and we would prefer to see better evidence before registering it.
Caitlin Angharad FitzHenry. Badge. [Fieldless] Three demi-arrows issuant
from a mascle gules.
The blazon is sufficiently ambiguous that reconstructibility may be a significant problem. (See RfS
VII.7.b.) It is not intuitively obvious that a "demi-arrow" would be the fletched half (as opposed to
the end with the arrowhead) nor that the arrows would be issuant to chief. (Though the latter is
fixed by simply blazoning them as issuant to chief from the outer edge of the mascle.) Nor has a
"demi-arrow" been used before in SCA heraldry (except, arguably, in the context of a quiver
There was considerable feeling among those attending the Laurel meeting regarding the
overall style of the badge, which was felt to be more like a modern graphic art design than period-
style heraldry. (See RfS VIII.4.d. "Generally modern style in the depiction of individual elements
or the total design may not be registered. Artistic techniques and styles developed after 1600
should not be used in Society armory. Charges may not be used to create abstract ... designs, or be
patterned after comic book art, fantasy art, pointillism, etc.")
Cordelia MacDougall. Device. Per chevron azure and vert, two broad-arrows
and a semiminim note argent.
The "semiminim note" here is not a period form, but a modern (post-period) one. This one neither
matches the semiminim in the Pictorial Dictionary (a lozenge shape with a vertical line from the
sinister corner; this version has been superseded by newer research) nor the form the newer
research has shown (a lozenge shape with a vertical line from the top corner). As with the various
forms of pens, in SCA heraldry the period form is the one that should be used. (See RfS VII.3.,
"Artifacts that were known in the period and domain of the Society may be registered in armory,
provided they are depicted in their period forms. A pen, for instance, must be depicted as a quill
pen or other period form, not a fountain pen. A wheel must be depicted as a wagon wheel, not a
rubber tire from an automobile.")
Malachi Halfhand. Device. Sable, on a pile inverted argent a Thor's hammer
sable, a chief rayonny argent.
As no forms were included in the Laurel packet, we are having to return this.
Margaret of Enniscorthy. Device. Azure, a fret and on a chief argent three
crosses crosslet fitched sable.
As no forms were included in the Laurel packet, we are having to return this.
Namara abdul Jemeel. Name.
There are several problems with this name. Namara was justified as a feminization of Namir;
period examples of feminizing Arabic masculine names by addition of -a are known, but the change
of the second vowel from i to a is very unlikely. Moreover, examination of the documentation
shows that the name found there is actually al-Namir, an epithet of some kind rather than a given
name. Jemeel appears to be a variant of the name usually transliterated Jamil, meaning "beautiful,
graceful, handsome"; however, it is not one of the traditional attributes of Allah on which names of
the form 'Abd al-X or Abdul-X are based. Finally, Laurel has never seen a cognomen of this type
used by a woman in period.
Susan MacGregor. Badge. Gules, a swan naiant argent.
Conflict with Sheryl of Thespis, Azure, a swan naiant argent crowned Or. There is
one CD for the change of field tincture, but nothing for removing the maintained
Alan atte Highcliffe. Device. Or semy of broadheads inverted gules, a chestnut
Berber sagittary salient contourny proper.
The charge is entirely brown; the term "Berber" was intended to reflect that the human portion is
not "flesh"-colored, but brown. Unfortunately, "Berber" is not a synonym for "brown-skinned"; no
more than "Tuareg" would be a synonym for "blue-skinned". (Indeed, most commenters thought it
referred to the fact that the sagittary had a torse about its head.) Nor does a mythological creature
such as a sagittary fall under the "natural critters brown proper" precedent. As a consequence, we
are forced to return this as being essentially unblazonable.
Anthony Navarre. Device. Sable, a lion passant contourny and a bordure argent
semy of compass stars elongated to base azure.
Conflict with Patri du Chat Gris, Sable, a cat counter-s'elongeant within a bordure
argent. There is only one CD for the addition of the tertiary compass stars. A comparison
of the two emblazons demonstrated the overwhelming similarity of the postures of the two
Robert Fitz Samson. Device. Per pale argent and Or, a chevron embattled
between a fox sejant gules, a demi-eagle reguardant sable, and a fox sejant gules.
The commentary was nearly unanimously uncomfortable with this design. Only one period example
of something similar was found in the arms of Henri Habervile, Azure, in dexter chief a lion
passant guardant and in sinister chief and in base cinquefoils pierced Or, and even that
one had the divergent charge in the more to be expected dexter chief. We need more
documentation of this motif in period before we register it. (See RfS I.1., Comparability. "Usages
documented to have occurred regularly prior to that date within that domain shall be automatically
considered compatible unless they have been specifically declared incompatible.... Usages not so
documented may be defined as compatible by these rules, Laurel precedent, or a policy statement
of the Board of Directors. In all cases, the burden of proving compatibility shall lie on the
individual making the submission or that individual's duly constituted
Sigrid Tomasdottir. Device. Per bend sinister azure and Or, an eye proper and
a Viking helm affronty azure.
