For the September 2001 meetings, printed 12 December 2001
To all the College of Arms from François Laurel, Zenobia Wreath, and Mari Pelican, health and good friendship.
NOTE: due to an early February meeting, comments on comments for October 2001 Letters of Intent are due one week earlier than normal: Thursday, January 24, 2002.
The September meetings were held on Saturday, September 15, 2001 (Pelican) and Saturday, September 22, 2001 (Wreath), and considered the following letters of intent: Atenveldt (May 1), Middle (May 5), Ansteorra (May 10), Caid (May 11), Æthelmearc (May 15), Caid (May 15), Lochac (May 16), Calontir (May 25), and An Tir (May 30).
The October meetings were held Saturday, October 13, 2001, and considered the following letters of intent: Drachenwald (May 14) and Atlantia (May 20) (both delayed due to late receipt of paperwork), Atenveldt (June 1), Æthelmearc (labeled at the top "January 27", redated to June 10), Ansteorra (June 14), Artemisia (June 14), Drachenwald (June 14), Middle (June 14), Atlantia (June 16), Lochac (June 17), Outlands (June 21), An Tir (June 27), Trimaris (June 28), and Meridies (June 30).
The November meetings were held on Saturday, November 10, 2001 (Pelican), and Sunday, November 11, 2001 (Wreath), and considered these Letters of Intent dated in July 2001: Atenveldt (July 1), Trimaris (July 7), Middle (July 7), Artemisia (July 7), Caid (July 10), East (July 13), Æthelmearc (July 15), Lochac (July 16), Atlantia (July 17), Calontir (July 18), Ansteorra (July 18), An Tir (July 27), West (July 29), Outlands (July 30), and Meridies (July 31). For administrative reasons, Drachenwald (July 19) was postponed one month.
The December meetings are scheduled for Saturday, December 15, 2001 (Pelican), and Saturday, December 8, 2001 (Wreath), and will consider these Letters of Intent dated in July and August 2001: Drachenwald (July 19, which was postponed), Atenveldt (August 1), Caid (August 9), Middle (August 5), East (August 15), Atlantia (August 16, 25, and 27), Lochac (August 18), Ansteorra (August 25), Drachenwald (August 26), Artemisia (August 28), An Tir (August 29), Meridies (August 31), and Ealdormere (August).
The January meetings are scheduled for Saturday, January 19, 2002, and will consider these Letters of Intent dated in September 2001: Atenveldt (September 1), Middle (September 9), Ansteorra (September 16), Atlantia (September 17), Drachenwald (September 17), West (September 17), Lochac (September 18), Caid (September 22), An Tir (September 27), Outlands (September 28), Meridies (September 30). For administrative reasons, the Trimaris (September 28) LoI is not yet scheduled. Calontir (September 28) was postmarked October 2, so it will be postponed until the February meeting. Original commentary on these LoIs must have been in the College's hands no later than November 30, 2001. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in the College's hands no later than December 31, 2001.
The February meetings are scheduled for Saturday, February 9, and will consider these Letters of Intent dated in October 2001: Calontir (September 28, postponed due to postmark), Æthelmearc (October 15), Lochac (October 20), Caid (October 20), Ansteorra (October 20), Drachenwald (October 21), An Tir (October 26), Calontir (October 30), Meridies (October 31). For administrative reasons, the following letters are not yet scheduled: Atenveldt (October 1), Middle (October 12), Outlands (October 17), and Atlantia (October 22). Original commentary on these LoIs must be in the College's hands no later than December 30, 2001. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in the College's hands no later than JANUARY 24, 2002.
The March meetings are tentatively scheduled for Saturday, March 16 (Wreath, with a March 24 road show at the An Tir Heraldic Symposium) and Saturday, March 23 (Pelican, plus an earlier Pelican road show at Gulf Wars), and will consider the Letters of Intent dated in November 2001.Original commentary on these LoIs must be in the College's hands no later than January 31, 2002. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in the College's hands no later than February 28, 2002.
