Copyright © 1995 - Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.
The 1st Tenure of Da'ud Ibn Auda (1st year)
"As stated then by Mistress Alisoun, 'as status of the heirs [to the throne of a principality] is not recognized by Corpora, we do not feel it appropriate to register arms for the 'office'.' " (LoAR 8/90 p.15).
[Entertainer's Guild] "It was felt that the name was too generic to be registered to a single group." (LoAR 10/90 p.21).
[A submission for a dog] "The College does not register names or armory which appear to claim for the submitter powers or status he or she does not have. In this case, the submitter is claiming human status. If the submitter can prove such, we will reconsider this name. Until such time, this name submission is RETURNED." (CL 2/4/91 pps. 1-2).
"We have strong doubts about the propriety of the College registering an unofficial designation like 'borough' to an SCA group, past registration notwithstanding. If it's a household, let's call it a household and register it to the head of the household. If it's a geographic group like a canton or shire, let's register it as a canton or shire." (LoAR 1/91 p.24).
"Cobras have their hoods expanded by default." (LoAR 8/90 p.7).
[Master Bowmen of <place>] "We cannot, in good conscience, register a title, reserved by Corpora to peers, to any non-peerage group, no matter in what form they propose to use it. It may be that there are guilds which use some form of 'guildmaster', 'master armorer', etc. These ranks are not registered, nor can they be unless and until the board of Directors changes the titles of rank of the peerages." (LoAR 7/90 p.15).
"The commentary on restricted charges, most specifically the caduceus, tended slightly to favor retaining the restriction to those with the medical qualifications to carry them outside the SCA. There did not appear to be a lot of strong feelings either way. We will therefore retain the restrictions as they currently apply to those charges." (CL 10/16/90 p.2).
[Wreath of violets in orle, blazoned as an orle of violets] "This was returned before in part because the orle of flowers was too similar to the restricted wreath of roses. This issue has not been addressed in the resubmission, and so this must be returned once again for this reason. It was suggested that if the submitter would clearly separate the individual flowers in orle, that this would probably remove the problem." (LoAR 9/90 p.13).
"The Latin term eques (plural equites) is the equivalent of 'knight', a restricted title in the SCA." (LoAR 9/90 p.15).
"Given the common usage in the SCA of calling the holder of an heraldic title 'Lord X' or 'Lady X', heraldic titles taken from real-life places falls under the Prohibition of Landed Titles of Corpora (Appendix C, Administrative Rules of the College of Arms)" (LoAR 11/90 p.13).
"Aamir (pronounced AH-mir) is not the same as the restricted alternate title Amir (pronounced ah-Meer)." (LoAR 12/90 p.5).
[Huscarl] "Huscarl is not a restricted title, any more than is 'the Apprentice', or, perhaps more appropriately, 'the Fighter'." (LoAR 12/90 p.8).
[<name> de Montfort Lyons] "SCA practice for those with awards of arms is to style them as 'Lord/Lady {Given}' or 'Lord/Lady {Entire registered name}'. It is Laurel's opinion that such usage is not presumptuous. The form of usage...of '<given name>, Lord de Montfort' or '<given name>, Lord de Montfort Lyons' would be presumptuous; that form is not what we use in the SCA nor is it appropriate for SCA use". (CL 2/4/91 p.2).
[<field> a charged engrailed torteau vs. <different field> a charged sun gules] "There is a CVD for the field, but nothing for the change to type only of the tertiary." [implying no difference between the engrailed torteau and the sun] (LoAR 8/90 p.19 - overruled in the LoAR 4/91 p.3).
"Lord Laurel seems to be in a definite minority in believing that a roundel engrailed is visually similar to a sun. Thus... [there is a CVD] for the type of primary charge." (LoAR 4/91 p.3).
"After much thought and discussion, it has been decided, for purposes of X.4.d, e and h of the Rules for Submission, that the bottommost of three charges, either on the field alone or around an ordinary, is defined as one-half of the group...multiple changes to the basemost of three charges under this definiton will be granted a maximum of one CVD." (CL 9/6/90 p.2).
"After reviewing carefully what commentary there was on the change to X.2 proposed by Mistress Alisoun, X.2 will be changed as follows, effective immediately:
X.2 Difference of Primary Charges. Armory that consists of: (a) a charge or group of charges alone on the field; or (b) a charge or group of charges which may themselves be charged; or (c) a charge or group of charges accompanied by a peripheral charge which may itself be charged - does not conflict with similarly simple, protected armory if the type of the primary charge is substantially changed.This wording is a little longer than Laurel himself would have liked, but describes more clearly than a more abbreviated form would the various conditions under which X.2 will apply. Please note the careful placement of the word 'or' between the various subclauses: X.2 will not apply to two devices with secondaries and a charged chief, for instance. The change to the primary charge(s) must be substantial: type variants are not sufficient (a chevron vs. a chevron embattled is not a substantial change in type {both are, after all, the same type of charge, a chevron} for the purposes of this rule); some quadrupeds and crosses, for example, may be too close visually to apply this rule." (CL 10/16/90 pps. 1-2).
"The following is a revised version of X.4.j. of the Rules for Submissions...The type of substantial change required for this new provision X.4.j.ii to apply is the same general standard in the recently revised X.2...
X.4.j Changes to Charges on Charges.For example, (a) Sable, on a pale Or two swords sable has one clear difference from Sable, on a pale Or two oak leaves sable. (b) Argent, on a fess azure between two pine trees vert, a spear argent has one clear difference from Argent, on a fess azure between two pine trees vert, a rose argent. (c) Azure, on a roundel Or a tree azure, a bordure Or has one clear difference from Azure, on a roundel Or a bear statant azure, a bordure Or. (d) Argent, a lion rampant and on a chief gules three fleurs-de-lys argent has one clear difference from Argent, a lion rampant and on a chief gules three crosses crosslet argent." (CL 1/4/91 pps. 2-3).i. Making two or more visually significant changes to the same group of charges placed entirely on other charges is one clear difference.
Changes of type, number, tincture, posture, or independent changes of arrangement may each count as one of the two changes. Generally, such changes must affect the whole group of charges to be considered visually significant, since the size of these elements and their visual impact are considerably diminished. For example, changing the tincture of the wings of such a charge would not be enough of a tincture difference to be one of the two. Charges held or maintained by other charges are generally too insignificant to count towards difference at all.
ii. In simple cases, a clear difference can be obtained from change to type only of charges entirely on other charges. On armory that consists of:
a) an ordinary or similarly simple geometric charge alone on the field; or
b) an ordinary or similarly simple geometric charge accompanied only by a single group of identical charges upon the field; or
c) an ordinary or similarly simple geometric charge accompanied by an uncharged peripheral charge; or
d) an uncharged charge or group of identical charges accompanied only by a peripheral charge which is charged;
Substantially changing the type of all of a group of charges entirely on the ordinary, similarly simple geometric charge, or, in case (d), peripheral charge is one clear difference. In any case changes to a single group of charges on charges cannot be more than one clear difference.