The enflaming of the heart, as is often the case, is drawn as small gouttes of flame, and is a blazonable detail that is not worth difference. Because the enflaming is considered an artistic detail, it is acceptable to have gules enflaming on a purpure field. The fact that enflaming can be too small to be worth difference, and can then violate the rule of tincture, is mentioned in this ruling from the LoAR of September 1996: "Therefore, the only possible difference could come from the flames. The submitter has drawn the salamander properly with small goutes of flame coming off it. Unfortunately, of the eight goutes of flame, five were solid gules, and three were solid Or. Therefore, if the goutes are significant enough to count for difference, this would have to be returned for breaking tincture [note: the charge was not returned for breaking tincture, it was returned for conflict.]"
Please advise the submitter that enflamed charges usually have the flames issuant from the edge of the charge towards the field, with minimal overlap between the flames and the charge itself. The submitter should not draw so much of the enflaming in the center of the charge.
Submitted as Blanc Gryphon Herald, The OED (s.n. Griffin) dates a number of spellings of this word to period including Griffon (1300s), Grifphon (1386), Griffoun (1400), Greffon (1435), Gryffon (1481), and Griphin. Further information from the herald for whom this title is intended indicates that, based on this information, she would prefer the period spelling Gryffon. We have made this change.
Listed on the LoI as Brénainn mac Giolla Phádraig, this name was submitted as Brénainn Mac Giolla Phádraig. The submitter requested authenticity for Irish and allowed minor changes. As submitted, this name combined the Old Irish Gaelic (c. 700 to c. 900) given name Brénainn with the Early Modern Irish Gaelic (c. 1200 to c. 1700) byname Mac Giolla Phádraig.
Brénainn was the name of a number of prominent saints, including two that lived in the 6th C. Brénainn can also be found listed in various Irish annals as the name of men, most of whom lived in the 6th C, who are not saints.
In Gaelic, unlike in English, children were not given the names of prominent saints, because those names were viewed as too holy to use. Not surprisingly, the name Brénainn fell out of use soon after the 6th C - probably due to the prominence of these saints. Therefore, an authentic name using the given name Brénainn would only have appeared in or near the 6th C.
Giolla Phádraig is an Early Modern Irish Gaelic form. Gilla Pátraic is the corresponding Old Irish Gaelic (c. 700 to c. 900) and Middle Irish Gaelic (c. 900 to c. 1200) form of this name. Gilla Pátraic came into use as a masculine given name in the late 10th C. Therefore, while Brénainn mac Gilla Pátraic is a consistently Old Irish and Middle Irish form of this name, it cannot be made fully authentic because there is no time period where the names Brénainn and Gilla Pátraic were in use such that a man named Gilla Pátraic would have had a son named Brénainn.
We have changed this name to the fully Old Irish and Middle Irish form in order to partially meet the submitter's request for authenticity.
Nice device!
This does not conflict with Rumil Fletcher, Azure, three arrows Or. There is substantial (RfS X.2) difference between arrows and crampons. The charges were treated quite distinctly in period, and there is notable visual difference between them. While it is true that both arrows and crampons are long and pointed at one end, so they have a certain similarity of shape, they are as different in appearance from each other as a bow and a crossbow (ruled substantially different in the LoAR of November 1996), a pretzel and a triquetra (ruled substantially different in the LoAR of April 2001), and a pear and a pinecone (ruled substantially different in the LoAR of May 2001).
Submitted as Hubert d'Aquae mortuae, the submitter requested authenticity for 13th C France (southern) and allowed all changes. The LoI provided documentation for the byname d'Aquae mortuae:
Aigués-Mortes: Dauzat, Noms de Lieux page 5 header Aiguebelette gives Aigue-Mortes and a 13th century form of the name Aquae mortuae 1248. It means a place with stagnant water.
Unfortunately, the submitted byname d'Aquae mortuae is violates RfS III.1.a, which requires linguistic consistency within a name phrase. Metron Ariston explains:
The byname mixes French orthography and Latin. If you are going to use the Latin form of the place name, you need to use the Latin preposition and the appropriate ablative form: de Aquis Mortuis. The French form would be d'Aigue Mortes. Either would work with Hubert, but you have to choose French or Latin for the phrase.
In order to meet the submitter's request for authenticity, we have modified this byname based on the dated example provided in the LoI, changing only the cases of the words as recommended by Metron Ariston.
Good name!
As noted in the December 2002 LoAR, the tai-chi is not a period heraldic charge, but it may be registered.
Submitted as Marguerie de Jauncourt, the submitter requested authenticity for 12th C France and allowed minor changes. Dauzat's dictionnaire des noms et prénoms de France (p. 416 s.n. Marguerite), dates Margeria to 12th C in Burgundy. We have changed the given name to this form in order to meet the submitter's request for authenticity.
The previous device, Or, a unicorn and on a chief azure three passion crosses botonny Or, is retained as a badge.
Submitted as Bjorn inn mikli, the documentation showed the given name as having an o-ogonek (which looks like an o with a reversed comma attached to the bottom of the letter) not a simple o. We have made this correction.
Note: Damon is his legal given name.
Submitted as Order of the Ermine Gauntlet, the only example of Ermine used in an order name in period was in reference to the animal, not to a fur used in heraldry. Metron Ariston explains:
Unfortunately, the entry in Shead's work [Ermine and the Ears of Corn, dated to 1450 and listed under the pattern "creature + thing" in Shead, "Project Ordensnamen - Order Names by Alphabetical Listing," http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/names/order/Alpha.htm] appears to be erroneous. The order referred to is probably the Order of the Ermine. The insignia of the order was a gold collar composed of ears of corn in saltire from which hung a depiction of an ermine so there is room for confusion.
We have changed this order name to Order of the Ermine and Gauntlet, as allowed by the barony, in order to register this name.
The submitters are each entitled to use a ducal coronet in their armory.
The ram was tinctured on the Letter of Intent as gules armed Or. The horns of the ram are a large enough artistic detail so that their tincture could be blazoned (unlike the tincture of the hooves of the ram, which the SCA always leaves entirely to the artist). However, the tincture of the horns of the ram is not so important that it must be blazoned. The submitter did not blazon the horns as Or on the form, so we suspect the submitter would like to leave the tincture of the horns to artist's license, and we have omitted the arming tincture from the blazon.
Submitted as Aliannsa Ó Rioghbhardáin, Aliannsa is the submitter's legal middle name.
Bynames were literal in Gaelic in period. Ó Ríoghbhardáin means 'grandson/male descendant of Ríoghbhardán'. As a woman cannot be a grandson or male descendant, Ó Ríoghbhardáin is not registerable with a feminine given name. The corresponding feminine byname would be inghean uí Ríoghbhardáin. We have made this change in order to register this name. We have also added the accent missing from the byname.
Submitted as Amalie von den Blumen, the submitter requested authenticity for German and allowed minor changes. No evidence was found that von den would be used with Blumen in a byname in period. Instead, the College found that Brechenmacher (p. 165 s.n. Blum) indicates that this surname derived from a house name and dates Haus zem Bluomen to 1393. Bahlow (p. 51 s.n. Blum) dates Nic. zem Blumen 1289 (zem is a contraction of zu dem 'at the'). Lacking evidence that von den Blumen is plausible in period and grammatically correct, we have changed her byname to zu dem Blumen in order to register this name and to meet the submitter's request for authenticity.
The previous blazon, Quarterly gules and purpure, a peacock feather bendwise Or, did not accurately describe the type of feather. Precedent makes it clear that we distinguish between peacock feathers and regular feathers, to the point of having given difference between them, "[A default azure feather vs. a proper peacock plume] "There is one CVD...for the change in type of feather. The peacock plume...is quite distinct in shape, with a prominent 'eye'" (LoAR December 1990 p. 11). The feather in this submission is a normally shaped feather.
The previous blazon, Azure, an owl close, holding in its talons a tuft of wool pendant therefrom a drop spindle argent, used the ambiguous blazon term holding. The wool and drop spindle are much smaller and less visually significant than the owl, and are thus maintained charges.
Submitted as Colyn MacRuairidh of Rathlin Island, no evidence was found that the island of Rathlin was known as Rathlin Island in period. Additionally, no evidence was provided and none was found that a locative byname referring to an island named X Island would take the form of X Island rather than the simpler of X in period. Lacking such evidence, we have dropped the element Island in order to register this name.
Submitted as Donnghal Buchanan, Donnghal is an Early Modern Irish Gaelic (c. 1200 to c. 1700) form of a name found in Old Irish Gaelic (c. 700 to c. 900) and Middle Irish Gaelic (c. 900 to c. 1200) as Donngal. No evidence was found of this name used later than circa 1100. Lacking evidence that this name was in use when Early Modern Irish Gaelic was in use, we have changed this name to the Middle Irish Gaelic form Donngal in order to register this name.
Buchanan is a location in Scotland. It is found as a byname in Scots (a language closely related to English) and in Latin in period. Aryanhwy merch Catmael notes that "R&W s.n. Buchanan cite Black for <de Buchanan> c.1270, 1373, <Buchanan> 1506-82."
Based on this information, the submitted form of this name combined a Gaelic given name dated no later than circa 1100 with a Scots byname found in that form in the 16th C. As a result, it had one weirdness for combining Gaelic and Scots in a name and one weirdness for a temporal disparity of greater than 300 years. We have changed the byname to a 13th C form in order to remove the weirdness for temporal disparity in order to register this name.
Her previous device, Per fess azure and vert, on a plate a raspberry fesswise gules slipped vert, is retained as a badge.
Her previous device, Per pale gules ermined argent and azure, an escallop inverted argent, is retained as a badge.
The branch was blazoned on the LoI as fesswise reversed. However, there is no clear way to determine which end of any branch is up. Therefore we have simply blazoned the branch as fesswise.
Good name!
Nice badge!
This is an acceptance of a transfer of the heraldic title Golden Antelope Herald (registered in November 2000) from Caid and a change of the designator from Herald to Pursuivant.
Kingdom blazoned the estoiles as pierced, but they are not pierced with the standard roundel shape, or with any clearly identifiable shape. Instead, there is a thick black detail where the lines running down the center of the arms of the estoile meet in the center of the charge. The "piercing" appears to be a simple artistic detail due to the way the lines in the center of the arms of the estoiles were drawn, rather than a blazonable armorial element.
This is an acceptance of a transfer of the heraldic title Flame Pursuivant Extraordinary (registered in April 1981) from Caid and a change of the designator from Pursuivant Extraordinary to Pursuivant.
Her previous name, Rowan of Ashley, is released.
The legs and feet of the ravens in this submission do not touch each other, so the following precedent does not apply to this submission: "[Three birds close conjoined in annulo] These birds are not conjoined in annulo, they are connected by the legs. As such, this depiction is not blazonable. We would need evidence that this motif is a reasonable heraldic depiction as well as a valid blazon for it in order to register it" (LoAR November 2000).
Submitted as Deirdre Stewart, this name had two weirdnesses as submitted. Deirdre was ruled SCA compatible in March of 1998. This name combined the Gaelic form Deirdre with Stewart, which is Scots (a language closely related to English). There is one weirdness for use of an SCA compatible name element and one weirdness for combining Gaelic and Scots in a name. Black (p. 204 s.n. Deirdre) dates Deredere to 1166. Given which source Black cites for this reference, Deredere is undoubtably a Latinized form of a Gaelic given name. We have changed the given name to this form in order to remove the weirdness for use of an SCA compatible element in order to register this name.
Note: Evangeline is her legal given name.
Submitted as Grimmbrand the Hound Keeper, the spelling of the given name was justified based on words found in a dictionary of Anglo-Saxon. While the words grimm and brand are related to the name elements, the spelling grimm is not found in names. Instead, all the Anglo-Saxon names that the College found use Grim-. We have made that change to register the name.
