Society for Creative Anachronism
College of Arms

2212 S. 64th Plaza, #418
Omaha, NE, 68106
+1 952 412 4112
laurel@heraldry.sca.org

For the April 2013 meetings, printed June 5, 2013

To all the College of Arms and all others who may read this missive, from Gabriel Laurel, Juliana Pelican, and Emma Wreath, greetings.

Items listed below in square brackets have not been scheduled yet. For information about future scheduling, please review the status table located on the Web at http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=137.

The April Laurel decisions were made at the Pelican meeting held on Sunday, April 7, 2013 and at the Wreath meeting held on Saturday, April 13, 2013. These meetings considered the following letters of intent: Meridies (30 Dec, 2012) (pushed due to lack of packet upload), East (17 Jan, 2013), Calontir (20 Jan, 2013), Palimpsest Rules Letter (20 Jan, 2013), Atenveldt (25 Jan, 2013), Palimpsest Rules Letter (25 Jan, 2013), Lochac (28 Jan, 2013), Outlands (29 Jan, 2013), Æthelmearc (31 Jan, 2013), An Tir (31 Jan, 2013), Ansteorra (31 Jan, 2013), Atlantia (31 Jan, 2013), Caid (31 Jan, 2013), Drachenwald (31 Jan, 2013), Meridies (31 Jan, 2013), and Middle (31 Jan, 2013). All commentary, responses, and rebuttals should have been entered into OSCAR by Sunday, March 31, 2013.

The May Laurel decisions were made at the Pelican meeting held on Sunday, May 5, 2013 and at the Wreath meeting held on Saturday, May 11, 2013. These meetings considered the following letters of intent: Ealdormere (31 Jan, 2013), Northshield (03 Feb, 2013), An Tir (05 Feb, 2013), Gleann Abhann (06 Feb, 2013), Laurel LoPaD (09 Feb, 2013), Middle (11 Feb, 2013), Æthelmearc (20 Feb, 2013), East (21 Feb, 2013), Calontir (24 Feb, 2013), Atenveldt (25 Feb, 2013), Ealdormere (25 Feb, 2013), Lochac (25 Feb, 2013), Atenveldt (26 Feb, 2013), An Tir (28 Feb, 2013), An Tir (28 Feb, 2013), Ansteorra (28 Feb, 2013), Artemisia (28 Feb, 2013), Atlantia (28 Feb, 2013), Meridies (28 Feb, 2013), Outlands (28 Feb, 2013), Palimpsest Rules Letter (28 Feb, 2013), and Trimaris (28 Feb, 2013). All commentary, responses, and rebuttals should have been entered into OSCAR by Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

The June Laurel decisions will be made at the Pelican meeting held on Sunday, June 9, 2013, at the Wreath meeting held on Saturday June 22, 2013, and at the Laurel Roadshow held on Sunday, June 30, 2013 at the Known Worlde Heraldic and Scribal Symposium. These meetings will consider the following letters of intent: West (28 Feb, 2013) (pushed due to lack of scans), West (28 Feb, 2013) (pushed due to lack of scans), Laurel LoPaD (03 Mar, 2013), Northshield (04 Mar, 2013), Middle (11 Mar, 2013), Drachenwald (21 Mar, 2013), Ealdormere (22 Mar, 2013), Calontir (25 Mar, 2013), Gleann Abhann (25 Mar, 2013), Atenveldt (26 Mar, 2013), Outlands (26 Mar, 2013), Atlantia (30 Mar, 2013), Caid (30 Mar, 2013), East (30 Mar, 2013), An Tir (31 Mar, 2013), Ansteorra (31 Mar, 2013), Lochac (31 Mar, 2013), and Meridies (31 Mar, 2013). All commentary, responses, and rebuttals should have been entered into OSCAR by Friday, May 31, 2013.