Not all Letters of Intent may be considered when they are originally scheduled on this cover letter. The date of mailing of the LoI, date of receipt of the Laurel packet, or other factors may delay consideration of certain Letters of Intent. Additionally, some letters of intent received may not have been scheduled because the administrative requirements (receipt of the forms packet, receipt of the necessary fees, etc.) have not yet been met.
REMINDER: Until all administrative requirements are met, the letter may not be scheduled.
To paraphrase a chili commercial, "When was the last time you read the Administrative Handbook of the College of Arms? Well, that's too long." I have been getting many questions from heralds who have obviously not looked at the handbook in a while, because the answers they seek are contained in that publication. If you are unsure of the requirements of your office, what should be included in your comments, or how to submit an appeal, check the handbook first.
The handbook will soon be updated, but until that time, the version on the Web page or available from Free Trumpet Press West is valid and in force. An updated copy of the handbook, including the changes published in LoAR cover letters, is being sent to the Board for approval at the January meeting.
Everyone involved with consulting and submissions processing in the College needs to read the entire Letter of Acceptances and Returns. If you are just reading the cover letter, then you are getting only a piece of the information contained in the LoAR. The cover letter contains the "big ticket" items, the decisions and policies that require special attention. There is a great deal of information contained in the discussions accompanying the decisions in the body of the letter. A great many of the precedents were never addressed in a cover letter, but only in the discussions.
As time has passed, the number of people included on the roster and mailing list has increased. This is a good thing and indicates that our organization is growing. The downside of this growth is that the cost to the College of Arms for the production and distribution of the LoAR and for the individual commenters distributing comments to the mailing list is increasing as well. It is time to review these lists and enforce the published policies regarding inclusion in the lists.
The Principal Heralds are to review the roster entries listed in their kingdom and let me know which entries no longer require the LoAR for the duties they are currently performing. For each listed herald, please provide a short job title for the function they are performing. Include this information in your Annual Report due in February 2002. The LoARs will continue to be available by subscription (info below) or on the Laurel Web site for no cost.
The mailing list has specific requirements outlined in the Administrative Handbook that must be met to remain on the list. If you are unsure of the requirements I recommend you review the appropriate section of the Administrative Handbook. The cost of producing and distributing letters of comment falls on the individual kingdoms or commenters. It is in all our interests that the mailing list be limited to those who meet the requirements. I am monitoring the comments and mailing list members for compliance with the requirements. Starting in March 2002, I will be removing people who are not meeting the requirements.
The name Allasan has been documented as a Scottish Gaelic feminine name using the article "Some Scottish Gaelic Feminine Names" at http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/arval/scotgaelfem/. This article has been updated and the name Allasan removed with the comment:
We had previously listed Allasan here; after further research, we have concluded that it was a mistake to include it. We have found no convincing evidence that this name was used in Scottish Gaelic before modern times.
The problem here is that Allasan is a modern Gaelic name. Evidence for Scottish Gaelic names in period is very hard to find, as most documents were written in Scots or Latin. The Academy of Saint Gabriel article in question is a compilation of information from many sources, to try to determine what feminine given names were in use in Scottish Gaelic in period by examining Gaels whose names were recorded in Latin, Scots, et cetera. Recently, the Academy re-reviewed the evidence that led to the inclusion of Allasan in that article and came to the conclusion that there is no convincing evidence that a form of Alison was used by Scottish Gaels in any spelling during our period.
Given this new information, barring other documentation of the spelling Allasan as a period name, we will discontinue registering this name beginning at the decision meeting in April of 2002. This does not affect the registerability of the Scots form Alesone or other documented forms of Alison in other languages.
There seems to be some confusion about the current policy regarding the registerability of saints' names. Here is a summary of current policy and recent pertinent precedent.