There were serious identifiability problems with the charge in base. (See RfS VII.7.a. "Elements
must be recognizable solely from their appearance.") The "viking helm" is not a defined charge,
and was not particularly identifiable as any kind of a helm in this posture. (Except for ear pieces
and "affronty" posture, it is similar, but not sufficiently similar to be so blazoned, to the Norman
helm shown in the Pictorial Dictionary, 2d ed., #377b.)
Stefan Temnaia Palatka. Device. Per fess gyronny gules and Or issuant from
the line of division and Or, a stump snagged proper and in base a rose bendwise sinister gules slipped and
The use of a gyronny half of a field which shares a tincture with the other half of the field, so that
in this case an Or gyron is next to the Or half of the field, makes creates a severe identifiability
problem; it is extremely difficult to figure out just what the field division/s is/are. RfS VII.7.a.
requires that "Elements must be recognizable solely from their appearance." To do so here requires
more time and effort than is consistent with the general principles of armorial
Dragonsspine, Barony of. Name and badge for the Order of the Dragon
Vanguard. Or, three arrows in gyronny points to chief vert and a wingless dragon dormant purpure.
No one was able to suggest a period model for this proposed order name.
The dragon in the badge here is not truly dormant (as it is in their device). Further, the
position of the arrows is not really blazonable (as was demonstrated by the number of variant
blazons suggested in the commentary). As a consequence, there are problems with both
identifiability (see RfS VII.7.a. "Elements must be recognizable solely from their appearance.") and
reconstructibility (see RfS VII.7.b. "Elements must be reconstructible in a recognizable form from a
Eudoxia d'Antioche. Device. Azure, a calypus argent, armed gules maintaining
in both forepaws an arrow inverted, within a bordure flory counter-flory.
Were there not otherwise sufficient reason to return this, it would have had to have been pended to
fill in the missing final tincture, which is Or.
The calypus is found in Brooke-Little's An Heraldic Alphabet, p. 62 under Chatloup, and
in Denys's The Heraldic Imagination, p. 155, both with line drawings. Brooke-Little describes it as
"a monster with a wolf's body, cat's face and goat's horns." The monster here does not match the
description: The head has a very prominent lion's mane, absent from the illustrations in both Denys
and Brooke-Little. Because it does not match the defined form for the monster, it must be returned
per RfS VII.7.a. ("Elements must be recognizable solely from their appearance. Any charge ... used
in Society armory must be identifiable, in and of itself, without labels or excessive
The bordure is not flory counter-flory, but rather has a plain line of division overlain with
fleurs-de-lis alternately facing inwards and outwards counterchanged. "The flory counter-flory line
is not correctly drawn here. While the treatment was applied to ordinaries in period (e.g. the
double tressure of the arms of Scotland), I ve found no period instances of its use as a complex
field division. The closest analogies are the trefly counter-trefly division of von Hillinger and the
per fess indented point flory division of Woodmerton. Both of the models require the flory
counter-flory line to be drawn with demi-fleurs, as shown in [figure]. As drawn in this submission,
the complex line is actually a group of charges, counterchanged across the field division, with half
of them inverted. This is not readily blazonable and doesn't fit the period pattern for complex
lines of division. (The illustration from Fox-Davies's Complete Guide to Heraldry, from
which the submitter s emblazon is taken, is cited in no dated armory." (Bruce Draconarius of
Mistholme, LoAR January 1993, p. 24)
Giulietta da Firenze. Device. Gyronny purpure and argent, a salamander
The charge as emblazoned could be better blazoned as on a flame a lizard gules. However, such a
blazon demonstrates the main problem with the emblazon; the primary charge is a large, irregular
blob, and the identifiability of the creature on the flames is impossible at any distance because both
it and the flames are the same tincture. (See RfS VII.7.a. "Elements must be recognizable solely
from their appearance." and VIII.2. "All armory must have sufficient contrast to allow each element
of the design to be clearly identifiable at a distance.") Were it to be redrawn in a more standard
depiction (with only 1/2 to 1/3 the amount of flame as a number of gouts of flame issuant from
rather than completely surrounding the lizard), it would probably be acceptable.
Return to the LoAR Index Page
Last Updated $Date: 2001/11/15 04:30:56 $ GMT
Copyright © 1997 Society
for Creative Anachronism, Inc.