Boar documented a byname meaning "one who takes care of hounds":
Betill Thuresson, Middle English Occupational Terms, (p.78) dates <Hundeman> to 1332 possibly meaning keeper of greyhounds and derives it from the Old English <Hund-> and <-mann> though he admits that a Scandinavian origin is possible.
As no evidence was presented nor could any be found that the word keeper was used in period bynames to describe people who cared for animals, the Hound Keeper cannot be registered. We have therefore changed this name to the documentary form found by Boar.
Submitted under the name Hannibal the Oblivious.
Submitted as Talia Margherita da Milan, the LoI noted that the submitter preferred the form da Milano for her byname, but no support for this form could be found in Kingdom.
Arval Benicoeur and Talan Gwynek's article "Fourteenth Century Venetian Personal Names" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/arval/venice14/) lists the form da Milano. Therefore, we have changed this byname to the submitter's desired form.
The submitter's previous submission, Azure, a sword with the blade lying on a flame within a bordure raguly argent, was returned on the January 2003 LoAR, which stated:
We have changed the blazon from a sword enflamed to a sword with the blade lying on a flame. A sword enflamed would have tiny spurts of flame issuant from the entire sword (including the hilt) while in this emblazon the blade (and only the blade) is completely surrounded by flames. A previous precedent has noted: "The sword loses its identifiability against the 'flames' of the same tincture. (One commenter noted its resemblance to a chain saw.)" (LoAR November 1994, p.17). This submission has an analogous problem and must therefore be returned for unidentifiability per RfS VIII.3.
The submitter has changed the submission so that the blade and the hilt issue small spurts of proper flame. This removes the identifiability problems which occur when the sword and the enflaming are the same tincture. The flames are packed quite close to each other as they surround the sword, but they do not touch each other, nor do they touch the sword. Thus, the flames do not technically fimbriate the sword, which would be illegal style. The submitter has complied with the directions given in the previous return, and as no new problems have occurred, this may be registered.
Please advise the submitter, in the future, to draw the flames even more sparsely than they have been drawn so far: there should be fewer flames with more space between them.
The College may wish to note that the mini-emblazon is a faithful reduction of the full sized emblazon. Some College members felt that the mini-emblazon showed a sword fimbriated of flame, but close inspection shows that the flames are, as described, separated from each other. The separation is more apparent on the full-sized emblazon than on the mini-emblazon.
This device does not conflict with Katherine Nox, Per fess engrailed sable and argent, a roundel between a decrescent and an increscent argent There is a CD for changing the field. There is also a CD for changing the posture of two of the three charges: each of the crescents has been reversed. (Alternately, you can see it as a change of arrangement of the charges, by swapping the outermost two charges.)
Some commenters mentioned that this arrangement of a roundel and crescents is not typical of period armory, and we concur, but this armorial design is registerable as long as the charges maintain their identifiability: "While we will reluctantly register the arrangement of an increscent, roundel and decrescent if they aren't conjoined, the conjoining makes them unidentifiable as well as non-period" (LoAR September 1997 p. 23)
This does not conflict with the important non-SCA arms of Burgundy Ancient, Bendy Or and azure, a bordure gules. RfS X.4.a.ii defines field-primary armory as follows: "If neither of two pieces of armory being compared has charges, or if each has the same uncharged peripheral ordinary, they may derive greater difference from changes to the field. Such armory will be called field-primary armory." Since both this submission and Burgundy Ancient consist of a field and an uncharged bordure, both are field-primary armory.
This submission is thus clear of Burgundy Ancient by RfS X.4.a.ii.a, which states, "If two pieces of field-primary armory have substantially different partitions, they are considered sufficiently different and do not conflict, irrespective of any other similarities between them." The two are also clear of conflict by RfS X.4.a.ii.b, which states, "If the fields of two pieces of field-primary armory have no tinctures in common, they are considered completely different and do not conflict, irrespective of any other similarities between them."
Good name!
His previous name, Gabriel af Malmö, is released.
Good name!
The cross formy floretty may be found in period armory, in the arms of Roger de Swynnerton, Argent, a cross formy flory at the ends sable, as cited (among other places) in The Rolls of Arms of Edward I volume I p.500 by Gerard J. Brault, and cited and illustrated in Foster's The Dictionary of Heraldry p.188 (under the slightly different spelling Roger de Swinnerton.)
The previous blazon, Lozengy vert and Or, an owl argent perched atop a drawstring pouch fesswise gules, did not clearly indicate whether the pouch was sustained or maintained.
She has a letter of permission to conflict from Timotheous of Alexandria, Azure, a chevron Or between two open books and a unicorn rampant reguardant maintaining a quill pen argent.
A rogacina is a stylized Polish charge, which is generally described by this name in reputable books on Polish heraldry. The charge resembles a broad arrowhead inverted with a complicated shaft. The shaft is straight (rather than tapering, as in many depictions of a broadarrow), may be crossed, and may have a complex end. In the 15th C Grand Armorial Équestre de la Toison d'Or, the Polish section has a number of coats of arms using variants of the rogacina, showing that this was a common charge in 15th C Poland. Two of the coats have the version of the rogacina found here, with a crosspiece and a simply forked foot. One version has no crosspiece and ends the foot in an arc (the top half of an annulet). One version has two crosspieces and a plain foot, one version has no crosspiece and a triply forked and elaborate foot that Pastoureau and Popoff describe as representing the tail of an eagle, one version has a single crosspiece and ends in a foot like the blades of an anchor, and one version has an oddly forked and downwards curving foot that cannot easily be described.
Because this charge is so common in period Polish armory it seems appropriate to blazon it using the Polish term. The number of crossings (if any) and the style of the foot should be blazoned explicitly.
This sort of rogacina has previously been registered twice using a Western blazon approximation by Aron Nied{z'}wied{z'}, with both registrations in the LoAR of November 1999, (Fieldless) In pale a cross couped between and conjoined to two chevronels couped sable, and (Fieldless) In pale a cross couped between and conjoined to two chevronels couped Or. If Aron wishes a reblazon to a rogacina crossed and fourchy, he may submit a request for reblazon.
The submitter's previous device, Or, on a chevron dovetailed counter-dovetailed between three roundels azure three trident heads Or, is retained as a badge.
A question was raised as to whether this was in visual conflict with a badge of the Barony of Darkwater for Order of the Acorn Glade, (Fieldless) Four oak leaves in saltire stems to center gules and four acorns conjoined in cross caps to center Or. In this submission, the swords are co-primary charges. In Darkwater's badge the acorns are secondary charges. There is no visual conflict, and as noted in the commentary, the two pieces of armory are technically clear of conflict.
Submitted as Deirdre inghen ui Bardáin, the submitter indicated that she desired her name to mean 'Deirdre daughter of the Bard'. The submitted byname, inghen ui Bardáin, means either 'grandaughter [of a man named] Bardán' or 'female descendant [of the] Ó Bardáin [family]'. Additionally, lenition was missing from the patronym and accents were not used consistently in the byname. A more typical and grammatically correct form of this byname would be inghean uí Bhardáin.
A byname meaning 'daughter of the Bard' would be inghean an Bháird. We have changed the byname to this form in order to give it the meaning desired by the submitter.
The previous blazon, Argent, two dragons combattant purpure, maintaining an arrow inverted vert, did not clearly reflect the size of the arrow. The arrow is co-primary with the dragons.
Engelbert was documented as the name of a saint who was born in 1185. However, the Web site used for documentation of this name merely lists saints. Many such sources routinely normalize the names of saints and, so, do not support the headers used for saints' names as appropriate spellings in period, even for the time period in which that saint lived. The College found support for the spelling Engelbertus in France dated to a917-42. Engelbert is likely a vernacular form of Engelbertus. The section "From Pelican: Regarding the Registerability of Saints' Names", in the Cover Letter for the September 2001 LoAR, explains the conditions under which saints' names are registerable, including:
[T]he 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.
No evidence was provided and none was found that Englebert was used later than the 10th C, even as a reference to this saint. Lacking such documentation, Englebert must be evaluated as a 10th C French name.
While documentation was presented showing that pious was a word in 1603, no documentation was presented and none was found that the word pious was used before 1600. Descriptive bynames using words documented only to late period or just post-period are problematic. By the 16th C, inherited surnames had replaced literal descriptive bynames. Therefore, it is highly improbable that (1) a literal descriptive byname would have been used circa 1600, and that (2) it would have used a word new to the English language. At this time, descriptive bynames of this type are registerable on a case by case basis depending upon the plausibility of the byname in question.
As a result, this name combines a 10th C French name with a circa 1603 English descriptive byname. There is no weirdness for combining French and English in a name. Therefore, this name has a single weirdness for combining elements with a temporal disparity of greater than 300 years and is registerable.
Submitted as Estrilda Le Siffleur, no documentation was presented and none was found supporting the byname as two separate words, both of which are capitalized. Therefore, we have lowercased le in order to follow documented forms of this type of byname and register this name.
The submitter requested authenticity for 8th C Wessex. Wessex was an Anglo-Saxon kingdom where Old English was spoken. While this is an authentic Old Norse name, it is not an Old English name. The issue of when Norse settlements existed in England was not discussed during commentary. As such, we were unable to determine whether or not this name is appropriate for the submitter's desired time and location.
The submitter's previous device, Ermine, three bendlets sinister enhanced azure and in base a sun in splendor gules eclipsed Or, is released.
Submitted as Lassar Fhina ingen Niell, the byname was spelled incorrectly. In Middle Gaelic (c. 900 to c. 1200), a woman's byname indicating that her father was named Niall would be ingen Neill, not ingen Niell. We have made this change.
Listed on the LoI as Lyonete Vibert, both the form and the documentation show the given name as Lyonnete. We have made this correction.
Listed on the LoI as Raffaello de Cernia, this name was submitted as Raphael de Cernia. The submitter requested authenticity for Italian and allowed minor changes. The given name was changed at Kingdom from the English from Raphael to the Italian form Raffaello in order to make this name authentic for the submitter's requested culture.
However, changing the given name from an English form to an Italian form is a major change, which the submitter does not allow. No evidence was provided either in the submitted documentation or in the LoI indicating that the submitter specifically allowed this major change. Therefore, we are returning the given name to the submitted English form Raphael in order to register this name.
The submitted documentation showed the byname as da Cernia rather than de Cernia. We have changed the byname to da Cernia to match the submitted documentation and to make this name more typical for Italian.
As the submitter requested authenticity for Italian, the submitter may be interested in knowing that the College found support for both Raffaello and Raffaele as Italian forms of the given name Raphael. Aryanhwy merch Catmael notes:
Italian forms that I've found are <Raffaele> in my "Names from Arezzo, Italy, 1386-1528" (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/arezzo.html), and <Raffaello> in "Italian Names from Florance, 1427" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ferrante/catasto/).
Based on this information, both Raffaello da Cernia and Raffaele da Cernia would be fully Italian forms of this name.
Submitted as Valla Lùta Kolladóttir, the submitter requested authenticity for 10th C Norway and allowed any changes.
The given name Lúta was cited with the incorrect accent on the u. Also, Valla- is a byname meaning 'field' that is prepended to a given name: in this case, as Valla-Lúta. We have made these corrections.
The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
This was the flag of the country that has also been known as the Belgian Congo. This flag was used in the 1960s and has also been used from 1998 to the present. The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
This flag was used from the mid-1960s to the early 1970s. The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
This has been the naval ensign of Japan since 1889. The flag is apparently more recognizable to the average American than the national flag due to its prominent display in the Second World War. It continues to be recognizable due to the many movies and other art forms which depict that conflict. Section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook states that the SCA will protect the "historical or modern armory of other geographical locations on a case-by-case basis if the location is associated with important administrative, social, political, or military events and the arms themselves are important or well-known." It appears from the commentary that this ensign should be protected because of the degree to which it is known in the general population, and because of the importance of the events with which it is associated.