The theory behind the registerability of saints' names has been that parents could use the given name of a saint when choosing a given name for their child. However, this practice was not the case in all cultures. For example, in medieval Ireland, the names of many saints were considered too holy to use by regular people. Instead of naming a child Míchél ("Michael"), parents would name their sons Máel Míchél ("devotee [of Saint] Michael") or Gilla Míchél ("servant [of Saint] Michael") if they wanted their child's name to refer to the saint.
Regardless, it seems unreasonable at this time to change our current policy by limiting the registerability of saints' names only to cultures where this practice can be solidly documentable. Therefore, if a saint can be documented to period, their given name may be used as a given name in an SCA name.
However, the form that the saint's name takes in the submitted name is subject to the standard rules and precedents, including those regarding weirdnesses that were set down in the August 1999 cover letter. This policy is in line with previous limitations put on the registerability of saints' names. For example:
Unfortunately for the submitter, mixed Irish / Spanish names are not allowed (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR of July 1997). As Teresa was not used in the British Isles until after our period we have to return this. [Teresa Callan, 04/01, R-Atenveldt]
Teresa was considered a Spanish name in this ruling since Saint Teresa was a 16th C Spanish saint whose cult did not spread to the British Isles until after period. Therefore, as Saint Teresa was not known in Ireland in period, Irish parents could not have named daughters for her and the name had to be considered Spanish in this submission. Since Teresa is the name of a saint, it was registerable. But that registerability did not override the ban on mixing Irish and Spanish.
Some combinations are clearly not likely. Wickenden (3rd ed., p. 304) gives Sadok (a masculine name) as the name of a 4th C Russian saint-martyr. Though Sadok is a saint, no evidence exists that he was known in Westen Euroope, so it does not seem reasonable that Welsh parents would know about this saint and choose to name their son after him. So the name Sadok ap Rhys would not be registerable because Russian and Welsh are not a registerable combination.
Some combinations are not so clear-cut. Saint Bernard (c. 1090-1153) was a Cistercian monk and abbot of Clairvaux. Eventually the order spread to England, Wales, Ireland, and throughout Europe (Farmer, The Oxford Dictionary of Saints, 3rd ed., pp. 51-52 s.n. Bernard). As such, Saint Bernard is referred to in documents written in many languages.
In Italian, he is referred to as San Bernardo (De Felice, Dizionario dei Nomi Italiani, pp. 89-90 s.n. Bernardo).
In English, he is referred to as Saint Bernard (Withycombe, p. 48 s.n. Bernard).
In Irish Gaelic, he is referred to as San Bernartt ("Annals of the Four Masters, vol. 5", entry M1584--the character e is used to indicate a "long e" in some Gaelic scripts, rendered "ea" in English characters).
No evidence has yet been found that the name Bernard (in any form) was adopted as an Irish Gaelic given name in period. Regardless, the form Bearnartt would be registerable since it is a documented reference to Saint Bernard. Therefore Bearnartt Ó Domhnaill would be registerable with no weirdnesses, as both the given name and the byname are documented as Irish Gaelic.
Bernard Ó Domhnaill would be registerable, since Bernard is documented as English and Ó Domhnaill is documented as Irish Gaelic. An English and Irish Gaelic combination is registerable with one weirdness.
Bernardo Ó Domhnaill would not be registerable even though Bernardo is documentable as a saint's name. The reason is that the form Bernardo is documented as Italian and Ó Domhnaill is Irish Gaelic. An Italian and Irish Gaelic combination is not registerable.
So, in summary, given names which can be documented as the given name of a saint may be registered as a given name. The use of a name documented as a saint's name carries no weirdness in and of itself. The only weirdnesses that derive from using that name come from the lingual mix of the submitted form of the saint's name with the rest of the submitted name.
Over time there have been conflicting precedents regarding which particles in Gaelic, Anglicized Irish, and Scots forms conflict with each other.