The July Laurel decisions will be made at the Wreath meeting held on Saturday, July 6, 2013, and at the Pelican meeting held on Sunday, July 7, 2013. These meetings will consider the following letters of intent: Laurel LoPaD (03 Apr, 2013), Northshield (04 Apr, 2013), Æthelmearc (10 Apr, 2013), Calontir (14 Apr, 2013), Trimaris (14 Apr, 2013), Ealdormere (18 Apr, 2013), Atenveldt (20 Apr, 2013), Outlands (21 Apr, 2013), Drachenwald (22 Apr, 2013), East (26 Apr, 2013), An Tir (28 Apr, 2013), Lochac (29 Apr, 2013), Middle (29 Apr, 2013), Atlantia (30 Apr, 2013), Caid (30 Apr, 2013), Gleann Abhann (30 Apr, 2013), Meridies (30 Apr, 2013), West (30 Apr, 2013), and West (30 Apr, 2013). All commentary, responses, and rebuttals should be entered into OSCAR by Sunday, June 30, 2013.

Not all letters of intent may be considered when they are originally scheduled on this cover letter. The date of posting of the LoI, date of receipt of the Laurel packet, or other factors may delay consideration of certain letters of intent. Additionally, some letters of intent received may not have been scheduled because the administrative requirements (receipt of the forms packet, receipt of the necessary fees, et cetera) have not yet been met.

REMINDER: Until all administrative requirements are met, the letter may not be scheduled.

* From Laurel: Job Opening - Pelican Sovereign of Arms

After three years of service as Pelican Queen of Arms, Juliana de Luna wants to retire from that job in January 2014. Therefore, we're looking for a successor to take up the reins (reigns?) and become the Pelican Sovereign of Arms.

If you are interested, please see the below job description and send a letter of interest and your resumé to bids@heraldry.sca.org by Saturday, August 31, 2013. If you have questions about the job, please contact Juliana at pelican@heraldry.sca.org or myself at laurel@heraldry.sca.org

Pelican Sovereign of Arms

The Pelican Sovereign of Arms is an educational deputy of the Laurel Principal Sovereign of Arms, responsible for the consideration of and decisions concerning names submitted for registration by the College of Arms.

Pelican is an unpaid position, currently requiring approximately 20 hours a week. The position requires considerable tact and patience, onomastic knowledge, research and reasoning ability, a clear understanding of the Standards for Evaluation and past Laurel rulings, the ability to write clearly and succinctly, the ability to work within tight deadlines and coordinate closely with Wreath, Laurel and other staff to produce a Laurel Letter of Acceptance and Return monthly, computer literacy and word processing skills, reliable e-mail and telephone access, and time and ability to travel. Access to a good research library is desirable but not required. Given the current structure of the office, a high-speed internet connection is useful but it is not required.

Resumés must be sent in both hard copy to Laurel at the address at the top of this Cover Letter and electronically to bids@heraldry.sca.org. The electronic applications will be posted on OSCAR with addresses and other contact information stripped from them. Resumés must be received by Saturday, August 31, 2013, with an expected start date of January 2014.

* From Pelican: Some Name Resources (An Ongoing Series)

For the last few months, we've been discussing models for household names. We've talked about inn-sign names across Europe and other household names in Gaelic and English. This month, we're going to bring together information about household names in Welsh.

The best starting point for household names in Welsh is Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn's "Period Welsh Models for SCA Households and the Nomenclature Thereof" (http://heatherrosejones.com/welshhouseholdname/index.html). You should definitely start there.

In Welsh, groups of people are most frequently named after the personal name of a common ancestor (most frequently the given name but sometimes a combination of elements):

Especially in genealogical texts, it's moderately common to find "Plant personal name" as a term describing the common descendents of personal name. It doesn't have the same legalistic sense as Irish "clann", although you can find something vaguely resembling that sense for "wyrion personal name" (literally "grandsons of personal name"). But these would always be used with a personal name of the common ancestor, not with an abstract totem or symbol. [Zara the Quiet, 05/04, R-Æthelmearc]

Gwely (and later gafael) refers to a group of descendants of an individual who share land. In 2003, Harpy (Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn's heraldic title) gave some examples of this type of group from the mid 14th century (in the Black Book of St. Davids), including gwele Cradoc ap Duryn~, gwele Ieuan ap Kediuor, gwele Gwylbrid', and gwele redwyth' (from [Mat of Forth Castle and Adekin Caradoc, 08/2003 LoAR, A-Caid]). This source uses the moderately unusual spelling gwele instead of the more common gwely.

