Collected Precedents of the S.C.A.: Holding Names

Name Precedents: Holding Names

Laurel: Date: (year.month.date) Precedent:

François la Flamme 2003.07 The submitter requested on his name submission form that this name be a holding name so that he can register his device while still researching his "real SCA Name". Unfortunately, that is not possible. Holding names have special status. They are purely administrative labels created at the Laurel level in order to register a piece of armory when the name submitted with that armory is not registerable. The submitter is then able to resubmit their name without Laurel fees. When an acceptable name is passed, the holding name is automatically released.
The submitted name in this instance is Douglas of Ravenslake and it is registerable. Therefore, a holding name does not come into play. The submitted name is registered as the submitter's primary SCA name. When he has completed researching the SCA name he desires, he may submit a name change according to normal procedures. As with any name change submission, the submitter may then choose whether to release his previously registered name (Douglas of Ravenslake in this case) or to retain it as an alternate name. [Douglas of Ravenslake, 07/2003 LoAR, A-Middle]

François la Flamme 2003.05 Submitted under the name Alida de Conti, the submitter's name was returned on the October 2002 LoAR for lack of documentation for Alida, which was submitted under the Legal Name Allowance. Her armory has been registered under the holding name Alida of the East. As explained in the Cover Letter for the June 2002 LoAR (in the section entitled "From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names"), use of Alida in her holding name does not grandfather this element for use in an SCA name, since no documentation was provided in this submission supporting Alida as her legal name. [Alida of the East, 05/2003 LoAR, A-East]

François la Flamme 2002.09 Her armory has been registered under the holding name Evangeline of Calanais Nuadh. As explained in the Cover Letter for the June 2002 LoAR (in the section entitled "From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names"), use of Evangeline in her holding name does not grandfather this element for use in an SCA name since no documentation was provided in this submission supporting Evangeline as her legal name. [Evangeline Bajolet de Roubidoux, 09/2002 LoAR, R-Calontir]

François la Flamme 2002.06 From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names
An issue regarding holding names arose in reviewing a submission this month. A holding name occupies a special, purely administrative, status as stated clearly and concisely by Baldwin of Erebor, Laurel King of Arms:
Please remember that a holding name is intended as a temporary measure. It allows us to register a piece of armory now, rather than having to wait for the person to choose a new name and resubmit. There is no fee for changing a holding name. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p. 4]

If a submitted name is not registerable for one reason or another and the submitter has also submitted armory that is registerable, then either the armory must be returned for lack of a name or a holding name must be created in order to permit registration of the armory. If the submitted name form indicates that the submitter will accept a holding name, a holding name is usually created.
The Administrative Handbook, section III.1.A, states, "Once registered, an item shall be protected until written notice of release is received by the Laurel Office from the registrant." This policy follows Corpora VI.C.3.b, which states:
Any item once registered shall remain registered unless the owner requests its release, and shall be accepted in the Society for the person for whom it was registered without regard to changes in the rules and standards applied to future submissions, or to the membership status of the owner.

Therefore, when a holding name is registered, a holding name is protected from conflict and will continue to be a registered item until the submitter submits a name change and has that name change registered. Upon registration of a name change, the holding name is automatically released. There is no charge for a name change from a holding name.
The issue that has currently come under discussion is what elements of a holding name may be claimed by the submitter for use in an SCA name under the Grandfather Clause. Section III.1.A of the Administrative Handbook and section VI.C.3.b of Corpora, both cited above, guarantee protection of the registered name, in the complete form in which it is registered, until such time as the submitter shall request release of that item. Since holding names are automatically released upon registration of a submitted name, submission of a name change acts as a request for release of the holding name upon registration of the new submission. The Grandfather Clause is not addressed in these two documents. Rather it is covered in RfS II.5, which states in part (emphasis added):
Registered Names. - Once a name has been registered to an individual or group, the College of Arms may permit that particular individual or group to register elements of that name again, even if it is no longer permissible under the rules in effect at the time the later submission is made. This permission may be extended to close relatives of the submitter if the College of Arms deems it appropriate.
Only the actual name element from the originally registered submission is covered by this permission. For example, if an individual had registered a surname from a fantasy novel that has no relation to period naming before such names were restricted, that surname could be retained if that submitter decided to change his given name, even though it might not be acceptable under these rules. He could not register other surnames from the same novel, however.