Some of the potential conflicts can be resolved by step-by-step application of the Rules for Submission. Other potential conflicts are not so clear-cut and need to be discussed by the College of Arms. The policy we adopt regarding these potential conflicts needs to be clearly understandable and predictable so that commenters and submissions heralds can conflict-check submissions more easily.
This topic will be ruled on at the April Pelican meeting. Original commentary on this issue must be in the College's hands no later than February 28, 2002. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in the College's hands no later than March 31, 2002.
In the interim, we will continue following the precedents as they now stand.
Basic Points
Per RfS V.1.a, V.1.a.ii, and V.1.a.ii.(a), to be clear of each other, two bynames of relationship must:
(1) look and sound significantly different
AND
(2) indicate significantly different relationships
RfS V.1.a.ii says, "In general the addition or deletion of prepositions and articles is not significant". However, RfS V.1.a.ii.(a) uses the example "Smythwyf is significantly different from Smithson because the nature of the relationship is significantly changed", which indicates that particles of relationship are considered significant. If they were not, we would be comparing Smith to Smith, which would certainly conflict. Therefore, relationship particles may contribute to look and sound differences.
Determining whether the relationships indicated by two bynames are significantly different is done by looking at the original meanings of the names. An example in English is to compare John Richards and John Richardson. In late period England, both Richards and Richardson are inherited surnames not literal patronymic bynames. However, both Richards and Richardson originally meant "Richard's son". Therefore, they conflict.
Example 1: Ó Domhnaill vs. O'Donnell
Does the Gaelic byname Ó Domhnaill conflict with the Anglicized Irish byname O'Donnell? To find out, we look at the first test: do they "look and sound significantly different"? Since they neither look significantly different nor sound significantly different, they conflict.
Example 2: M'Conill vs. MakDonald
Do the Scots bynames M'Conill and MakDonald conflict? There would likely be debate about whether they look and sound significantly different. But it wouldn't matter since they don't pass the requirement that they "indicate significantly different relationships" because they are both variants of MacDonald and so the original meaning for both was "son [of] Donald".
Example 3: inghean Domhnaill vs. neyn Donald
Does the Gaelic byname inghean Domhnaill conflict with the Scots byname neyn Donald? The particle inghean looks significantly different from the particle neyn, but they are pronounced similarly. They also both mean "daughter [of] Donald". Therefore, they fail both the "look and sound significantly different" test and the "indicate significantly different relationships" test and so conflict.
Example 4: inghean mhic Dhomhnaill vs. neyn vic Conill
Does the Gaelic byname inghean mhic Dhomnaill conflict with the Scots byname neyn vic Conill? The bynames look significantly different but they sound similar. They also both mean "daughter [of the] son [of] Donald". Therefore, they fail both the "look and sound significantly different" test and the "indicate significantly different relationships" test and so conflict.
Example 5: inghean mhic Dhomhnaill vs. nic Conill
Does the Gaelic byname inghean mhic Dhomhnaill conflict with the Scots byname nic Conill? The bynames look significantly different. They sound somewhat different depending upon whether inghean is being pronounced with an earlier or later pronunciation. But the sound doesn't matters since nic is a Scots rendering of inghean mhic. Therefore both inghean mhic Dhomhnaill and nic Conill mean "daughter [of the] son [of] Donald". Therefore, they do not pass the "indicate significantly different relationships" test and so conflict.
Question 1: Mac Domhnaill vs. Ó Domhnaill
Do the Gaelic bynames Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill conflict? The question of whether they "look and sound significantly different" really needs to be discussed separately in this case from the issue of whether the two bynames "indicate significantly different relationships".