The gyronny and overlying roundel on this flag are offset slightly towards the hoist of the flag. This slight offset is not worth difference and needs not be explicitly blazoned.
The Letter of Intent was not entirely clear about whether Moldavia was ever an independent principality, or was always under some sovereign. After further research, it does appear that Moldavia was an independently governed nation for various times in its history, between the times when it was governed by some empire or another. As an independent nation, its arms are protected in the SCA, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
The SCA protects all national arms, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
The previously protected flag, Per pale azure and gules, on a pale Or an eagle displayed brunâtre, was not a previously used historical flag, but apparently an oversimplification of that flag. Because the previous flag was never a national flag, it is released.
Montenegro has been an independent nation. The SCA protects all national arms, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
The SCA protects all national arms, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
This was the flag of the kingdom of Serbia before 1919. The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
These have been the arms of the Federal Republic of Serbia and Montenegro since 1994. This is the area that was previously known as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and the submission was under the name Yugoslavia. We have altered the name to the current name of the nation. The SCA protects all national arms, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
The SCA protects all national arms, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
This was the flag of the Republic of Vietnam prior to 1944. The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
The Letter of Intent was not entirely clear about whether Wallachia was ever an independent principality, or was always under some sovereign. It does appear that Wallachia was an independently governed nation for various brief but shining moments in its history, in between the times when it was governed by some empire or another. As an independent nation, its arms are protected in the SCA, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook
This flag was used from 1946 to 1992. The SCA protects all national flags, as stated in section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
Submitted as Arimaris Maçon, the submitter requested authenticity for 10th to 14th C French and allowed minor changes. Arimaris was documented from Morlet (vol. 1, p. 126, column b). However, the name at that location is Arimares, not Arimaris. We have changed this name to the documented form in order to register this name.
This submission was mistakenly listed on the LoI as a new name. Instead, both a correction note from Palmer and the submission forms indicated that this submission was actually an alternate name submission for Aedan MacAlastair. We have made this correction.
Please advise the submitter to draw the pile so that it issues entirely from the sinister side of the shield, rather than having the top edge issue from the sinister chief corner of the shield.
Listed on the LoI as Giovanni da Lucca, this name was submitted as Giovanni Di Lucca. The submitter requested authenticity for Italian and allowed minor changes. Both di Lucca and da Lucca are bynames in Italian that can be found in "Italian Men's Names in Rome, 1473-1484" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/mari/Studium/). The byname di Lucca is a patronymic byname formed from the masculine given name Luca, which is also occasionally found as Lucca. The byname da Lucca is a locative byname referring to a town west of Florence which is found in records as Luca or Lucca. As the submitted documentation specifically referred to a town rather than a masculine given name, we have registered this name in the locative byname form.
While the tincture of the crescents was not given in the blazon on the LoI, enough members of the College correctly deduced the tincture of the crescents and checked for conflict that this need not be pended for further research.
The submitter requested authenticity for Norse. While Ivarr is an Old Norse given name, ffening is a Middle English byname. Lacking evidence that any form of this byname was used in Old Norse, we were unable to make this name authentic for the submitter's requested culture.
Note: Renee is her legal given name.
Listed on the LoI as Séaghnait inghean Dhonnchaidh, this name was submitted as Séaghnait Dhonnchaidh and changed at Kingdom because unmarked patronymics were not used in Gaelic in period. The submitter requested authenticity for Gaelic and allowed any changes.
Séaghnait is listed as a header form in Ó Corráin & Maguire (p. 164 s.n. Ségnat). It appears to be an Early Modern Irish Gaelic (c. 1200 to c. 1700) form of this name. Ó Corráin & Maguire state that Ségnat was the name of an "abbess whom St Abbán placed in charge of his foundations in Meath", as well as being the name of a saint, but give no date for this saint. In the entry for Abbán Ó Corráin & Maguire date St. Abbán to the "late sixth or early seventh century". In Gaelic, unlike in English, children were not given the names of prominent saints because those names were viewed as too holy to use. Therefore, an authentic name using the given name Ségnat would only have appeared in or near the time that the saint lived.
In the 7th C, the language spoken in Ireland was Oghamic Irish, which is significantly different in sound an appearance from the submitted form of this name which is Early Modern Irish. By the 8th C, Old Irish Gaelic (c. 700 to c. 900) was in use. It is possible that the given name Ségnat was still in use at that time. Therefore, we have changed this name to a fully Old Irish Gaelic form in order to meet the submitter's request for authenticity.
This device does not conflict with the badge of Cliodhna ni Bhriain, Per fess indented crusilly vert and argent. It is true that the field division Per chevron inverted is not listed under RfS X.4.a.ii.a, "Substantial Change of Partition", so that rule does not apply to this armorial comparison. However, X.4.a.ii.c states:
In any case, independent changes to the tincture, direction of partition lines, style of partition lines, or number of pieces in the partition may be counted separately when comparing two pieces of field-primary armory. There are two clear differences between Per chevron argent and azure and Per pale nebuly argent and azure.
There are thus two independent changes (and CDs) between Cliodhna and this submission: one for the change in the line of division from per fess to per chevron inverted and another for the change in the partition style from indented crusilly to plain.
Please advise the submitter to draw the per chevron inverted line higher on the field and steeper. When drawn correctly, the per chevron inverted line will balance around the fess point rather than issuing from the fess point at its highest.
Please advise the submitter to draw the chevron inverted line higher on the field, so it balances around the per fess line, rather than issuing at its highest point from the per fess line.
The badge follows the design of their registered device, Argent, in dexter a saltire throughout sable, involved by a snake facing sinister vert, armed and langued gules, and in sinister chief a laurel wreath vert.
This submission adds the designation of Order of the Oaken Glade to the following badge, registered in March 1999, (Fieldless) Four oak leaves in cross, stems to center gules, and four acorns in saltire, caps to center Or all conjoined at the center point.
Note that the designation of Order of the Oaken Glade is also attached to their very similar badge registered in May 1999, (Fieldless) Four oak leaves conjoined in saltire stems to center gules between four acorns conjoined in cross caps to center Or. Laurel Clerk did some significant excavations pertaining to these past Darkwater submissions. He eventually determined that, while the combined paperwork of the Letters of Intent, Letters of Acceptance and Return (and associated pend actions), submissions forms, and other paperwork was (to put it mildly) complicated, when all the smoke cleared, both badge submissions had had forms, both had been registered, and both were supposed to be designated for Order of the Oaken Glade. However, the designation was omitted from this badge, and we are thus adding it at this time.
Listed on the LoI as Faílenn Bá, both the submission form and the documentation showed the byname as Bán. We have made this correction.
Listed on the LoI as Gavine MacCormai, the submission form listed this name as Gavine MacCormaic. We have added the missing letter to the byname.
In period, Mac was not connected to the patronym in Gaelic. We have added a space to follow documented period examples.
Note: Johnston is her legal surname.
The crow was blazoned on the LoI as a bird, but the submitter blazoned it on the form as a crow, and it is identifiable as a crow, so we have blazoned it as the submitter desired.
The device for the princess may be registered because it does not use any forbidden restricted charges. This device, and the device of the queen of Trimaris, does not use the restricted wreath of roses, but uses a simple group of peripheral roses, which could be registered to anyone of any estate. While this device does include a crown, a crown may be registered in any kingdom/principality armory, as indicated by the Glossary of Terms. Therefore, the kingdom may register armory with a crown and designate it for the use of the princess.
Please also see the discussion in the cover letter concerning the registration of devices for consorts and heirs of kingdoms and principalities.
The submitter's husband registered the SCA name David of Whaleshaven in January 1983. Therefore, the submitter may register the byname of Whaleshaven under the Grandfather Clause.
This transfer is based on a previously filed heraldic will.
Listed on the LoI as Crimthann MacGiolla Phadraig, the form listed this name as Crimthann Mac Giolla Phadraig. We have replaced the missing space in the byname.
This transfer is based on a previously filed heraldic will.
Note: Dmitriy is his legal given name.
Her previous name, Donata Ivanovna Basistova, is released.
Submitted as Ellisif Þunnkárr Reinarskona, we have lowercased the byname to use standard transliteration conventions. (See the Cover Letter for the October 2002 LoAR for more information.)
The byname Reinarskona combines the Danish masculine given name Reinar with the Old Norse kona 'wife'. While Danish and Old Norse are related languages, they are not the same language. Therefore, the byname Reinarskona violates RfS III.1.a, which requires linguistic consistency within a name phrase. As the submitter allows major changes, we have dropped this element in order to register this name.
The SCA has previously registered one triskelion of spirals, for Sorcha ar Menez, Vert, a triskelion of spirals argent between in cross four mullets pierced Or. The SCA does not have a defined charge of a spiral, and spiral ends are not standard for other charges (such as crosses). However, the SCA has an established and wide-ranging pattern for registering triskelions of objects, or triskelions ending in objects. As a result, we are reluctant to refuse further registrations of this charge (as suggested by some of the commentary). The triskelion of spirals may continue to be registered, but as one step from period style (a "weirdness"). As this submission does not include any other steps from period style, it may be registered.
Good name!
This name mixes Spanish and Italian, a combination which has been ruled registerable, though with a weirdness. The LoI documented Gabriele as an undated Italian masculine given name. The College was able to find evidence of this name, in this spelling, in 14th to 16th C Italy. While the more common forms of a byname derived from the masculine given name Gabriele would be di Gabriele or Gabrieli, there are examples of unmarked patronymic surnames in period Italian. Therefore, this name may be registered as submitted.
Her previous name, Gwyneth Breila Eurin, is released.
Submitted as Jora inn Irska, the submitter requested authenticity for Norse and allowed any changes. The article inn is used in masculine bynames. The feminine form is in. We have made this correction.
Her previous name, Clare ingen Neill, is released.
The submitter's previous device, Per pale vert and sable, a talbot passant within a bordure invected argent, is retained as a badge.
Please advise the submitter to draw the caltrops more boldly.
Submitted under the name Miguel Argento.
Submitted under the name Raven of Oakwood.
Submitted under the name Sveinn Ulfsson.
Listed on the LoI as Vigdís Vesfirzka, this name was submitted as Vigdís Vestfirnzka. The byname was corrected at Kingdom to remove the incorrect n in the byname. However, an extra letter (t) was omitted in the LoI. We have added the missing letter to the byname.
Additionally, we have lowercased the byname to use standard transliteration conventions. (See the Cover Letter for the October 2002 LoAR for more information.)
Her previous name, Beatrix zum Dunklenturm, is released.
Listed on the LoI as Wilhelm von Bassel, this name was submitted as Wilhelm von Basel. The LoI stated that "The name was originally submitted as Basel, but we [i.e. Kingdom] did not have any documentation to support this formation." This statement implies that the name was originally submitted as Wilhelm Basel not Wilhelm von Basel, as is clearly shown on the submission form. Additionally, the submitter requested authenticity for 14th to 16th C "German, Landsknecht". This information was not included in the LoI, depriving the College of the ability to properly comment on this name.
We would remind submission heralds that proper summarization of forms, including changes allowed by the submitter and requests for authenticity, is required as part of the LoI. Improper summarization of a submission is cause for return of that submission. The College of Arms has a limited amount of time and all of us are volunteers. Asking the College to evaluate names based on incomplete or entirely missing data is both unfair to the College and a disservice to the submitter.
Orle and Hund both found a dated example of this byname in Brechenmacher (p. 77 s.n. Basel) which dates the form von Basel to 1360. By coincidence rather than intent, since the College was unaware of the submitter's request for authenticity, this dated example show's the submitter's desired form of this byname in his desired period. We have changed his name to this form in order to register his name and to meet his request for authenticity.
