MIDDLE KINGDOM
LETTER OF ACCEPTANCES AND RETURNS

Middle Kingdom - Internal Letter of Acceptances & Returns – September 2002 

This is the September 2002 Middle Kingdom Letter of Acceptances and Returns for Escutcheon’s and Keythong’s July Letters. Unless otherwise noted, all clients will accept changes. {Comments in braces {} were removed from the Letter of Intent sent to Laurel and the College of Arms. Names, devices, or badges in braces have been returned or pended; general comments or replies to commentary are also placed in braces. Thanks to AElfreda aet AEthelwealda, Mikhail of Lubelska, John ap Wynne, Rory mac Feidhlimidh, Aryanhwy merch Catmael, Athenais Bryennissa, Pendar the Bard, Richenda de Jardin, Hinach ben Josef, Gevehard von Baden, Knut, Roberd mac Cormaic, Elena de Vexin, and Jaelle of Armida for their commentary this month.} 

 

{*) Aislynn of Talonval. New Device. Per bend sable and argent goutty de poix in sinister chief a compass star argent.

This is being returned for the lack of a registered name. In order to register a device, you must first have a registered name (or be in the process of registering a name).

A note to Ary: Pietari ruled Aislinn to be SCA compatible (see Aislinn inghean an Shionnach [Meridies 8/00].} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Per bend sable and argent goutty de poix, a compass star argent Given this field, the compass star defaults to this location. Clear 

Ary: I can't find any record either of her name being registered, or even submitted.  But it would be nice to let her know that her name probably isn't registerable; <Aislynn> is an alternate modern spelling of the modern Irish name <Aislinn>.  There is no evidence that any form of <Aislinn> was used before the 19th century - see the problem names article on the name at http://www.MedievalScotland.org/problem/names/aislinn.shtml.  Furthermore, I

don't believe it's ever specifically been ruled SCA-compatible.  It is mentioned in Alisoun's precedents: "[Aislinn] It is not necessary to support the given name on the grounds of "compatibility": it has amply been documented as a period given name in the past. (LoAR Aug 88, p. 1)" But since this was 14 years ago and there is actually *no* documentation that it is a period given name, I would not believe it's registerable.

The device has a number of possible conflicts: A badge of An Tir (reg 05/99 via An Tir), "Azure, a compass star voided argent."  There is one CD for the field, but none for placement of Aislynn's compass star, since it is a forced move.  I do not know if there is a CD for the voiding in the An Tirian badge.  Voiding is listed with fimbriation in the compiled precedents of Elsbeth, but while precedent says "There is not a CD for fimbriation ... [Fiona ingen ui Fhaolain, 07/00, R-Æthelmearc]", I'm not sure if I would extend that to voiding, since, e.g. "Sable, a mullet voided argent" is almost the same as "Sable, on a mullet argent another one sable," which *would* have a CD.

It doesn't conflict with the device of Keridwen Bowen (reg 12/86 via Ansteorra), "Per bend sinister wavy azure and bendy sinister wavy Or and azure, in dexter chief a mullet of six points argent"; there is one CD for

the field, and one for position, since Keridwen's need not be in dexter chief.

However, it certainly conflicts with The badge of Somalia (reg 09/95 via Laurel), "Azure, a mullet argent," with one CD for the field, and probably with the badge of the Barony of Rivenstar (reg 08/79 via the Middle),

"Azure, a riven star argent," with one CD for the field.

It also conflicts with the device of Eleazar Valentine von Mindelheim, (reg 01/80 via the West), "Per bend sinister, per bend argent and sable, and purpure, a compass star of four points argent."  There is one CD for the

field, but there is no CD between a mullet of four points and a compass star, as shown by these two precedents from Elsbeth's tenure: "[(Fieldless) A mullet sable] Conflict with ... (Tinctureless) A mullet of four points distilling a goutte. . Although the LoI indicated that the submitter had permission to conflict, such a letter was not included with

the submission. [implying no CD between a mullet and a mullet of four points] [Chirhart Blackstar, 05/00, R-Atlantia] // [(Fieldless) A mullet sable] ... in conflict with ... A mullet of five greater and five lesser points distilling goutes . As with the mullet of four vs. a compass star (see the June 1995 LoAR, pg. 23), the lesser points of the mullet have very little visual impact, and as mullets of greater and lesser points are not known in period, the visual difference counts. This reaffirms the precedent set in July 1990 (pg. 13). [Chirhart Blackstar, 05/00, R-Atlantia]" 

Richenda: The blazon doesn’t require the phrase in chief regarding the compass star because the charge can not be on the bottom of the field as both are argent. This appears to be clear. 

Athenais: I wasn=t able to find any record of this name being registered. With no name registered, the device will have to be returned unless the client can prove the name is registered in some form. We can drop Ain sinister chief@ from the blazon, as the compass star can=t be on the argent side of the field. Suggested reblazon: Per bend sable and argent goutty de poix, a compass star argent. No conflicts found. 

AElfreda, et al:  We were unable to find if this name was registered.  The only item found with the phrase “Talonval" was the Shire of Talonval. 

 

{*) Alexander de Seton of Altavia. Badge Resubmission. (Fieldless) A dragon in annulo Or within a bordure gules.