Regarding whether they "look and sound significantly different": Mac and Ó look and sound significantly different, but do they contribute enough difference to make Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill look and sound significantly different? Significant difference in look and sound of one syllable has traditionally been enough to clear two names. For example, Conor MacNeil was ruled close to but clear of Conn MacNeill in 01/96. However, Conchobhar Ó Faoláin was ruled to be in conflict with Conchobar mac Fáeláin in 07/95 because "the change from mac to Ó does not significantly change the sound of the byname or the nature of the relationship". Ignoring the relationship issue for the moment, this ruling indicates that the difference between Mac and Ó is not enough to prevent an auditory conflict. On the other hand, the issue of sound and appearance has not been addressed in more recent rulings (both acceptances and returns) regarding possible conflicts between Mac and Ó bynames.
Regarding whether these two bynames "indicate significantly different relationships", the original meaning of Mac Domhnaill was "son [of] Donald". The original meaning of Ó Domhnaill was "grandson [of] Donald". These are significantly different relationships and would clear the "indicate significantly different relationships" test if these were the only possible interpretations of these bynames.
Over time the issue of bynames being used to indicate clan affiliation has come up. By the end of period, Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill were being used as bynames indicating clan affiliation in Ireland. But at this time, they were inherited and the particles were significant. The Mac Domhnaill family is different from the Ó Domhnaill family. One viewpoint says that the two bynames should conflict since they both indicate descent from a person named Domhnall. A different viewpoint says that they should not conflict since the two bynames are not interchangeable and Mac Domhnaill really indicates descent from someone who was a "son [of] Donald" and Ó Domhnaill indicates descent from a "grandson [of] Donald".
If we decide that Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill should conflict because they both indicate descent from the same eponymous ancestor, then that restriction will need to be applied to bynames in other languages as well. For example, Reaney & Wilson (p. 127 s.n. Daughters) date Richard Wrightdoghter to 1379 and (p. 505 s.n. Wrightson) date Robert Wryghtson to 1379. The example of Richard Wrightdoghter indicates that -doghter names could (albeit rarely) become inherited. At a point where Wrightdoghter and Wryghtson were inherited surnames, they both indicate descent from a person who was a wright. Therefore, they would conflict if we were to apply the "indicates descent from same ancestor" standard. Additionally, the Russian Alekseevich and the English Saunderson would conflict as they both indicate descent from someone named Alexander. In both the "wright" example and the "Alexander" example, we would be calling conflict between bynames that would not have been used interchangeably as they had become distinctly different inherited surnames by the time the "descent from" issue applies. (At the point when the Russian byname could only have been literal, Russia and England had no contact, so the literal bynames could not have been used interchangeably.) For Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill as well, we would be calling conflict between two names that could not have been used interchangeably when they were used literally and which were distinctly separate inherited surnames by the time the "descent from" issue applies.
So, should Mac Domhnaill and Ó Domhnaill conflict? And if so, should they conflict via the "look and sound significantly different" test or by the "indicate significantly different relationships" test?
Question 2: inghean uí Dhomhnaill vs. O Donnell
Does the Gaelic byname inghean uí Dhomhnaill conflict with the Anglized Irish byname O Donnell? They look and sound significantly different. The byname inghean uí Dhomnhaill means "daughter [of the] grandson [of] Donald". The byname O Donnell means "grandson [of] Donald". Therefore they indicate different relationships. But are the relationships significantly different? This is an important question since a woman named Caitríona inghean uí Dhomhnaill could have been recorded in Anglicized Irish documents as Catherine O Donnell.