This name conflicts with the household name Dreiburgen School of Rapier, which was registered to the barony of Dreiburgen in October 1995. School is the designator in this household name and is transparent for conflict purposes. The addition of a group reference, such as Dreiburgen, is normally transparent for conflict purposes. However, previous precedent (including The Order of the White Scarf of Caid (Caid, Kingdom of; Acceptances, Caid, April 1997) and Order of the Golden Swan of Aneala (Aneala, Barony of; Acceptances, Lochac, July 1999) has ruled that a group reference is enough difference to clear the conflict when used in conjunction with a letter of permission to conflict.
This title does not conflict with Carolingian Rapier Company (Carolingia, Barony of, November 1989), Rapier Champion (Atlantia, Kingdom of, March 1994), or Baronial Rapier Champion (Ponte Alto, Barony of, April 2001) because these items are generic identifiers and are not actually registered items. Generic identifiers are "functional, generic, and thus not held to conflict standards" (Cover Letter for the January 1993 LoAR). They may optionally include a reference to the branch name, but such a reference does not negate the generic nature of the identifier.
The wreath of hops, due to its small size, is too difficult to distinguish from the reserved charge of a laurel wreath, and thus may not be registered. RfS VIII.3 states "Identifiable elements may be rendered unidentifiable by significant reduction in size." While this armorial element has not been rendered unidentifiable by the small size of the charge, it has been rendered significantly less identifiable: you can tell it is a wreath, but not what type of wreath. The size of the charge is a direct result of the fact that it is a tertiary charge on a chief: simply redrawing the armory will not solve this problem.
We would expect that, when drawn as a more significant element of the design, there would be a CD between a laurel wreath and a wreath of hops as drawn in this submission (which consists of hop leaves and hop cones.) There are a number of precedents which give type difference between a laurel wreath and a wreath of some other sort of plant, when the wreath is a more significant element of the design. In the LoAR of December 1998, an oak chaplet was ruled to be sufficiently distinct from a laurel wreath, but in that armory the chaplet was a large peripheral wreath encircling the primary charge on the shield. In the LoAR of March 1999, a wreath of barberry was ruled to be sufficiently distinct from a laurel wreath. In that case, the barberry wreath was drawn as a tertiary charge on a mountain. The mountain was almost as large as the bottom half of a per chevron line of division, and the wreath was thus almost as large as the basemost of a group of three co-primary charges, arranged two and one, on a per chevron field.
This name is being returned for (1) lack of evidence of significant contact between speakers of Polish and French (or Hungarian and French, depending upon how you view the given name) in period, and (2) grammatical issues with the byname.
Listed on the LoI as Kinga la Roux, this name was submitted as Kinga de la Roux, the byname was changed at Kingdom to better match available documentation.
The LoI provided documentation of Kinga found in Polish records in period:
Feminine given name recorded in Poland as Kinga in 1266, Kynga in 1275, and Kince c1320, all of which apparently refer to the same person. Kinga appears to be a diminutive of Kunegunda, or at least this individual was known by both names. [Taszycki, Witold, S{l'}ownik Staropolskich Nazw Osobowych, 7 vols. Vol. 2, Wroclaw: Polska Akademia Nauk, 1965-1987, pp 583b-584a] [Taszycki, Vol.2, p 584a]
The LoI also notes that the person referenced in these records is a woman who went on to become a saint. Nebuly identifies that the woman in question is culturally Hungarian, even though she is found in Polish records:
The submitter has successfully documented period use of the Hungarian name Kinga, but has failed to address the other reason for her previous return. Yes, the submitter has found Kinga in Polish records, but that does not make it a Polish name. I can find records of Suleiman the Magnificent in French, but that doesn't make Suleiman a French name. Likewise, all the citations in the SSNO for Kinga refer to the Hungarian princess by that name. It is perhaps a unique name in period, and is strictly Hungarian. We need evidence of significant contact between Hungary and France to register this name.
Based on this information, the submitted name combines either Polish and French or Hungarian and French in a name. Regardless, neither combination has previously been addressed. As no evidence of significant contact was provided and none was found, this name must be returned for lack of documenation of this lingual mix.
Regarding the submitted byname, the form la Roux is not grammatically correct. Colm Dubh's article "An Index to the Given Names in the 1292 Census of Paris" (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/names/paris.html) lists the masculine byname form le Rous (Lyon le Rous) and the feminine byname form la rousse (Aalis la rousse), both meaning 'the red'. Aryanhwy merch Catmael's article "Names Found in Commercial Documents from Bordeaux, 1470-1520" (http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~sfriedemann/names/bordeaux.htm) shows an inherited surname form: Leroux. Kingdom provided information from consultation with the submitter:
[The] submitter will accept no changes to the given name, and for the byname will only accept de la Roux or la Roux or la Rous.
No evidence was found to support de 'of' used with any form of a byname la Rousse 'the red'. The byname forms la Roux and la Rous combine the feminine la with Roux and Rous, both of which are masculine. As none of these byname forms are grammatically correct, they are not registerable.
Conflict with Deirdre McLair, reblazoned in the Midrealm section of this LoAR as Argent, two dragons combattant purpure sustaining between them an arrow inverted vert. There is one CD for changing the field, but no difference for changing the type or tincture of the centermost of three co-primary charges in fess.
The amaranth as depicted in this submission is not identifiable. The identifiability issue was mentioned in the October 2000 return and has not been adequately addressed with this submission. The submitted amaranth does not resemble the picture of the amaranth flower/flower-head mentioned by the submission herald at http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/angio/images/amara636.gif. Nor does it match an illustration of the specific amaranth species described in the attached documentation, Grain amaranth (Amaranthus cruentus, Amaranthus hypochondriacus), which are New World plants that were mentioned by a Western European, Fray Bernardino de Shagún, in 1570. A picture of this species, which shows its resemblance to the other amaranth picture, may be found at http://www.desert-tropicals.com/Plants/Amaranthaceae/Amaranthus_cruentus.html.
This submission depicts a very small portion of the flower head, rather than the whole flower, which causes it to lose its identifiability. Brachet summarized the concerns as follows: "an amaranth flower (or floret) is no more than 4 mm long ... someone drawing a normal 'amaranth flower' would draw the inflorescence, the grouping of hundreds of actual florets on a stem or set of stems (sometimes they branch), something that might be blazoned as a 'sprig of amaranth'. That drawing would look nothing like this. This drawing may be botanically correct (except that the stem is way too long and thick), but we feel a parallel may be drawn between this and sunflowers. Were I to blazon 'a sunflower' I would expect to see the round multi-'petaled' inflorescence, not one of the little tubular florets. If I were to blazon amaranth, I would expect to see a drawing of some macroscopic portion of the plant, not a grossly exaggerated tiny portion thereof."
Conflict with Friðælv Olvesdottir, Vert, a chevron inverted and in chief a roundel Or. There is one CD for changing the type of the secondary charge from a roundel to a beehive. There is no difference for only engrailing the bottom side of the chevron inverted. Per the LoAR of November 1990, p. 15, "[A bend potenty on the lower edge] Conflict with [a plain bend]. Were the ordinary in this proposal potenty on both sides, it would be clear, but the majority of the commenters (and Laurel) did not feel that difference should be granted for this non-period treating of only one (and the less visually important) side of an ordinary. The only period examples of treating one side of an ordinary which were noted was that of embattling the upper edge of an ordinary."
No Letter of Acceptance of Transfer was received from Lochac for this item. Additionally, no Acceptance of Transfer item for Lochac was listed on an LoI from Lochac.
No Letter of Acceptance of Transfer was received from Ildhafn for this item. Additionally, no Acceptance of Transfer item was listed for Ildhafn on an LoI from Lochac.
No Letter of Acceptance of Transfer was received from Western Seas for this item.
No Letter of Acceptance of Transfer was received from Southron Gaard for this item. Additionally, no Acceptance of Transfer item was listed for Southron Gaard on an LoI from Lochac.
Conflict with Ulf of Sjaelland, Quarterly gules and argent. There is one CD for changing the tincture of the field. There is not Complete Change of Tincture, because both fields include the tincture gules. Per the LoAR of January 2001, "[Per chevron ermine and vert] Conflict with ... Per chevron vert and sable. The only possible rule that could make these clear is RfS X.4.a.ii.b, Complete Change of Tincture (part of the Field-Primary Armory rules); however, that rule states 'If the fields of two pieces of field-primary armory have no tinctures in common, they are considered completely different and do not conflict, irrespective of any other similarities between them.' While each portion of the field has changed tincture, one cannot say that they do not have a tincture in common."
The charges are not simply conjoined but they also overlap: the top yoke of the water bouget lies entirely on the pair of wings. This sort of overlap for conjoined charges is reason for return. One of the many rulings stating that this is not registerable was found in the LoAR of June 2000, "The tree is not within and conjoined to the annulet; it is slightly overall. This type of 'slightly overall' charge has long been a cause for return."
The two charges were originally blazoned as co-primary charges in pale. However, the water bouget is notably smaller than the wings. We have thus reblazoned the badge to indicate that the water bouget is a secondary charge in base rather than co-primary with the wings.
No Letter of Acceptance of Transfer was received from Western Seas for this item.
The augmentation conflicts with Bianca Fioretta da Ravenna, Purpure, a cross moline disjointed, a bordure Or. The augmentation in this submission appears to be a display of the armory Purpure, a cross of Calatrava and a bordure Or, which has one CD from Bianca's device for changing the type of cross, but does not have the substantial difference required to qualify for RfS X.2.
The augmentation also conflicts with a badge of the Kingdom of Calontir, Purpure, a cross of Calatrava Or. There is only one CD for adding the bordure.
Please see the cover letter of the October 2003 LoAR for more discussion of augmentations, their requirements for difference, and their requirements for letters of permission to conflict.
We are aware of the previous registration of an augmentation to Valens of Flatrock in 1993, Vert, a bend azure fimbriated Or between a tower argent and a castle Or, and for augmentation, on a canton purpure a cross of Calatrava within a bordure Or. He, like Andreas, is the recipient of an augmentation from the Crown of Calontir. However, Valens' augmentation (which predates Bianca's 1996 registration) does not protect the armory Purpure, a cross of Calatrava within a bordure Or against conflict, nor does it in any way grandfather the use of this armory for recipients of augmentations from the Kingdom of Calontir. As stated in a pertinent excerpt from the Cover Letter to the October 2003 LoAR:
It is not necessary to check new devices or badges for conflict against previously existing augmentations that have the appearance of being independent armory. This is because the augmentations do not have an existence separate from the arms that they augment, and therefore are not independently protectable entities. Per the LoAR of October 1985: "Arms may be borne with or without an augmentation, but the augmentation should not be used separately from the arms."
Some commenters have theorized that if a person registers an augmentation that appears to be independent armory, the independent armory is somehow grandfathered to the kingdom that originally bestowed the augmentation, and thus (the theory continues) the independent armory could be registered by any new recipient of an augmentation from that kingdom. But this cannot be the case, because the augmentation does not have an independent existence, and because the kingdom has no ownership of, or even control of, the form taken by an individual's augmentation.
We note that Bianca registered her device through the kingdom of Calontir. Since it appears that many recipients of augmentations from Calontir wish to use the augmentation found in this submission, we strongly suggest that the kingdom of Calontir attempt to register Purpure, a cross of Calatrava within a bordure Or as a badge designated as an augmentation. If it is able to do so (which will require, at minimum, permission to conflict from Bianca), then as stated in the October 2003 Cover Letter, further recipients of augmentations from Calontir will be able to use this designated augmentation badge as an augmentation on an appropriate form of display (including a canton or inescutcheon), without requiring letters of permission from the Crown of Calontir against their badge, and without requiring a letter of permission to conflict from Bianca.