Currently at issue are mundane name elements taken from submission forms in order to create a holding name, most notably elements used as given names in the holding name that is created. A holding name is often created using the given name the submitter has listed on their submission form. However, unlike with a given name submitted under the Legal Name allowance (RfS II.4), no documentation is normally provided to support that name as the submitter's legal given name. In most cases, the name listed is likely the name they commonly use. Often this is indeed the submitter's legal given name. In other cases, it may be a nickname or a middle name that they use as their common use name. Grandfathering these undocumented elements creates a situation where documentation requirements have been circumvented.
Therefore, only elements in a holding name that were documented in the original submission will be eligible for reuse without new documentation via the Grandfather Clause. The alternative would be to either (1) not use any mundane name element from the submitter's form in a holding name unless it is accompanied by supporting documentation as required by the Legal Name Allowance, or (2) not register holding names. Either of these options would be unreasonably burdensome on submitters, the majority of whom do not encounter this situation. In the interest of balancing fair application of documentation standards for all submitters, versus ease of submission, we have chosen to limit grandfathering of individual elements from a holding name to those elements that were acceptably documented in the original submission. A submitter wishing to preserve that name element in a resubmission may submit documentation as specified by the Legal Name allowance and may register that item via that rule.
This policy change replaces previous policy, including that covered in the "Holding Names" section of the March 1997 Cover Letter, and will go into effect at the January 2003 decision meeting. [Cover Letter for the 06/2002 LoAR]

François la Flamme 2002.06 An issue regarding holding names arose in reviewing this submission resulting in a policy change discussed fully in the Cover Letter accompanying this LoAR. Beginning with the January 2003 decision meeting, elements of a holding name which were not documented in the original submission are not grandfathered for use in a new submission or resubmission. Most notably this addresses mundane name elements taken from the submission form in order to create a holding name. If such an element was not submitted with proper documentation as required under the Legal Name allowance (RfS II.4), it is not grandfathered. If the submitter wishes to use that element in an SCA name, it may be submitted as normal under the Legal Name allowance. For a full discussion of this issue, please see the Cover Letter. [Haley Óláfsdóttir, 06/2002, A-Atenveldt]

François la Flamme 2001.12 The letter of intent listed this item as a device-only submission, and noted in the discussion that Kingdom had formed a holding name. This must be returned because neither the Kingdom nor Laurel may form a holding name for a branch. Without an associated name, armory may not be registered. [Brant County, Canton of, 12/01, R-Ealdomere]

François la Flamme 2001.12 The Letter of Intent listed this item as a device-only submission, and noted in the discussion that Kingdom had formed a holding name. This must be returned because, according to the Administrative Handbook, Kingdoms cannot form holding names. This is therefore administratively equivalent to a submission without an associated name. Also according to the Administrative Handbook, armory may not be registered without an associated name. [Niall of Skelter Gate, 12/01, R-Ealdomere]

Jaelle of Armida 1998.12 [Raffe of Ardcreag. Change of holding name from holding name James of Eoforwic.] This was an appeal of the original return of Raffe Scholemystre. Out of courtesy to the client we have changed his holding name to the form he prefers. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR December 1998, p. 9)

Jaelle of Armida 1997.07 [returning Sean Donald] Since creating a holding name would be a change, we must obey the submitter's wishes as refrain from doing so, which means that the armory must be returned as well. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR July 1997, p. 18)

Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme 1993.07 Some of my staff thought it unfortunate that this device be returned on a technicality regarding the name, and urged me to form a holding name out of whole cloth: Jason of Havbjorn, for instance. I considered it, but decided not to set such a dangerous precedent. The College of Arms already has a reputation for arbitrarily changing people's names. I see no need to fuel that reputation by selecting a name for this client from thin air; that would be truly arbitrary. At least, when correcting people's grammar, we try to give them a name with their desired meaning; when forming a holding name, we either use elements from the submitted name (which we can therefore assume are acceptable to the client) or else the mundane name and SCA branch, following a procedure carefully defined beforehand. Choosing a name on a whim for this submitter would follow neither his preference nor our procedure; it would usurp his privilege to choose his own Society name. Even with the best of intentions --- to register his device --- I'm not willing to take that step. (Jay MacPhunn, July, 1993, pg. 17)

Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme 1993.05 Depending on the case, I will usually form a holding name by combining the submitter's mundane given name with the name of his/her SCA branch. Exceptions may be made when the submitter has specified the holding name he/she would like to receive, or when the use of the mundane given name would sound modern to the ear. In the end, it shouldn't matter exactly how the holding name was formed; submitters with holding names should still be encouraged to resubmit their names, with the problems corrected. (10 June, 1993 Cover Letter (May, 1993 LoAR), pg. 3)

Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme 1992.08 [Alternate name returned for lack of primary name] I don't believe holding names can be formed for anything but armory. (Sophia Sans Peur (Sophia Fearadaigh), August, 1992, pg. 29)

Da'ud ibn Auda (1st year of 1st tenure) 1990.09 [Submitter appealing and suggesting, if appeal fails, that the existing holding name be changed] "Regarding the proposed change of the holding name, even while knowing the submitter's desires and the reasons therefore, Laurel had to agree with Trefoil that changing an existing holding name at the request of the submitter sets a bad precedent, and it is believed would be tantamount to a name change, which would require the submitter to pay for her next name (re)submission. In the interests of fairness to all submitters, the holding name...remains unchanged." (LoAR 9/90 p.14).

Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane 1987.03.20 I was extremely distressed by the number of submissions with acceptable armoury that I was compelled to return in their entirety ... because the submission forms specifically stated that no changes, however minor, could be made to the spelling or grammar of the name. Unless there is some indication that a holding name would be acceptable, I am compelled to take statements that no changes may be made to the name literally and return the submission as a whole.... There are several options open to consulting heralds to resolve this situation: advise submittors not to prohibit changes to the name, request them to state on the forms if a holding name is acceptable, or to ... add a line to the forms requesting the submittor to indicate if formation of a holding name is not acceptable. Of all the options, the latter is probably the most satisfactory and I heartily recommend it to all Kingdoms. (I hate returning a beautiful armorial submission because of technical problems with the name!) (CL 20 Mar 87, p. 2)

Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme 1986.01 That being the case, the holding name should serve "to emphasize the fact that this was a temporary measure, not an unauthorized modification. (Timothy of Carraig Ban ...is more obviously a temporary substitute than [the submitted name with the objectionable phrase omitted].) The idea is to encourage the submitter to correct the problem himself." [LoAR of Jan 86, p.7]

Baldwin of Erebor 1985.12.29 Holding names are for use at the Laurel level only. Problems found at the kingdom level should be dealt with before the submission is sent out on a letter of intent. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]

Baldwin of Erebor 1985.12.29 I consider the assignment of a holding name to be a change. It is true that the purpose served by a holding name is administrative, and that there is no fee for changing a holding name: nonetheless, what is registered is not what was submitted, and some people regard holding names as a form of tampering. (Witness the rather acrid comments from the Midrealm over the holding name with which N. was "saddled". If the practice draws this kind of reaction from the heralds, who presumably understand how the system works, imagine how a non-herald might feel.) [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]

Baldwin of Erebor 1985.12.29 Please remember that a holding name is intended as a temporary measure. It allows us to register a piece of armory now, rather than having to wait for the person to choose a new name and resubmit. There is no fee for changing a holding name. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]