Question 3: inghean uí Dhomhnaill vs. Donnell
Does the Gaelic byname inghean uí Dhomhnaill conflict with the Anglized Irish byname Donnell? They look and sound significantly different. But do they indicate significantly different relationships? The byname inghean uí Dhomnhaill means "daughter [of the] grandson [of] Donald". What would we interpret the meaning of the byname Donnell to be? As an example, John O'Donovan (Annals of Ireland, by the Four Masters, vol. 6, p. 2446) contains a transcription of the will of "Mr. Daniell O'Donovane",dated August 14, 1629. Among the people in this will is "Ellen Donovane, the daughter of Daniell O'Donovane, my sonne and heire". So, the byname Donovane in Ellen's name comes about because her father had the byname O'Donovane. If Ellen was referred to in Gaelic, her name would likely be Oilén inghean Daniél uí Dhonnabháin or Oilén inghean uí Dhonnabháin. Oilén inghean uí Dhonnabháin and Ellen Donovane certainly look and sound significantly different. But do they differ in meaning? It comes down to the question of what Donovane means in Anglicized Irish. Also mentioned in this will is, "my maried wife, Juan Cartie, alias Donovane", so we have an example of Donovane being used in a wife's name to refer to her husband's byname.
Question 4: inghean Domhnaill vs. McConill, & M'Conill
Does the Gaelic byname inghean Domhnaill conflict with the Scots byname M'Conill? The bynames look and sound significantly different. The byname inghean Domhnaill means "daughter [of] Donald" and they byname McConill means "son [of] Donald", so the two indicate significantly different relationships. Traditionally we have called these forms in conflict under the assumption that a woman with the byname inghean Domhnaill would be referred to in Scots records using forms of MacDonald, including McConill, etc. Is this a reasonable assumption? And if so, should these bynames conflict?
Question 5: inghean mhic Dhomhnaill vs. VcConill, McConill, & M'Conill
Does the Gaelic byname inghean mhic Dhomhnaill conflict with the Scots byname M'Conill? The bynames both look and sound significantly different. The meaning of inghean mhic Dhomhnaill is "daughter [of the] son [of] Donald". The meaning of M'Conill is "son [of] Donald". Therefore, they pass both the "look and sound significantly different" test and the "indicate significantly different relationships" test. However, a woman named Caitríona inghean mhic Dhomhnaill could have been recorded in Scots language records as Catrina Vc Conill, Catrina McConill, or Catrina M'Conill. Each of these bynames looks and sounds significantly different from inghean mhic Dhomhnaill. So the only conflict could be via meaning. VcConill is a Scots rendering of mhic Dhomhnail, so it means "son [of] Donald". McConill and M'Conill also mean "son [of] Donald". So the meaning is not the same though they could have been used to refer to the same person in different documents. So, should they conflict or not?
Two examples from Black will help us illustrate this issue. Black (p. 518 s.n. MacIntaylor) says, "James McIntailyeour and Janet McIntailyeour, his sister, were tenants of Balnacochane, 1539 (ER., XVII, p. 658)." We do not have any indication in this entry whether James & Janet's father was a tailor or if his byname was McIntailyeour. In this Scots instance, the same Mac- style byname in the same form is being used for both brother and sister.
Black (p. 555 s.n. MacPatrick) says, "Affrica Makpatrik, daughter and heiress of Duncan Makpatric, resigned the three mark lands of old extent of Killenane, 1525 (RMS., III)." In this case, Affrica"s byname is obviously taken from her father's byname. Her full name in Gaelic would be Affraic inghean Donnchaidh Mhic Phádraig. So, would Affrica Makpatrik conflict with Affraic inghean Mhic Phádraig?
Question 6: inghean mhic Dhomhnaill vs. Donald
Does the Gaelic byname inghean mhic Dhomhnaill conflict with the Scots or Anglicized Irish byname Donald? The two look and sound significantly different. They may or may indicate significantly different relationships. inghean mhic Dhomhnaill means "daughter [of the] son [of] Donald". How would we interpret the meaning of Donald? An example relevent to this issue is found in the 1629 will in O'Donovan mentioned under Question 2 above. Among the people mentioned in this will is "Ellen Carthie, the daughter of Florence Mc Carthie, of Beannduffe". In Gaelic, Ellen's name would be be Oilén inghean Fhlorens Mhic Carthaigh. (Note: Florence is being used as a masculine given name in this instance.) So, would Ellen Carthie conflict with Oilén inghean Mhic Carthaigh?