It is acceptable for an augmentation to surmount a portion of the underlying armory even if, as in this emblazon, it renders one of the charges unidentifiable by surmounting it almost entirely. The effective invisibility of the charge under the canton is apparent from the blazon and should be taken into account when doing conflict checking.
No documentation was presented and none was found that Cú-Liath is a plausible Gaelic name.
Cú-Liath was submitted as a constructed given name combining the elements Cú 'hound' and Liath 'gray' based on the example of Cú Dub, which combines Cú 'hound' and Dub 'black', found in Ó Corráin & Maguire (p. 64 s.n. Cú Dub).
One example has been found of Liath as a descriptive byname meaning 'grey-haired, aged' in 1332.
However, dub 'black' is a common element in Gaelic masculine names such as Dubán, Dubdae, Dubgall, Dubthach, etc. Additionally, Donnchadh Ó Corráin & Mavis Cournane, ed., "The Annals of Ulster" (http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/G100001/), entry U967.1, lists Dub as the given name of a king of Scotland: Dub m. Mael Coluim, ri Alban 'Dub son of Mael Coluim, king of Scotland'. No evidence was found of liath used as an element in masculine given names. Lacking such evidence, the constructed Cú-Liath is not a plausible Gaelic masculine given name and is not registerable.
The LoI documented Morrissay as an Irish surname found in MacLysaght (p. 222 s.n. Morrissay). Multiple members of the College noted that the submitted documentation was incorrect. Aryanhwy merch Catmael cited Woulfe for period examples of this byname:
[L]ooking at my copy of MacLysaght, there is no entry for <Morrisay>, but only for <Morrisey>, and the entry says: = "This name can be Irish <Ó Muirgheasa> or Norman <de Marisco>." There is no evidence that <Morrisay> or <Morrisey> is a period form. The name is not in R&W. Woulfe s.n. Ó Muirgheasa has <O Murrissa>, <O Morisa>, <O Morrissy> as forms from late 16th C England.
The forms referenced by Aryanhwy are found as italicized secondary headers in Woulfe and are forms found in records from the reigns of Elizabeth I and James I. While they were recorded in English documents, the names recorded were Anglicized Irish forms of people living in Ireland. Lacking evidence that the submitted form Morrissay is a plausible period form, it is not registerable.
These releases were not included on a Letter of Intent. We require all requests that will affect registered items, such as releases, to be submitted on a Letter of Intent. This action is being returned for proper inclusion on a Letter of Intent.
Further, the name Pádraig MacAindreis is not currently registered. In the April 1999 LoAR the name was changed to Jabra'il al-Nasrani. Although not explicitly stated, the name was released with the acceptance of the new name.
Conflict with Barbara Fitzhugh de Brandhard, Azure, a sword inverted proper entwined widdershins of a poppy proper. There is one CD for adding the mastiffs. There is no difference for removing the entwining poppy, per the following ruling in the LoAR of December 2000 regarding the same conflicting armory, "Conflict with Barbara Fitzhugh de Brandhard, Azure, a sword inverted proper entwined widdershins of a poppy proper. Traditionally, entwined charges are treated like maintained charges unless both charges have equal visual weight." Because the entwined charge is considered a maintained charge in Barbara's device, its addition or deletion is not worth difference.
The dogs were originally blazoned as mastiff hounds but they should simply be termed mastiffs. From a heraldic perspective, a mastiff and a hound are different types of dogs, and the phrase mastiff hound is as nonsensical as the phrase talbot greyhound.
Conflict with Alvaro Rodrigo de León, Quarterly vert and argent, a goblet Or between and sustained at the stem by two lions sejant erect reguardant respectant sable. There is one CD for changing the field. There is no difference for changing only one of a group of three co-primary charges in fess.
There is no difference for the slight change in posture of the felines from combattant (which is blazon shorthand for rampant respectant) to sejant erect reguardant respectant. The change in the head position is not worth difference by RfS X.4.h, which notes "Changes in the position of the head, for instance, are not significant." The LoAR of August 2003 discusses the fact that the SCA gives no difference between rampant and sejant erect:
No evidence has yet been presented that the rampant and sejant erect postures would have been considered distinct in period: in fact, it does not appear that the sejant erect posture was described in period blazon (as discussed further in ... [Proceedings of the Knowne World Heraldic & Scribal Symposium (Trimaris A.S. XXIX 1994), "On the Origins and Development of the Sejant Erect Posture" by Zenobia Naphtali)]... Thus, period practice appears to agree with the visually-based precedent in the LoAR of June 1992 (symposium), which stated: "By SCA precedent, there's no difference between rampant and sejant erect. The only real change is the placement of a hind leg."
Over the last few years, there have been several rulings regarding abstract descriptive bynames, including:
[returning the nickname the Arronious] Period nicknames tend to be straightforward and to use common words: Thynnewyt "thin [of] wit, stupid", le Wis "the wise", Badinteheved "bad in the head", le Wilfulle, le Proude "the proud", le Hardy "the courageous", le Sour, le Cursede, le Deuyle "the devil", Blaksoule "black-soul". The learned erroneous simply doesn't belong in this company. Although the adjective in question is not a past participle, we do not consider this case to be significantly different from those of Adam the Unexpected (East, returned 2/96) and Deirdre the Distracted (Ansteorra, returned 4/94), whose bynames were returned partly for being too abstract. Similarly, erroneous is too far from the common tongue to be at all believable as a period byname. (Aurelius the Arronious of Bikeleswade, 10/96 p. 8)
Given this ruling, the byname the Oblivious is unregisterable if oblivious is "too far from the common tongue to be at all believable as a period byname". The only documentation provided for the byname the Oblivious in the LoI was:
Oblivious - Online Etymology Dictionary at www.geocities.com/etymonline/o1etym.htm states: oblivion - late 14c, from L. oblivionem (nom. oblivio) "forgetfulness," from oblivisci "forget" originally "evenout, smooth over," from ob "over" + root of levis "smooth." Oblivious is c. 1450, from L. Obliviosus "forgetful," from oblivio. It has lost its original sense, however, and now means simply "unaware."
While this information demonstrates that oblivious was a word in period, it does not address the issue of whether this term was in regular use in the common tongue. Oblivious is an abstract term of the same type as forgetful, erroneous, et cetera, which have been ruled to be "too far from the common tongue to be at all believable as a period byname". Lacking evidence that oblivious was a common term applied to people in period, this byname is not registerable.
His armory has been registered under the holding name Hannibal of Calontir.
This name conflicts with Caitlin O'Hart (registered in May 1994). Crescent summarized relevant rulings:
This does conflict with Caitlin O'Hart (5/94). Per precedent the given names conflict:
Conflict with the registered name Caitlin of Greenwood. When pronounced correctly, the only difference in sound is the very minor difference between an "r" and an "l" and sometimes the difference between a "t" and a "th". Neither change is sufficient difference. Catharine Grenewode, 01/00, R-Atlantia]
And from the April 2002 Cover Letter, the bynames conflict:
For purposes of conflict, all of the following are significantly different relationships: son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, wife, husband, brother, sister. As a compromise between simplifying conflict checking and basing conflict on interchangeability of bynames in period: in the cases where no particle is present, the unmarked byname shall conflict with a form of the same byname that contains a particle of descent. Particles of descent include those particles that indicate a relationship to an ancestor and so have the meaning 'son', 'daughter', 'grandson', 'granddaughter', et cetera.
O'Hart is an Anglicized Irish rendering of the Gaelic name Ó hAirt, which literally means 'grandson of Art'. Therefore, O'Hart is a byname that contains a particle of descent, which would have Hart as an unmarked byname form. Therefore, Hart and O'Hart conflict.
This device conflicts with Emma de Lyons, Azure, on a chevron between two lions rampant guardant and a crescent argent, three fleurs-de-lys azure. There is one CD for changing the type of secondary charge. There is no difference for changing the type only of the charges on the chevron because this armory has "more than two types of charge directly on the field" (chevron, thistles, and stag's head) and thus is not eligible for the new version of RfS X.4.j.ii in this month's cover letter.
This device also would not have been eligible for the old version of X.4.j.ii because the charges surrounding the ordinary are not identical. The pertinent example from RfS X.4.j.ii.b stated, "Or, on a chevron between two millrinds and a lion passant gardant sable three escallops argent has no clear difference from Or, on a chevron between two millrinds and a lion passant gardant sable three crosses crosslet argent because the charges accompanying the chevron are not identical."
There were some concerns in the commentary about the way that the stag's head was drawn, with its nose slightly to sinister. People in period had a hard time drawing the long narrow stag's head affronty, too, and a stag's head affronty/cabossed that is looking ever so slightly to dexter or sinister is well within the range of reasonable depictions for this charge. The head would have to be turned much more before requiring a return for being in trian aspect.
This name conflicts with Lisa Dolorosa (registered in November 1982). There is insufficient difference in the pronunciation of these two names.
The praenomen Odysseus was submitted using the justification that the Romans had a pattern of adopting an element from a famous leader's name. However, Odysseus is not a Latin name. Odysseus is the typical modern English spelling of the Greek name, which can be transliterated Odysseos. Metron Ariston adds:
The Latin form as Lewis and Short tell us is properly Ulixes with rare misspellings as Ulysses (hence the name of the Civil War general). The name in Latin sources, as far as I can determine, always refers to the hero of the Odyssey and Iliad and does not enter into common use in the Latin name pool in any position.
Barring evidence that Greek names were used by Romans in this way, no spelling of Odysseos can be justified using this Roman naming pattern.
In addition, Metron Ariston and others observed that the names of famous generals were not used as praenomina. Therefore, this pattern cannot be used to justify the use of an element in that position. Finally, no evidence was presented for the use of the names of legendary figures, such as the hero of the Odyssey. Barring evidence of such a pattern, Ulixes is not registerable in this position either. As the submitter does not allow major changes, we were unable to drop the problematic element Odysseus in order to register this name.
The SCA has not registered an arch top before, although it has registered an arch. The arch top in this submission is the semicircular portion of an arch only, without any columns on the sides.
In some cases, we routinely create a new charge out of a portion of a standard heraldic charge without requiring specific documentation for that portion of a charge being used as an independent charge in period. It was a standard period heraldic practice to create demi-beasts and beast's heads from a beast. In keeping with this real-world practice, if a particular beast or monster is a documented heraldic charge, we routinely allow the registration of a demi-beast/monster or a beast's/monster's head as long as the charge's identifiability is preserved. For example, a demi-enfield preserves its identifiability as a portion of an enfield, as it includes the enfield's fox's head, eagle's forelegs and greyhound's torso. However, an enfield's head does not preserve its identifiability, as it would be identical to a fox's head. We thus would not register an enfield's head, although we could register a fox's head.
In the case of the arch top, it does not appear to be a standard period heraldic practice to create an arch top from an arch, any more than it is a standard period practice to create a tower top from a tower. The College felt that the identifiability of the arch top was not preserved when it is removed from the rest of the arch, and that this charge violated RfS VII.7.a, which states in pertinent part, "Any charge, ... must be identifiable, in and of itself, without labels or excessive explanation. Elements not used in period armory may be defined and accepted for Society use if they are readily distinguishable from elements that are already in use." The College felt that the arch top was not "identifiable, in and of itself." Moreover, if the arch top is an "[element] not used in period armory", it is not "readily distinguishable from elements that are already in use", as it could be confused with a bridge.
If documentation were provided for an arch top in period heraldry, then the charge could be registered. The concerns about the identifiability of this "[element] not used in period armory" would be removed if documentation were presented showing that an arch top, in this depiction, was a period charge. However, no such documentation has been provided with this submission, or by the College.