Laurel:	Date: (year.month.date)	Precedent:
François la Flamme	2003.07	The submitter requested on his name submission form that this name be a holding name so that he can register his device while still researching his "real SCA Name". Unfortunately, that is not possible. Holding names have special status. They are purely administrative labels created at the Laurel level in order to register a piece of armory when the name submitted with that armory is not registerable. The submitter is then able to resubmit their name without Laurel fees. When an acceptable name is passed, the holding name is automatically released. The submitted name in this instance is Douglas of Ravenslake and it is registerable. Therefore, a holding name does not come into play. The submitted name is registered as the submitter's primary SCA name. When he has completed researching the SCA name he desires, he may submit a name change according to normal procedures. As with any name change submission, the submitter may then choose whether to release his previously registered name (Douglas of Ravenslake in this case) or to retain it as an alternate name. [Douglas of Ravenslake, 07/2003 LoAR, A-Middle]
François la Flamme	2003.05	Submitted under the name Alida de Conti, the submitter's name was returned on the October 2002 LoAR for lack of documentation for Alida, which was submitted under the Legal Name Allowance. Her armory has been registered under the holding name Alida of the East. As explained in the Cover Letter for the June 2002 LoAR (in the section entitled "From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names"), use of Alida in her holding name does not grandfather this element for use in an SCA name, since no documentation was provided in this submission supporting Alida as her legal name. [Alida of the East, 05/2003 LoAR, A-East]
François la Flamme	2002.09	Her armory has been registered under the holding name Evangeline of Calanais Nuadh. As explained in the Cover Letter for the June 2002 LoAR (in the section entitled "From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names"), use of Evangeline in her holding name does not grandfather this element for use in an SCA name since no documentation was provided in this submission supporting Evangeline as her legal name. [Evangeline Bajolet de Roubidoux, 09/2002 LoAR, R-Calontir]
François la Flamme	2002.06	From Laurel: Regarding Mundane Given Names Used to Create Holding Names An issue regarding holding names arose in reviewing a submission this month. A holding name occupies a special, purely administrative, status as stated clearly and concisely by Baldwin of Erebor, Laurel King of Arms: Please remember that a holding name is intended as a temporary measure. It allows us to register a piece of armory now, rather than having to wait for the person to choose a new name and resubmit. There is no fee for changing a holding name. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p. 4] If a submitted name is not registerable for one reason or another and the submitter has also submitted armory that is registerable, then either the armory must be returned for lack of a name or a holding name must be created in order to permit registration of the armory. If the submitted name form indicates that the submitter will accept a holding name, a holding name is usually created. The Administrative Handbook, section III.1.A, states, "Once registered, an item shall be protected until written notice of release is received by the Laurel Office from the registrant." This policy follows Corpora VI.C.3.b, which states: Any item once registered shall remain registered unless the owner requests its release, and shall be accepted in the Society for the person for whom it was registered without regard to changes in the rules and standards applied to future submissions, or to the membership status of the owner. Therefore, when a holding name is registered, a holding name is protected from conflict and will continue to be a registered item until the submitter submits a name change and has that name change registered. Upon registration of a name change, the holding name is automatically released. There is no charge for a name change from a holding name. The issue that has currently come under discussion is what elements of a holding name may be claimed by the submitter for use in an SCA name under the Grandfather Clause. Section III.1.A of the Administrative Handbook and section VI.C.3.b of Corpora, both cited above, guarantee protection of the registered name, in the complete form in which it is registered, until such time as the submitter shall request release of that item. Since holding names are automatically released upon registration of a submitted name, submission of a name change acts as a request for release of the holding name upon registration of the new submission. The Grandfather Clause is not addressed in these two documents. Rather it is covered in RfS II.5, which states in part (emphasis added): Registered Names. - Once a name has been registered to an individual or group, the College of Arms may permit that particular individual or group to register elements of that name again, even