Question 7: inghean mhic Dhomhnaill vs. Donaldson
Does the Gaelic byname inghean mhic Dhomhnaill conflict with the Scots byname Donaldson? The two look and sound significantly different. They also indicate significantly different relationships. The byname inghean mhic Dhomhnaill means "daughter [of the] son [of] Donald". The byname Donaldson means "Donald's son". I do not know of any cases of a woman being called inghean mhic in a Gaelic reference and -son in a Scots reference. Does any member of the College know of one? Lacking such evidence of interchangebility, it would seem that these bynames should be clear. What are your opinions?
Sorting Particles
One of the difficulties in determining whether particles conflict is knowing what forms names took during period. Heralds helping submitters with their names should not have to become experts in Gaelic to be able to tell if two names conflict or not. Towards this goal, I've compiled a preliminary table below where the various particles used in Gaelic, Scots, and Anglicized Irish are all sorted by meaning and language. The list of particles below currently only includes forms that I've encountered in sources where we can identify the context and so determine the meaning of the byname. I would ask the College to provide feedback on the usefulness of this table as well as its contents: do other particles need to be added, are some listed in incorrect locations, should others be listed, etc.? Also, is this table generally useful or does it need to be reorganized in a different structure?
There are instances of women's bynames in Scots using Mac-, Mak-, Mc, Mc-, and M'- and instances in Anglicized Irish using Mc- and no particle. Since most of these instances seem to involve a woman being recorded under the same surname as a parent or brother (when we can identify context at all), I did not list them in this table. Where these should be listed for conflict purposes will be determined when we have a consensus regarding the answers to some of the questions listed above. (Note: Anglicized Irish or Scots particles such as Mc-, M', N', etc., are registerable because they are viewed as variant spellings due to phonetic rendering of the Gaelic forms rather than as abbreviations.)
Also, when a multi-generation patronymic is used in Scots (for example: Christian Nichean vic Couil vic Gillespie [in Cornelian's Calder article listed below], Finlay McDonchy VcKerris [Black, p. 486 s.n. MacDonachie]), particles take the forms Vik-, vic, and Vc-. These derive from mhic, the lenited genitive form of mac. Should mhic get its own column in the table?
The dash notation below indicates that the particle is conjoined with the patronym. For example, Mac- would become MacDonald, while Mac would become Mac Donald.
|
'daughter' |
'son' |
'daughter [of a] son [of]' |
'grandson' |
'daughter [of a] grandson/ male descendant [of]' |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Irish Gaelic |
ingen |
mac |
ingen
mec |
ua |
ingen
uí |
|
Scottish Gaelic |
inghean |
mac |
inghean mhic |
[not used] |
[not used] |
|
Anglicized Irish |
ne |
mac |
|
O'- |
|
|
Scots |
En- |
Mac |
N'- |
[not used] |
[not used] |
Note: the particles ní and nighean are not included in this table since they are post-period. ní is a post-period Gaelic form of inghean uí and nighean is a post period Scottish Gaelic form of inghean. The particle nic is a reasonable variant of the documented Scots forms Nic-, Nick, and Nyk, but I do not know of an actual dated example of nic at this time and so have not listed it.
* These forms come from the article "Fourteenth to Sixteenth Century Irish Names and Naming Practices" by Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/tangwystyl/lateirish/). The Red Book of Ormond, where these two examples come from, was written in Latin by an English speaker. However, given the rarity of easily accessible Anglicized Irish sources, these two examples (which appear in this Latin document) seem reasonable for an Anglicized one as well, so I have included them in this table for the College to review.
The Scots forms listed here are taken mainly from entries in Black's Surnames of Scotland and from names listed in Margaret Makafee's article Names from Papers Relating to the Murder of the Laird of Calder (http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~grm/calder.html).