Precedent has consistently held that the first submission of a charge to the College should be accompanied by documentation: "This is being returned for lack of documentation. We can find no indication that a 'muffin cap' has ever been registered before in the SCA. As a consequence, this would be the defining instance of the charge. Previous Laurel Sovereigns of Arms have held new charges to the same standard of documentation and have return them for lacking it, c.f. a winch (Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme, LoAR 9/92, p. 42), a Mongol helm (Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme, LoAR 12/92, p. 15), a zalktis (Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme, LoAR 1/93, p. 28) and a Viking tent arch (Da'ud ibn Auda, LoAR 5/94, p. 17)" (LoAR August 1997, p. 16).
This name submission was an appeal of the return of this name in the February 2003 LoAR, which explains:
No documentation was found that Siridean was used as a given name in period.
Siridean was submitted based on the Gaelic surname form Ó Sirideáin found in MacLysaght's The Surnames of Ireland (s.n. (O) Sheridan). However, not all Mac and Ó surnames derive from given names. Some derive from descriptive bynames. For example, the surname Ó Balbháin (Woulfe, p. 433 s.n. Ó Balbháin) means 'descendant of the stammerer'. Metron Ariston describes the uncertainty regarding the origin of this name:
There has been a great deal of controversy over the etymology of Sheridan and its Irish antecedent over the years. Some people state that the putative Ó Sirideáin meant "son of the Searcher", i.e., is an attributive patronymic rather than a patronymic formed from a given name. Others insist it must have been derived from a rare given name (based largely on its use as a patronymic as far as I can tell). The Clan Sheridan web site itself (www.longfordtourism.com/genealogy/sheridan.html) notes "O' Shiridean literally translates as decendants of Sheridan the meaning of which is uncertain." I was not able to find a clear instance of its use as a given name (as opposed to a portion of a patronymic) in period [...].
Lacking evidence that Siridean is plausible as a given name in Gaelic in period, it is not registerable as a given name.
This appeal is based solely on the text of the ruling for the return of the name Sirideain ui Neill in the January 1993 LoAR (Caid returns), which states:
Sirideain is the genitive form of the given name Siridean; it's how the latter would mutate when used in a patronymic, for instance. As a given name, the unmutated form should be used. Furthermore, the patronymic particle should be ua; ui, the submitted spelling, is the plural. The submitter forbade any changes; this must therefore be returned.
The LoI quoted this ruling, then stated:
Thus the Laurel office was stating at that time that the given name form of this name would be Siridean. And while previous registrations and notes do not guarantee future registration, we feel with this previous statement and the current return statement that says, "Others insist it must have been derived from a rare given name (based largely on its use as a patronymic as far as I can tell). The Clan Sheridan web site itself (www.longfordtourism.com/genealogy/sheridan.html) notes "O' Shiridean literally translates as decendants of Sheridan the meaning of which is uncertain.", we feel that benefit of the doubt should be given to the submitter.
The cited 1993 return was considered when this submitter's name was returned in February 2003. The documentation provided for the 1993 submission was the same citation from Woulfe cited as documentation for the current submitter's name. Prior registration is no guarantee of current registerability; even less so is a prior return support for current registerability.
Knowledge of Gaelic naming practices has increased dramatically within the College during the last ten years. At any point, the registerability of name elements, in the case of "benefit of the doubt" situations, must be judged on a case by case basis according to the current level of knowledge of the College. An argument may be made for recent knowledge - knowledge that may have been current at the time when the name was submitted. Regardless of the validity of such an argument, it is not applicable to the current submission. The cited return is over ten years old and more recently given names documented only as byname elements in Gaelic have been returned:
The documentation for the given name consisted of a S. Gabriel report that says O Corrigan is an English form of the Gaelic name Ó Corragáin. That name may derive from a given name Corrigán, but we have no evidence that such a name existed. Not all O surnames derive from given names, but Corragán certainly looks like a given name. If it existed, it was extremely rare and probably used only in the early Middle Ages. Please note that the report explicitly says that the Academy did not find evidence that the given name existed. Until such evidence is provided, we have to return this. [Corrigan mac Cainnich, 07/2001, R-Calontir]
Further, RfS II.1, "Documented Names", states that:
Documented names, including given names, bynames, place names, and valid variants and diminutives formed in a period manner, may be used in the same manner in which they were used in period sources.
The current RfS is more recent than the cited 1993 return and supercedes it. As the current submission does not provide evidence of Siridean as a given name in period, and no such evidence was found by the College, the reason for return cited in February 2003 is still valid.
In addition, this was not an adequate appeal. The Administrative Handbook, section IV.E, states in part:
A submitter shall have the right to appeal any return to Laurel. All appeals must be supported by new documentation, other proof that the original submission was returned in error or by compelling evidence that the submission was not properly considered at the time of return.
None of these requirements were present in the current appeal. Barring clear evidence of Siridean used as a given name in period, it is not registerable as a given name.
The device submission is an appeal of the return of the device also in the February 2003 LoAR, which explained:
The device conflicts with the important non-SCA arms of Bohun, Earl of Hereford, Constable of England, Azure, a bend argent cotised between six lions rampant Or. There is no difference for changing the type of one of a group of six lions, leaving only one CD for changing the number of secondary charges.
The appeal of the device return is based on interpretation of RfS X.4.e (types) and X.4.f (number) of secondaries. The appeal incorrectly considered the secondaries and changes to the make up of the charge groups. During the commentary on this appeal, it became evident that some misconceptions concerning how to determine secondary charge groups and what changes to these groups apply.
The appeal did not consider the cotises in the discussion of the secondary charge groups. There was confusion and disagreement in the commentary regarding whether the cotises are a separate charge group giving two secondary charge groups, or are included with the lion and castle and thus a single group of secondary charges. The cotises are a separate secondary group as is explained well in the following precedent from October 2001:
[Per bend sinister purpure and vert, a bend sinister between a butterfly and three bells one and two Or] This is clear of conflict with Yusuf Ja'baral-Timbuktuwwi, Per bend sinister purpure and vert, a bend sinister cotised between an elephant's head couped close and a decrescent with a mullet suspended between its horns Or. The cotises, in Yusuf's device, form a distinct charge group apart from the group consisting of the elephant's head and decrescent/mullet. "While cotises and other charges on the field would be considered separate charge groups on the same armory, they are still secondary charges and can be compared to other secondary charges. (LoAR 6/98 p. 17)." In other words, Yusuf's device has two secondary charge groups: the cotises, and the other charges around the bend. Comparing Yusuf's device with this submission, there are three CDs: one for the removal of the cotise group and two for changing the type and number of the other secondary group.
It is certainly possible to have more than one secondary charge group on the field. In the hypothetical arms Argent, a bend cotised between a mullet and a crescent all within a bordure gules, the primary charge group is the bend, the cotises are one secondary charge group, the mullet and crescent are, together, a second secondary charge group, and the bordure is a third secondary charge group (of the type often termed peripheral). Changing or removing any one of these charge groups would be a separate CD. Thus, this hypothetical coat of arms has two CDs from Argent, a bend cotised between two mullets and a chief gules. There is one CD for changing the type of half of the secondary group surrounding the cotised bend (a mullet and a crescent to two mullets) and a second CD for changing the type of the peripheral secondary group (bordure to chief).
With the clarification on cotises we now compare the appeal with the existing (already protected) armory: Bohun, Earl of Hereford, Constable of England, Azure, a bend argent cotised between six lions rampant Or, which is composed of a field azure and three charge groups: primary (the bend argent), secondary group 1 (set of cotises Or), secondary group 2 (six lions rampant Or).
The new armory under submission (Siridean): Azure, a bend argent cotised between a lion rampant and a castle Or is composed of a field azure and three charge groups: primary (the bend argent), secondary group 1 (set of cotises Or), secondary group 2 (a lion rampant and a castle Or).
The two devices have in common the field, the primary, and one of the secondary charge groups (the cotises). The only change between these two pieces of armory involves secondary group 2. Siridean's device compared to the Bohun armory has changed from a group of six lions rampant Or to a group of a lion rampant and a castle Or. Therefore, the only differences between the Bohun arms and Siridean's device is in the type and number of charges in this secondary charge group.
The rules that apply to the changing of the type and number of secondary charge group 2 are RfS X.4.e (type) and X.4.f (number). X.4.e states "Type Changes - Significantly changing the type of any group of charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges or charges overall, is one clear difference... Changing the type of at least half of the charges in a group is one clear difference." X.4.f provides "Significantly changing the number of charges in any group placed directly on the field or overall is one clear difference." This rule does not have any restriction on "half" the group such as is found in X.4.e.
The SCA has always had difficulty dealing with the situation when both the number and the type of a single charge group change. For a classic example, consider the hypothetical arms Azure, a lion Or and a unicorn argent combattant versus Azure, a unicorn argent. In both cases, you have a blue field with a white rampant unicorn. In the first, the unicorn is also accompanied by a gold lion rampant to sinister. The traditional SCA view is to give only one CD for removing the lion so that the two arms are in conflict. However, occasionally, someone tries to argue from a different perspective, namely, that we should give one CD for changing the number of the group (from two to one charge), another CD for changing the type of the group (from half unicorn, half lion to all unicorn), a third CD for changing the tincture of the group (from half Or, half argent, to all argent), and a fourth for changing the posture of the group (from half facing dexter and half facing sinister, to all facing dexter). This, of course, would make the arms well clear of conflict. This interpretation has been disallowed fairly consistently in precedent, although the issue continues to be raised occasionally. The most recent time this issue was addressed was in the LoAR of October 2003, which stated:
Jan van Antwerpen. Device. Quarterly argent and azure, two lymphads sails unfurled azure
Conflict with Lee Sharpeyes, Quarterly argent and azure, four dhows reversed counterchanged. As noted in the LoAR of July 2001, "There is ... nothing for the change in the type of ship, [or] for reversing a ship." There is one CD for removing the two argent ships, but no other difference may be obtained from this change. One cannot argue, as was done on the Letter of Intent, that "there is a CD for the number of charges, and a CD for changing color of half the primary charges." That is equivalent to saying that there is a CD for removing two of the charges, and another CD for the changing the tincture of the charges that have just been removed. The rules have been interpreted consistently for years, and the following discussion from the LoAR of July 1992 still applies:
One cannot get a CD for adding charges, then another CD for changing the charges just added. This has been an underlying principle of the last three sets of Rules: see the LoAR of 25 Aug 85, p.14, for a full discussion. The difference obtained for adding, say, a bordure engrailed ermine, is exactly the same as for adding a bordure Or. (One does not get a CD for adding the bordure, then a CD for changing its tincture, then another CD for making it engrailed.....)
In the 1985 LoAR cited in this return, Laurel noted:
We have held previously that the addition of a modified charge (such as a roundel engrailed ermine) contributes no more difference than adding an unmodified charge (e.g. a roundel gules). This gets us away from absurdities such as the following: to "Azure, a fleurdelys [sic] Or" we add two bars Or and a bordure argent. We engrail the bordure, change the bars from Or to argent, and then delete the bordure. Depending on how creative you are at counting, you could get anywhere from two to five points for the addition of a pair of silver stripes. Not bad for a couple of minutes' work ...
In addition, it should be recalled that the SCA protects REGISTERED armory. Because of this, the SCA considers changes to have been made from the registered armory to the armory currently under submission, and has interpreted the Rules for Submission in the manner that gives the greatest protection to the registered armory, and allows the fewest possible differences for a change to armory. This implies a certain lack of symmetry to the ruling, because the interpretation of a change from "registered" to "considered" does not necessarily match the change from "considered" to "registered". The February 2003 ruling on Siridean's device applied type first (no type difference) and then number (removing four lions). If we were going from "considered" to "registered", we could arguably give a CD for changing from a lion and a castle to two lions (half the group has changed, and is entitled to a CD) and then give a CD for adding four lions, giving two CDs. But this is not the situation under consideration in this appeal.