if it is no longer permissible under the rules in effect at the time the later submission is made. This permission may be extended to close relatives of the submitter if the College of Arms deems it appropriate. Only the actual name element from the originally registered submission is covered by this permission. For example, if an individual had registered a surname from a fantasy novel that has no relation to period naming before such names were restricted, that surname could be retained if that submitter decided to change his given name, even though it might not be acceptable under these rules. He could not register other surnames from the same novel, however. Currently at issue are mundane name elements taken from submission forms in order to create a holding name, most notably elements used as given names in the holding name that is created. A holding name is often created using the given name the submitter has listed on their submission form. However, unlike with a given name submitted under the Legal Name allowance (RfS II.4), no documentation is normally provided to support that name as the submitter's legal given name. In most cases, the name listed is likely the name they commonly use. Often this is indeed the submitter's legal given name. In other cases, it may be a nickname or a middle name that they use as their common use name. Grandfathering these undocumented elements creates a situation where documentation requirements have been circumvented. Therefore, only elements in a holding name that were documented in the original submission will be eligible for reuse without new documentation via the Grandfather Clause. The alternative would be to either (1) not use any mundane name element from the submitter's form in a holding name unless it is accompanied by supporting documentation as required by the Legal Name Allowance, or (2) not register holding names. Either of these options would be unreasonably burdensome on submitters, the majority of whom do not encounter this situation. In the interest of balancing fair application of documentation standards for all submitters, versus ease of submission, we have chosen to limit grandfathering of individual elements from a holding name to those elements that were acceptably documented in the original submission. A submitter wishing to preserve that name element in a resubmission may submit documentation as specified by the Legal Name allowance and may register that item via that rule. This policy change replaces previous policy, including that covered in the "Holding Names" section of the March 1997 Cover Letter, and will go into effect at the January 2003 decision meeting. [Cover Letter for the 06/2002 LoAR]
François la Flamme	2002.06	An issue regarding holding names arose in reviewing this submission resulting in a policy change discussed fully in the Cover Letter accompanying this LoAR. Beginning with the January 2003 decision meeting, elements of a holding name which were not documented in the original submission are not grandfathered for use in a new submission or resubmission. Most notably this addresses mundane name elements taken from the submission form in order to create a holding name. If such an element was not submitted with proper documentation as required under the Legal Name allowance (RfS II.4), it is not grandfathered. If the submitter wishes to use that element in an SCA name, it may be submitted as normal under the Legal Name allowance. For a full discussion of this issue, please see the Cover Letter. [Haley Óláfsdóttir, 06/2002, A-Atenveldt]
François la Flamme	2001.12	The letter of intent listed this item as a device-only submission, and noted in the discussion that Kingdom had formed a holding name. This must be returned because neither the Kingdom nor Laurel may form a holding name for a branch. Without an associated name, armory may not be registered. [Brant County, Canton of, 12/01, R-Ealdomere]
François la Flamme	2001.12	The Letter of Intent listed this item as a device-only submission, and noted in the discussion that Kingdom had formed a holding name. This must be returned because, according to the Administrative Handbook, Kingdoms cannot form holding names. This is therefore administratively equivalent to a submission without an associated name. Also according to the Administrative Handbook, armory may not be registered without an associated name. [Niall of Skelter Gate, 12/01, R-Ealdomere]
Jaelle of Armida	1998.12	[Raffe of Ardcreag. Change of holding name from holding name James of Eoforwic.] This was an appeal of the original return of Raffe Scholemystre. Out of courtesy to the client we have changed his holding name to the form he prefers. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR December 1998, p. 9)
Jaelle of Armida	1997.07	[returning Sean Donald] Since creating a holding name would be a change, we must obey the submitter's wishes as refrain from doing so, which means that the armory must be returned as well. (Jaelle of Armida, LoAR July 1997, p. 18)
Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme	1993.07	Some of my staff thought it unfortunate that this device be returned on a technicality regarding the name, and urged me to form a holding name out of whole cloth: Jason of Havbjorn, for instance. I considered it, but decided not to set such a dangerous precedent. The College of Arms already has a reputation for arbitrarily changing people's names. I see no need to fuel that reputation by selecting a name for this client from thin air; that would be truly arbitrary. At least, when correcting people's grammar, we try to give them a name with their desired meaning; when forming a holding name, we either use elements from the submitted name (which we can therefore assume are acceptable to the client) or else the mundane name and SCA branch, following a procedure carefully defined beforehand. Choosing a name on a whim for this submitter would follow neither his preference nor our procedure; it would usurp his privilege to choose his own Society name. Even with the best of intentions --- to register his device --- I'm not willing to take that step. (Jay MacPhunn, July, 1993, pg. 17)
Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme	1993.05	Depending on the case, I will usually form a holding name by combining the submitter's mundane given name with the name of his/her SCA branch. Exceptions may be made when the submitter has specified the holding name he/she would like to receive, or when the use of the mundane given name would sound modern to the ear. In the end, it shouldn't matter exactly how the holding name was formed; submitters with holding names should still be encouraged to resubmit their names, with the problems corrected. (10 June, 1993 Cover Letter (May, 1993 LoAR), pg. 3)
Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme	1992.08	[Alternate name returned for lack of primary name] I don't believe holding names can be formed for anything but armory. (Sophia Sans Peur (Sophia Fearadaigh), August, 1992, pg. 29)
Da'ud ibn Auda (1st year of 1st tenure)	1990.09	[Submitter appealing and suggesting, if appeal fails, that the existing holding name be changed] "Regarding the proposed change of the holding name, even while knowing the submitter's desires and the reasons therefore, Laurel had to agree with Trefoil that changing an existing holding name at the request of the submitter sets a bad precedent, and it is believed would be tantamount to a name change, which would require the submitter to pay for her next name (re)submission. In the interests of fairness to all submitters, the holding name...remains unchanged." (LoAR 9/90 p.14).
Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane	1987.03.20	I was extremely distressed by the number of submissions with acceptable armoury that I was compelled to return in their entirety ... because the submission forms specifically stated that no changes, however minor, could be made to the spelling or grammar of the name. Unless there is some indication that a holding name would be acceptable, I am compelled to take statements that no changes may be made to the name literally and return the submission as a whole.... There are several options open to consulting heralds to resolve this situation: advise submittors not to prohibit changes to the name, request them to state on the forms if a holding name is acceptable, or to ... add a line to the forms requesting the submittor to indicate if formation of a holding name is not acceptable. Of all the options, the latter is probably the most satisfactory and I heartily recommend it to all Kingdoms. (I hate returning a beautiful armorial submission because of technical problems with the name!) (CL 20 Mar 87, p. 2)
Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme	1986.01	That being the case, the holding name should serve "to emphasize the fact that this was a temporary measure, not an unauthorized modification. (Timothy of Carraig Ban ...is more obviously a temporary substitute than [the submitted name with the objectionable phrase omitted].) The idea is to encourage the submitter to correct the problem himself." [LoAR of Jan 86, p.7]
Baldwin of Erebor	1985.12.29	Holding names are for use at the Laurel level only. Problems found at the kingdom level should be dealt with before the submission is sent out on a letter of intent. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]
Baldwin of Erebor	1985.12.29	I consider the assignment of a holding name to be a change. It is true that the purpose served by a holding name is administrative, and that there is no fee for changing a holding name: nonetheless, what is registered is not what was submitted, and some people regard holding names as a form of tampering. (Witness the rather acrid comments from the Midrealm over the holding name with which N. was "saddled". If the practice draws this kind of reaction from the heralds, who presumably understand how the system works, imagine how a non-herald might feel.) [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]
Baldwin of Erebor	1985.12.29	Please remember that a holding name is intended as a temporary measure. It allows us to register a piece of armory now, rather than having to wait for the person to choose a new name and resubmit. There is no fee for changing a holding name. [BoE, cvr ltr, 29 Dec 85, p.4]