The Anglicized Irish forms are taken mainly from the will of "Mr. Daniell O'Donovane", dated to 14 Aug 1629 on p. 2446 of John O'Donovan, Annals of Ireland, by the Four Masters, Volume 6 (New York, N.Y.: AMS Press, 1966).
Enclosed is a Laurel Letter of Intent for "Wreath Sovereign of Arms", the title for use by Dame Zenobia Naphtali, who is making the rulings on armory submissions. It was erroneously omitted from the August LoAR. (Irreverent comment: I had promised it in a section labelled "Good Intent". We know what road is paved with that. Hubris, nemesis.)
Not many commenters have been commenting on Laurel pends or cover letter discussion issues. As an experiment, we are putting them on something we call a Laurel Letter of Pend and Discussion, enclosed. We hope that people will remove the LoPaD from the LoAR packet, drop it on their regular piles of LoIs, and comment on it like an LoI.
If anyone has other ideas on how to increase commentary on Laurel items, please let Laurel staff know.
It is important to check and update your mailing lists with each new roster and with roster updates. Lindorm, who stepped down as Schwarzdrachen half a year ago, says that he is still getting mailing list mail. If people are not updating mailing lists, it means that there are probably people who are on the mailing list but who are not getting all the mail due them.
Juliana de Luna, who was acting Garnet Herald (submissions herald for Æthelmearc), is no longer acting. She now has the office on a permanent basis.
The following Atlantian Heralds have each produced a timely letter of comment, so they are being added to the roster and mailing list:
Having produced a timely letter of comment, Magnus Orle is added to the roster and mailing list: Orle Herald (Ansteorra): Magnus von Lubeck (Doug Bell); 705 Cherry St, College Station, TX 77840-1405; e-mail: magnus77840@hotmail.com.
There were a couple of omissions from the latest printed roster entry for Triton Principal Herald, Michael Batcok: his phone number is 757-488-3597, and his e-mail address is herald@atlantia.sca.org
Gordian Knot Herald (Atlantia), Eldred AElfwald (J. T. Thorpe), has stepped down as baronial herald and the title remains with the barony. Eldred's designation should be changed to "Herald-at-Large."
Escutcheon Herald (Middle), Paul Wickenden of Thanet, has an updated e-mail address: goldschp@yahoo.com.
David of Moffat's information was updated in an Elsbeth cover letter, but the change didn't make it into the last printed roster and mailing list. Electrum Herald (An Tir): David of Moffat (David Hunter of Montlaw); 1703 Crosby Ct SW, Tumwater, WA 98512-8216; 360-705-0550, amoffatamoffat@juno.com (email commentary NOT preferred).
For all Letters of Intent, Comment, Response, Correction, &c, send one paper copy to each of Laurel PKoA and Wreath QoA at their mailing addresses as shown on the College of Arms Mailing List.
Send Laurel office copies of all submissions-related paper, including
to Kathleen M. O'Brien, 7323 Potters Trl, Austin, TX 78729-7777.
Send Laurel office copies of all submissions-related electronic files to submissions@sca.org. This includes electronic copies of LoIs, LoCs, LoRs, &c.
Send roster changes and corrections to Lord Symond Bayard le Gris, Bruce R. Nevins, 2527 E. 3rd St., Tucson, AZ, 85716-4114, (520) 795-6000, (520) 795-0158 (fax), bnevins@nexiliscom.com. College of Arms members can also request a copy of the current roster from Symond.
For subscriptions to the paper copy of the LoAR, please contact Symond, above. The cost for an LoAR subscription is $25 a year. Please make all checks or money orders payable to "SCA Inc.—College of Arms". For subscriptions to the electronic copy of the LoAR, please contact Laurel at herald@sca.org. The electronic copy is available free of charge.
For all administrative matters, or for questions about whom to send to, please contact Laurel Principal King of Arms, whose contact information heads this letter.
Pray know that I remain
In service
François la Flamme
Laurel Principal King of
Arms
Created at 2001-12-30T23:23:45