We have no evidence of names of groups of people in Welsh formed from the names of charges or other inn-sign elements. We likewise have no evidence of fanciful or legendary names. Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn suggests that a few types of household names may use place names or regional ones, such as those using Teulu "warband" or Llys "court." However, the evidence for these is relatively limited. See the article for more details.

* From Pelican: An Apology

The June 2012 and December 2012 Cover Letters referenced a "Matronymics Bynames" page in Mari ingen Briain meic Donnchada's "Index of Names in Irish Annals" article. That page was a collection of research notes that was not intended for public consumption. We apologize to the author for making this link public. The analysis of the data presented in the Cover Letter, like all Laurel decisions, is the interpretation of the Laurel office, and may not be the same as the analysis of the author of the source material.

* From Wreath: Individually Attested Patterns and You

More submissions are making use of the Individually Attested Patterns rules in SENA, which is good. However, we are starting to see more and more insufficient and scattershot documentation, which is not good, as it involves more work by commenters and a greater chance of return for insufficient documentation.

SENA A4A specifically says "All elements in an Individually Attested Pattern must be found in that single time and place, including charges, arrangement of charge groups, and lines of division." SENA A4B states "Each element of the armory which falls outside the core style rules must be documented...The overall design of the submission must be similar to the types of designs that document the use of the non-core style elements. In general, examples must match the submission in style and complexity." The combination of these two statements may be a bit confusing at first.

SENA A4C details the number and types of examples that are required to demonstrate the desired pattern to allow registration. It should be remembered that SENA A4C1 explicitly states that "All examples should come from a single heraldic style or culture; the submissions should match the style of that culture as well."

* From Palimpsest: Closing a Loophole in the Marshalling Rules

On the November 2012 LoAR Cover Letter, Wreath noted that the marshalling rules in SENA do not address designs in which one section of the field has multiple charge groups. This was not intended. Not long after, Palimpsest issued a Rules Letter with a proposed change to SENA section A.6.F.2.d to address this.

The Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory section A.6.F.2.d, Multiple Charges in a Section, currently reads, in part:

d. Multiple Charges in a Section: When any section of such a field contains multiple charges of the same type in a way that cannot be described as a standard single pattern covering the entire field, it creates the appearance of marshalling.

For example, Quarterly, azure and Or, in canton three crosses fleury argent creates the appearance of marshalling, because the charges cannot be blazoned as a single pattern covering the entire field. Similarly, Per pale sable and erminois, each section charged with three billets two and one counterchanged creates the appearance of marshalling, because each section appears to be an independent piece of armory. However, Per pale sable and erminois, six billets two, two, and two counterchanged does not create the appearance of marshalling, because the arrangement of all the charges can be blazoned as a single coherent pattern.

To close this loophole and disallow designs in which any section of the field has multiple charge groups, we are changing A.6.F.2.d., effective immediately, to read:

d. Multiple Charges in a Section: When any section of such a field contains multiple charges of the same type in a way that cannot be described as a standard single pattern covering the entire field, multiple charges of different types, or multiple charge groups, it creates the appearance of marshalling.

For example, Quarterly azure and Or, in canton three crosses fleury argent creates the appearance of marshalling, because the charges cannot be blazoned as a single pattern covering the entire field. Similarly, Per pale sable and erminois, each section charged with three billets two and one counterchanged creates the appearance of marshalling, because each section appears to be an independent piece of armory. However, Per pale sable and erminois, six billets two, two, and two counterchanged does not create the appearance of marshalling, because the arrangement of all the charges can be blazoned as a single coherent pattern. For example, Quarterly sable and Or, in canton a lion and a unicorn combattant Or creates the appearance of marshalling because a single section of the field contains multiple types of charges. Similarly, Per pale gules and argent, a tree and in chief a mullet gules creates the appearance of marshalling because the tree and mullet are forced into the argent section of the field and thus it contains multiple charge groups.