In Siridean's case, the submitter is changing one of the lions into a castle, which leaves us with a charge group consisting of five lions and one castle. This change is to less than half of the charges in that group, so there is no CD under RfS X.4.e.
After the change of the type (a lion into a castle), we apply the change to the number by removing all but one of the lions and the castle. Of six charges, we remove four of the lions, leaving a total of two charges in the group, which is a change from six to two. RfS X.4.f notes that two and six are signficantly different, and therefore, entitled to a CD.
After applying the change of type and then the change in number, the submitted armory has but a single CD from Bohun, Earl of Hereford, Constable of England, Azure, a bend argent cotised between six lions rampant Or. The device appeal is denied..
This name conflicts with Snorri Bjarnarson (registered in April 1999). The typical Norse patronymic byname formed from the masculine given name Bj{o,}rn is Bjarnarson. The College was unable to find evidence that Bjornsson was a correctly formed spelling, though later spellings such as Biornsson and Byornsson (both dated to 1319 in Sveriges Medeltida Personnamn, vol. 3, column 343, s.n. Biornsson) were found in Swedish.
The talbot was originally blazoned as sustaining the cross of Calatrava. Per the Cover Letter to the LoAR of October 1996, "Maintained charges are small and do not count for difference. Sustained charges are large - large enough in fact that if they were not being held that they would be considered a co-primary, and do count for difference." In this case, while the cross of Calatrava is not a miniscule charge, it is not large enough to be considered a co-primary charge. It is smaller than the talbot both vertically and horizontally and has notably less visual weight than the talbot. Because the SCA's only choices for held charges are to consider them to be sustained co-primary charges, or to consider them maintained insignificant charges, and this cross cannot be considered a co-primary charge, it must be considered a maintained charge.
This thus conflicts with Griffin Brandt, Azure, a talbot passant within an orle of mullets of seven points Or. There is one CD for removing the orle of mullets of seven points, but no difference for adding the maintained cross. It also conflicts with Ingilborg Sigmundardóttir, Azure, in pale two wolves courant Or. There is one CD for changing the number of canines, but no difference between a talbot and a wolf, no difference between passant and courant per the LoAR of August 2001, and no difference for adding the maintained charge.
The device conflicts with Medb Renata, (Fieldless) On a sun argent a bear's pawprint sable. There is one CD for fieldlessness. There is no difference for changing only the type of the tertiary charge on a sun under either the new or old version of RfS X.4.j.ii, since a sun is not a "suitable" charge under that rule.
The bird was blazoned on the LoI as an eagle, but on the form as a falcon, and we have thus reblazoned it.
This submission is heraldically equivalent to Bendy sinister Or and vert. It thus conflicts with Brenna the Disinherited, Bendy sinister of four vert, argent, purpure and argent. There's no difference between bendy sinister of four and bendy sinister of six. The two pieces of armory share a tincture so X.4.a.ii.b does not apply. This leaves one CD for changing the tincture of the field, but that is all.
Conflict with Steffan ap Cenydd of Silverwing, Azure, chapé ployé invected, an owl close affronté argent. There is one CD for changing the field, but no other difference.
This also conflicts with a number of other pieces of armory, typified by the conflict with James MacChluarain, Sable, an owl argent. There is one CD for changing the field. Precedent indicates that there is no difference between an owl in its default close guardant posture (sometimes blazoned as statant guardant) and an owl affronty: " [An owl affronty guardant vs. an owl statant guardant] The "blobbiness" of the owl's body, and the fact that the owl is guardant in all cases, leads me to conclude that there is no visual difference for turning the owl's body affronty." (LoAR August 1992 1992, p. 26.)
While this is a non-exhaustive list, some of the other conflicts are: Antonia d'Alessandria, reblazoned in the Atenveldt section of this LoAR as Azure, an owl close, maintaining in its talons a tuft of wool pendant therefrom a drop spindle argent. There is one CD for changing the field but nothing for the posture of the owl and nothing for removing the maintained charge. Also, Cormac Jacobo de Vega, Per fess sable and checky sable and argent, in chief an owl close guardant maintaining a chess rook in its dexter upraised talon argent. There is one CD for changing the field, no difference for removing the maintained charge, and no difference for the forced move of the owl to chief.
This does not conflict with Anton von Heidelberg, reblazoned in the East section of this LoAR as, Lozengy vert and Or, an owl argent perched atop and sustaining a drawstring pouch fesswise gules. There is one CD for changing the field and a second for removing the co-primary drawstring pouch.
None.
None.
This device conflicts with a badge of Michael Städtler Zweihänder, Azure, a sword proper, overall a lion's head cabossed Or. There is one CD for changing the type of the overall charge and no difference for the small tincture change between a sword argent and a sword proper.
Per the LoAR of September 2001, "Please advise the submitter to draw the flaunches issuing from the top corners of the shield rather than from the chief." Unfortunately, the flaunches in this emblazon are drawn in a fashion that is so far from the standard depiction of flaunches that they may not be registered without redrawing. Please advise the submitter that the flaunches must be drawn from the top corners of the shield in order to be registered.
This flag is for a treaty organization, similar to NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The SCA does not generally protect the flags of treaty organizations. While the SCA does protect the flag of the European Union, the European Union has some features which are generally associated with nation-states, such as courts and legislative authority.
The flag of the Palestinian Authority does not clearly fall into one of the categories which are protected under section III.B.2 of the Administrative Handbook.
Puerto Rico is a commonwealth associated with the United States. Its world importance is roughly that of the importance of a state of the United States. Puerto Rico has more visibility than some states - its Olympic team gives it a more significant international prominence than that of North Dakota - but Puerto Rico is less prominent than some of the states of the Union, such as California or Texas.
The SCA does not consider the flags of the states of the United States to be important enough to protect, although it does consider the arms of the states to be important enough to protect, and in some states, the flag is the same as the arms, so those states have their flags protected via the arms. If Puerto Rico is roughly as important as a state of the United States, and we do not protect the flags of the states of the United States, then the flag of Puerto Rico should not be important enough to protect either.
It was suggested that the presence of the flag of Puerto Rico on someone's shield might result in obtrusive modernity for the viewer of that shield. This may be true, but if we receive such a submission and it is viewed as obtrusively modern, the correct course of action is simply to return the problematic submission for obtrusive modernity. The rules for obtrusive modernity do not require the registration of modern insignia that, when referenced in SCA armory, might cause the SCA armory to be obtrusively modern. The pertinent portion of RfS VIII.4, "Obtrusive Modernity", is section b, "Modern Insignia", which states
Overt allusions to modern insignia, trademarks, or common designs may not be registered.
Such references, including parodies, may be considered obtrusive. Examples include using a bend within a bordure gules to parody the international "No Entry" sign, variations on the geometric Peace sign, and so forth.
Thus, armory that looks like the international "No Entry" sign may be obtrusively modern, but this does not require us to register (Fieldless) A bend within a bordure gules. Armory that looks like the geometric peace sign may be obtrusively modern, but this does not require us to register (Tinctureless) a pale and overall a chevron all within and conjoined to an annulet. And armory that looks like the flag of Puerto Rico may be obtrusively modern, but does not require us to register the flag of Puerto Rico.
None.
No documentation was presented and none was found that a name meaning 'Order of the Feather of the Red Angel' is a plausible order name in period. The submission cited a number of period order names, most of which do not in any way support this submission. The Wing of St. Michael is the only period order name cited in this submission that in any way parallels the construction of the submitted order name. However, it is not a true parallel. al-Jamal explains:
An angel is not a monster or a beast; the only "parts" that come close in the examples cited are the Wing of St. Michael. St. Michael is a very specific personage, with equally specific attributes (archangel, and so on); what is submitted is closer in spirit to "the seraphim's left foot" than St. Michael's wing, and I find nothing in the examples presented to adequately support this submission.
Lacking evidence that the submitted order name complies with RfS III.2.b.ii, which requires that "Names of orders and awards must follow the patterns of the names of period orders and awards", this name is not registerable.
No documentation was presented and none was found that the pattern [animal/creature]+[possession or adornment] is a plausible construction for an order name in period. Lacking such evidence, this order name violates RfS III.2.b.ii, which requires that "Names of orders and awards must follow the patterns of the names of period orders and awards", and must be returned.
The badge conflicts with Alexander le Browere, Per pale sable and vert, a serpent involved in annulo Or. There is only one CD for fieldlessness. This also conflicts with Vladimir Vitalievich Volkov, Per pale argent ermined purpure and purpure, an annulet Or. There is no difference between a serpent involved in annulo and an annulet per the LoAR of February 1999, "[Or, a serpent involved sable] This conflicts with Conrad Breakring of Ascalon Argent, an annulet fracted on the dexter side sable., with one CD for the difference in the fields" [implying no further difference for changing the type of charge.]
Conflict with the Barony of the Flaming Gryphon, badge for the Order of the Gryphon's Plume, Ermine, a feather bendwise Or, enflamed gules. The enflaming in the emblazon of the badge for the Order of the Gryphon's plume is drawn as somewhat fuzzy gules fimbriation, and like all fimbriation, is not worth difference.
This also conflicts with Antoine de Breton, reblazoned in the Atenveldt section of this LoAR as Quarterly gules and purpure, a feather bendwise Or. There is only one CD for fieldlessness.
The feather was blazoned on the LoI as a quill pen, but as it has no nib, it is simply a feather. The slight difference between these charges is artistic only, and no difference is given between them.
This submission has not addressed the reasons for the previous return, which largely involved the chevron abased. The chevron abased is drawn in the same place as the previous chevron abased, or possibly even slightly farther to base. The previous return read:
The chevron abased here is too far to base to be acceptable without documentation for such a design in period. Overly enhanced ordinaries have been a reason for return for many years as non-period style: "These bendlets are enhanced so much to chief that the style becomes unacceptably modern" (LoAR January 1992). Overly abased ordinaries suffer from the same problem.
In the particular case of this chevron, this design could also be interpreted as a voided point pointed. Points pointed may not be voided per RfS VIII.3, which states that "Voiding and fimbriation may only be used with simple geometric charges placed in the center of the design." (LoAR November 2002)
This submission has a number of conflicts, including but not limited to the conflicts mentioned here. Conflict with Johnathan Crusadene Whitewolf, Gules, ermined argent, a wolf rampant argent. There is just a single CD for changing the field. Conflict with Lothar der Grauwolf, Quarterly gules and pean, a wolf sejant erect reguardant argent, maintaining in the dexter paw a torch and in the sinister a sword Or. There is a CD for changing the field but nothing for removing the maintained charges and nothing for the different between rampant and sejant erect.
Conflict with the important non-SCA arms of Drummond, Earl of Perth, Or, three bars wavy gules. Three bars wavy is heraldically equivalent to barry wavy, so there is only one CD for the change from wavy to rayonny. It also conflicts with the important non-SCA arms of Cameron of Lochiel, Gules, three bars Or. This is heraldically equivalent to barry, so there is one CD for changing the line of the barry from plain to rayonny, and no difference for swapping the order of the tinctures on a multiply divided field like barry.
In addition, even though the rayonny line is often drawn with more small repeats than some other lines of division, this particular emblazon shows too many rayonny repeats, and it must be redrawn with fewer and larger repeats.
While a kingdom may certainly choose to allow the Crown Prince to display the arms of the Sovereign differenced by a label, the SCA does not register such armory, by long-standing precedent:
I returned the original arms of the Crown Prince (Calontir differenced by a label) with a certain amount of regret. If there were to be any exception to the rule that a laurel wreath may be used only in the arms of an SCA branch, this would be it. ... I do not, however, consider it inappropriate for a Crown Prince to bear the arms of the King differenced by a label. This seems to me a valid form of display of the royal arms, and it appears to be consistent with our existing policies.