* From Palimpsest: Closing Some Loopholes in Personal Name Presumption

This month, we are closing a number of loopholes in the Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory section PN.4, Personal Name Presumption.

Some portions of PN.4.B.1 specifically say that they apply to attested bynames; this would allow the use of the Legal Name Allowance or other allowances to register such name elements, which is not the intention. The current relevant portions of PN.4.B.1 read:

Attested bynames which are identical to titles used in the Society are generally not allowed for individuals who do not have that rank. Relatively minor changes to the form of the byname can remove the appearance of a claim to rank.

and

Attested given names that are identical to titles and forms of address may be registered in contexts that make it clear that they are given names and not titles.

and

Attested bynames incorporating the names of Society peerage orders and real-world knightly orders are not considered a claim to rank or membership in those orders.

To close this loophole, we are changing these portions of PN.4.B.1., effective immediately, to remove the word "attested". It will then read:

Bynames which are identical to titles used in the Society are generally not allowed for individuals who do not have that rank. Relatively minor changes to the form of the byname can remove the appearance of a claim to rank.

and

Given names that are identical to titles and forms of address may only be registered in contexts that make it clear that they are given names and not claims to rank or titles.

and

Bynames incorporating the names of Society peerage orders and real-world knightly orders are not considered a claim to rank or membership in those orders.

The rest of PN.4.B.1 remains the same, including restriction of bynames identical to non-Society titles.

The wording of PN.4.B.5 currently refers solely to bynames; however, some given names (including late-period English surnames used as bynames) can also give the appearance of being an occupational name, creating the appearance that this rule is intended to prevent. The current text of PN.4.B.5 reads:

5. Combination of Occupational and Locative Bynames: Names may not combine an occupational byname and a locative byname in a way that seems to be a claim to rank or official position. Most such combinations do not have this appearance. This should not be understood to suggest that the Crown cannot make such appointments; however, as they are not necessarily permanent, such appointments may not be used as justification for registered names.

For example, a name submission cannot use the combinations the Bard of Armagh or Abbot of Saint Giles or Champion of Ealdormere. However, the Seamstress of York is unlikely to be understood to be the only seamstress, or an official seamstress and so would be registerable.

To close this loophole, we are changing PN.4.B.5, effective immediately, to read:

5. Combination of Occupational and Locative Bynames: Names may not combine an occupational byname and a locative byname in a way that seems to be a claim to rank or official position. Some given names appear identical to occupational or locative bynames; names may not combine a given name of this form with an occupational or locative byname in a way that seems to be a claim to rank or official position. Most such combinations do not have this appearance. This should not be understood to suggest that the Crown cannot make such appointments; however, as they are not necessarily permanent, such appointments may not be used as justification for registered names.

For example, a name submission cannot use the combinations Bard of Armagh or Abbot of Saint Giles or Champion of Ealdormere. Similarly, while Kingdom, London, and Herald can all be documented as both given names and bynames, Kingdom Marshall, London Herald and Herald of Wyvernwoode all give the impression of claiming rank or official position and would not be registerable. However, Seamstress of York is unlikely to be understood to be the only seamstress, or an official seamstress and so would be registerable.

Finally, we are adding a new section to PN.4 to address claims of non-human status, such as being a territorial unit. We are adding PN.4.E., effective immediately, which reads:

E. Claim of Non-Human Status: A personal name may not give the false appearance of being a territorial name, a rank or title, or an order or award; a name may make the appearance of a household name on a case by case basis. A personal name may not be identical to the name of any non-personal entity we protect.

For example, while Town and Kingdom can both be documented as given names, both Town of Princeton and Kingdom of Ealdormere create the false appearance of being a territorial entity. Similarly, while House can be documented as a given name, House of York creates the false appearance of being a famous English royal household. However, Kingdom Jones or House Smith do not give this false appearance.

* From Palimpsest: Improving Consistency with Low-Contrast Complex Lines of Division

SENA is somewhat inconsistent in how it describes which low-contrast complex lines of division are registerable; sub-sections of A.3.B.3 say that they must be attested and that Appendix H has a list of acceptable ones, but Appendix H instead describes more generalized standards. Additionally, SENA is inconsistent in terminology, using "poor contrast" sometimes and "low-contrast" other times.