In addition, please see the discussion in the cover letter concerning the registration of devices for consorts and heirs of kingdoms and principalities. Please do note that we will allow a resubmission of armory for the Crown Prince of Trimaris via application of the grandfather clause, even though we will not be registering devices for crown princes in the future, as directed in the Cover Letter.
Listed on the LoI as Bathsheba of Zigana, the submission form shows that this name was submitted as Bath-Sheba Zigana. Apparently it was changed at Kingdom. However no indication of changes made at Kingdom, or an explanation for those changes, was included in the LoI. The form noted that she would accept minor changes and that she would also accept the name Liliom Zigana. No mention of any of this information was included in the LoI.
We would remind submission heralds that proper summarization of forms, including changes allowed by the submitter and requests for authenticity, is required as part of the LoI. Improper summarization of a submission is cause for return of that submission. Asking the College to evaluate names based on incomplete or entirely missing data is both unfair to the College and a disservice to the submitter.
As no documentation was presented to the College for the element Liliom, her alternative choice Liliom Zigana may not be considered.
Bathsheba was documented only as a name used in the Bible (Book of Samuel 11:3). Biblical names are registerable on a case by case basis according to the plausibility of their use in period. Metron Ariston provided information regarding documented period forms of this given name:
Of the given name Withycombe (Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names, s.n. Bathsheba) s[a]ys "It occurs occasionally as a christian name in the Middle Ages in the form Barsabe, and more frequently after the Reformation, often as Bathshua, the form of the name in the Authorized Version of the Book of Chronicles."
The documentation provided for the byname of Zigana in the LoI was:
The submitter provides a web site -- http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Lapyrinth/2398/bginfo/geo/trebizon.html - as documentation for the locative. It states that the Zigana Pass was the route that Marco Polo traveled on his way home to Venice in 1295.
While this demonstrates that the pass existed in period, it only supports Zigana as the modern name for this pass. Lacking evidence that it is a period name for this location, it is not registerable.
Metron Ariston regarding the byname of Zigana:
There is indeed a great deal of doubt as to whether the Turkish form of the name used here was actually used in period for either the pass or any locality nearby in which humans lived in antiquity or the medieval period. While Xenophon clearly brought his troops back from Persia by the pass (he describes it clearly), the largest city in the area was Trapezus or Trebizond, although the geographer Strabo, a contemporary of the Emperor Augustus, also mentions the city of Zigopolis which many scholars associate with the modern Zigana area (www.kultur.gov.tr).
Since there is no indication that Zigana is a period name, the element Zigana is not registerable and this name must be returned.
Any future resubmission should include a proper summarization of the submitter's wishes, as noted on the submission form, in the LoI.
Conflict with Stephen of Forth Castle, Per bend sable and paly gules and Or, a double-bitted anvil Or. There is one difference for changing the field but none for changing a double- to a single-horned anvil.
The frauenadler was originally blazoned as caucasian but it is argent. This discrepancy would have resulted in a pend were it not for the following administrative difficulties.
This submitter already has the maximum number of allowable registrations. His registrations are:
Device (January 1995), Quarterly vert and argent crusilly fitchy counterchanged, a bordure quarterly argent and vert.
Badge (April 1996), (Fieldless) A bear sejant erect Or sustaining a cross crosslet fitchy quarterly argent and vert.
Badge (March 1998), (Fieldless) A cross crosslet fitchy quarterly vert and argent.
Badge (April 1998), James as primary owner and registered jointly with Ghislaine d'Auxerre, (Fieldless) A cross-crosslet fitchy argent charged with a compass star azure.
(The errata letter accompanying this LoAR has errata regarding the April 1998 LoAR. Specifically, according to the Armorial, James appeared to have a fifth badge registered, (Fieldless) On a cross-crosslet fitchy argent a compass star azure. However, this was not a true extra registration but an error in the April 1998 LoAR.)
Because he has four pieces of armory already registered to him, he may not register new armory, per Administrative Handbook section I.B, without releasing some armory.
Note that jointly owned armory counts against the registration limit of the primary owner of the badge. As noted in the Cover Letter for the July 1992 LoAR, "My policy shall be that the first name on the submission be the main badge-holder --- who has the right to release, grant permission to conflict, etc. --- and the second name receive the cross-reference in the A&O." The person with the right to release or grant permission to conflict must necessarily have this item counted against his registration limit.
This name is being returned for lack of documentation that the construction of the byname Hvithestr 'white horse' follows a period pattern of bynames used in Old Norse in period.
The submitter requested authenticity for "Viking / Norse" and allowed minor changes. She also allowed no holding name. However, the LoI included none of this information.
We would remind submission heralds that proper summarization of forms, including changes allowed by the submitter and requests for authenticity, is required as part of the LoI. Improper summarization of a submission is cause for return of that submission. The College of Arms has a limited amount of time and all of us are volunteers. Asking the College to evaluate names based on incomplete or entirely missing data is both unfair to the College and a disservice to the submitter.
The submitted byname Hvithestr was submitted as a combination of two descriptive bynames found in Geirr Bassi, hvít 'white' (p. 23) and hestr 'horse' (p. 22). The most often cited example of the an Old Norse descriptive byname of the form [color] + [animal] is rauðrefr, found in Geirr Bassi (p. 26). Geirr Bassi gives the meaning of 'red fox' for this name. However, this byname and meaning have been found to be an error. Via italics, he indicates that this byname came from the Landnámabók. However, the Landnámabók does not have an example of any person with that byname. It seems to be a typo for rauðnefr 'red-nose'. When an earlier submission referred to the byname rauðrefr listed in Geirr Bassi, Gunnvör silfrahárr found this information:
Interestingly enough, I just went through the Old Icelandic version of Landna'mabo'k (see http://www.snerpa.is/net/snorri/landnama.htm) and I *did not* find a single instance of <rau{dh}refr>. I then searched the whole Netu'tga'fan website and the term does not occur in *any* of the sagas or chronicles they have up -- and that includes almost all of them.
Looking carefully through Landna'mabo'k, however, in chapter 92 I *did* find <Þo'rsteinn rau{dh}nefr>, son of <Hro'lfr rau{dh}skeggr>. This leads me to strongly question whether <rau{dh}refr> may not actually represent a typo for the by-name meaning "red-nose"! Cleasby-Vigfusson also does not list the <rau{dh}refr> compound under either <refr> or <rau{dh}r>.
As this information removes support for the byname rauðrefr in Geirr Bassi, we are left with no confirmed examples of descriptive bynames of the form [color] + [animal] in Old Norse. One commenter reported an example of rauðbekri 'red ram' as appearing in the Landnámabók, but the information provided was incomplete and we were unable to find the byname in the online version of the Landnámabók. Further, as stated in a previous ruling:
A pattern of anything cannot be derived from a single example. It takes multiple examples--the more examples found, the more likely it is that the theorized pattern is accurate. [Annalies Maria von Marburg, 09/01, A-Caid]
Lacking solid evidence of a clear pattern of descriptive bynames of the form [color] + [animal] in Old Norse, there is no support for the submitted Hvithestr as a plausible descriptive byname in Old Norse.
As the submitter allows no holding name, we must also return this device.
On resubmission, please advise the submitter to draw the decrescents larger and to draw the horse's head fully in profile rather than tilted slightly.
The submitter requested authenticity for "Spanish/Italian" and allowed no changes. His form included the notation: "mixed heritage - Italian father, Spanish mother". However, the LoI included none of this information. As a result, the College was not given the opportunity to adequately comment on this submission.
We would remind submission heralds that proper summarization of forms, including changes allowed by the submitter and requests for authenticity, is required as part of the LoI. Improper summarization of a submission is cause for return of that submission. The College of Arms has a limited amount of time and all of us are volunteers. Asking the College to evaluate names based on incomplete or entirely missing data is both unfair to the College and a disservice to the submitter.
Regarding the submitter's request for authenticity: in our period, a man of mixed Italian and Spanish ancestory would have had his name recorded in different ways. In a document written in Italian, his name would have been written completely in an Italian form. In a document written completely in Spanish, his name would have been written completely in a Spanish form.
Maridonna Benvenuti, a regular attendee at the Pelican decision meetings, made time to specifically research this item as a courtesy to the submitter and we thank her for her effort. She found one example of Argento included as part of a byname in period:
Caracausi, Girolamo, Dizionario Onomastico della Sicilia, two volumes, 1994, Palermo, s.n. Argento, has a Latin entry <Iohannes de Argento> a. 1324. This byname is from a placename.
Based on the form of the name found by Maridonna, the form de Argento appears to be a Latin form. Lacking evidence that Argento would have appeared as a stand-alone byname in period, we would have changed this byname to the documented form de Argento in order to register this name. However, as the submitter allows no changes, we were unable to make this change.
Any future resubmission should include a proper summarization of the submitter's wishes, as noted on the submission form, in the LoI.
His armory has been registered under the holding name Miguel of St. Katherine.
The only information provided on the LoI for this submission was:
Raven is found in Reaney and Wilson on pg. 372 under the heading of Raven. It is dated to 1185. Oakwood is justified by such name constructions as Oakhurst, Oakleaf, etc.
This is inadequate and erroneous documentation. It is unclear where this documentation came from since the submission form contains no documentation at all. Reaney & Wilson (p. 372 s.n. Raven) do not date the form Raven to 1185. Rather, the form dated to 1185 in this entry is Rauen. No information was given as to why a placename of Oakwood is plausible based on the examples of Oakhurst and Oakleaf. Also, no documentation was provided for either Oakhurst or Oakleaf. As a result, they cannot support a hypothesized Oakwood, leaving the byname of Oakwood completely undocumented as submitted and as represented on the LoI.
A further error in the LoI was the complete failure to note what changes the submitter would allow. In this case, the submitter allows no changes - which dramatically affects the options that the College might research.
We would remind submission heralds that proper summarization of forms, including changes allowed by the submitter and requests for authenticity, is required as part of the LoI. Improper summarization of a submission is cause for return of that submission. The College of Arms has a limited amount of time and all of us are volunteers. Asking the College to evaluate names based on incomplete or entirely missing data is both unfair to the College and a disservice to the submitter.
Members of the College researched the elements of this name in an attempt to aid the submitter. Aryanhwy merch Catmael provided information supporting elements of this name:
It is <Rauen> that is dated to 1185 in Reaney & Wilson s.n. Raven. Other examples of the given name include <Reuene> 1086, <Raven> 1133-60, 1188, <Reven> 1279.
[...] Reaney & Wilson do have Oakhurst as a header, with the forms <de Okhurste> 1283-4, <Okhurst> 1395. Other headers are Oakham (<de Ocham> 1327, <de Ocham> 1327, <Ockham> 1340-1450) and Oakley (<de Ocle> 1199, 1246, <de Okeley> 1327, <Okelee> 1377, <Okeleye> 1545). S.n. Birchwood are the forms <de Birchewude> 1177, <de Birchwde> 1204, <atte Birchwode> 1342. These examples would support a 12th to 14th century <de Okwude> or <de Ockwode>, in keeping with the time period of <Raven>.
Orle provided other information supporting a form of Oakwood as a placename in period:
Ekwall page 347 s.n. Oakle Street gives Oaklay under several spelling meaning oak wood so the name is plausible. Under s.n. Oakford dates Ocford 1224 as oak ford and s.n. Astwood dates Estwod from 1208 for eastern wood. It looks like the name would be Okewod or Ocwode from the 1200s.
As no documentation was presented and none was found that the spelling Oakwood is plausible for a placename in period, we would have changed the submitted byname of Oakwood to one of the forms recommended by Aryanhwy or Orle in order to register this name. However, as the submitter allows no changes, we were unable to alter the byname to one of these forms.
Her armory has been registered under the holding name Raven of the West.
This name conflicts with Sveinn Ulfsson, king of the Danes (1047-1074).
His armory was registered under the holding name Sveinn of Hawks Haven.
Created at 2004-03-15T19:26:52