These changes are intended to make things more consistent between A.3.B.3 and Appendix H; however, the primary standard remains identifiability. Regarding "poor contrast" and "low-contrast", we are making the smallest possible change, to make it explicit that we use both interchangeably, in section A.3.B.2.

The current relevant portion of A.3.B.2 reads:

Pairings such as a color and a color or a metal and a metal are said to have poor contrast.

We are changing this portion of A.3.B.2., effective immediately, to read:

Pairings such as a color and a color or a metal and a metal are said to have poor contrast or to be low-contrast.

The current relevant portions of A.3.B.3.a and A.3.B.3.c are identical; both read:

Thus, any pairing of low-contrast tinctures with a complex line of division must be attested in order to be registered. A discussion of currently allowed low-contrast combinations and their designs is included in Appendix H.

We are changing these relevant portions of A.3.B.3.a and A.3.B.3.c, effective immediately to read:

Thus, any pairing of low-contrast tinctures with a complex line of division must meet the standards in Appendix H.

As Appendix H is changing substantially, we are giving only the new version. We are changing Appendix H, effective immediately, to read in whole:

The primary standard for low-contrast complex lines of division is that they be readily identifiable.

In many cases, a charge overlying a low-contrast complex line of division will render the line of division unidentifiable. Thus, divided fields with low-contrast tinctures with complex lines of division will be registered with a charge overlying the line division only if the line of division remains readily identifiable.

In some cases, even if there is no overlying charge, a low-contrast complex line of division may be unidentifiable and thus unregisterable. Similarly, in some cases, the specific shades used in a submission may render a low-contrast complex line of division unidentifiable and thus unregisterable, even if the combination has previously been registered.

Some low-contrast complex line combinations which have been registered recently are:

Some low-contrast complex line combinations which have been ruled unregisterable, even when there is no overlying charge, are:

* Society Pages

It is with great sadness that we note the death of Dom Pedro de Alcazar, Padrão Herald, on 27 May 2013 after a stroke suffered on the 16th. After several years in the Middle Kingdom, Pedro served the Kingdom of Atlantia for many years as baronial herald for Storvik and as kingdom heraldic staff (deputy to the submissions herald, consulting table organizer, and newsletter editor). He was on Laurel Staff from 1996-99 and Wreath Staff in 2004-05, and served Pennsic Heralds Point well for several years. Pedro brought in serveral new heralds, and contributed much to heraldic education and research. In addition to articles published for Known World Heraldic and Scribal Symposia, on the Laurel website, and for the Atlantian newsletter, he also wrote other articles of interest which can be found on his website (http://pages.ripco.net/~clevin/professional.html). He had stepped back from heraldry in recent years to return to his love of astronomy, coordinating and delivering several planetarium shows at the Owens Science Center. He was devoted to his wife, Devora bat Shimshon.

* Send What to Whom

Letters of Intent, Comment, Response, Correction, et cetera are to be posted to the OSCAR online system. No paper copies need be sent.

Submission packets (one copy of each name form plus documentation, including petitions; two colored copies of each armory form plus two copies of any associated documentation, including petitions) to the SCA College of Arms, 3101 Lee Hwy Ste 18/19 #178, Bristol VA 24202.

Cheques or money orders for submissions, payable to "SCA Inc.-College of Arms" are to be sent to John C. Sandstrom, New Mexico State University, PO Box 30006/MSC 3475, Las Cruces, NM 88003.

Send roster changes and corrections to Laurel. College of Arms members may also request a copy of the current roster from Laurel.

For a paper copy of a LoAR, please contact Laurel, at the address above. The cost for one LoAR is $3. Please make all checks or money orders payable to "SCA Inc.-College of Arms". The electronic copy of the LoAR is available free of charge. To subscribe to the mailings of the electronic copy, please see the bottom of http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/lists.html#lists for more instructions.

For all administrative matters, please contact Laurel.

Pray know that I remain,

In service,

Gabriel Kjotvason
Laurel Principal King of Arms


Created at 2013-06-06T00:05:43