{Name reg’d 7/96}

The badge is being returned because fieldless badges cannot have bordures. RfS VIII.5 (Fieldless Style) states that “Fieldless armory must form a self-contained design.  A fieldless design must have all its elements conjoined, like the three feathers issuing from a crown used by the Heir Apparent to the throne of England.  Since there is no field in such a design, it may not use charges that rely on the edges of the field to define their shape, such as bordures and orles, nor to cut off their ends, such as ordinaries or charges throughout.”} 

Badge Commentary

Knut: The bordure violates RfS VIII.5 The depiction of the dragon appears to be somewhat stylized in the manner of "Celtic twisty beasts" and not a properly heraldic dragon which could run afoul of RfS VII.7.b Return for reworking.

Elena: You can’t have a border on a fieldless badge. Angharad – this probably should have been returned by you.

Ary: The bordure is far too narrow and must be redrawn.  His name was registered as Alexander de Seton of Altavia in 09/96.

This badge still has the dragon in annulo to sinister; there is now one CD vs. the Lindquistringes for fieldlessness and one for the bordure.  However, this still conflicts with the device it was originally returned against (in 04/00 by Rouge Scarpe), that of the Shire of Hinterland (Gules, a dragon dormant in annulo and a bordure rayonny Or).  There is one CD for the rayonny of the bordure.  The last time the client submitted, he had a letter of permission to conflict from Lady Francesca Faliero, the seneschal of the branch, who, as seneschal, is authorized to give permission to conflict; however, if this letter is not also accompanying this submission, permission to conflict cannot be assumed, and thus this must be returned.

Richenda: This is an autobounce – because the badge is fieldless, all charges must be contiguous. Name registered as Alexander de Seton of Altavia.

Athenais: If the submitter=s name is registered in a different form than what they write on the submission form, the registered form is the one that should be used on the ILoI.

If this is truly fieldless, it will have to be returned, as you cannot have a bordure on a fieldless badge. I found no conflicts, assuming the field is argent. This would clear the conflict with Drachenwald, cited in the ILoI, although I highly doubt that changing the orientation of a dragon in annulo is worth a CD, as the outline is still basically identical. 

Rory: This is the unofficial/official badge for the Midlands Regional Army, and (I believe) the third attempt by Alexander to pass one.  Once again this badge must be returned:  RfS VIII.5 - Fieldless Style:  "Fieldless armory must form a self-contained design.  A fieldless design must have all its elements conjoined, like the three feathers issuing from a crown used by the Heir Apparent to the throne of England.  Since there is no field in such a design, it may not use charges that rely on the edges of the field to define their shape, such as bordures and orles, nor to cut off their ends, such as ordinaries or charges throughout."

         When word of this return is sent to HL Alexander, you might want to suggest that he consult with a herald before trying again with this badge.  Had I seen this ILoI before Pennsic I would have talked with him there about the submission. 

AElfreda, et al:  This badge uses two non-conjoined elements, one of which is a bordure.  As such, it twice violates RfS VIII.5. - Fieldless Style:  "Fieldless armory must form a self-contained design.

A fieldless design must have all its elements conjoined, like the three feathers issuing from a crown used by the Heir Apparent to the throne of England. Since there is no field in such a design, it may not use charges that rely on the edges of the field to define their shape, such as bordures and orles, nor to cut off their ends, such as ordinaries or charges throughout."

If the client meant the design to be on an argent field, it violates RfS VIII.2.b.i - Contrast Requirements:  "The field must have good contrast with every charge placed directly on it and with charges placed overall."

We suggest return for redesign. 

 

{*) Alf of the High Mountain. Device Resubmission. Azure, two links of chain interlaced in cross argent.

{Name reg’d 5/98}

This identical device was previously returned by Dragon (sitting in for Rouge Scarpe) on 1/98 for being unidentifiable: “The device is returned as unblazonable. Guesses for what the charge was included links of chain, cartouches, and one ‘pretzel cross’.” As the device has remained unchanged, the problem persists and the internal commentators (while more charitable in their commentary this time) seemed to agree that the device was still not registerable. At the very least, there needs to be some evidence that the design is a period motif.} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Azure, two links of chain fretted in cross argent.

Greece - December of 1994 (via Laurel): Azure, a cross couped argent. Technically, these are X.2 different, or these have CDs for type and number of primary group. Unfortunately I feel I have to mention X.5 similarity between these.  The submission appears to be a variation of a cross.  Since crosses with the same number of arms generally get no more than a CD for type, not X.2, I think that these are an X.5 conflict. 

Ary: According to the RS database, his first device attempt, identical to this, was returned by RS in 01/98; this ILoAR isn't available on the web, so I don't know the particulars, but I'd bet anything it has to do with unidentifiability, unblazonability, and lack of evidence of being period of the primary charge.  Since the client has made no changes, this will need to be returned again. 

Richenda: I would like to see evidence of this charge as a period motif. It looks like knotwork to me more than a cross. However, I believe this is in conflict with Greece, Azure, a cross couped argent. There is only 1 CD for the difference in crosses. I believe this is also in conflict with Eureka Flag, Azure, a crux stellata argent. There is only 1 CD for the difference in crosses. 

Athenais: These would probably be better blazoned as Alinks of chain.@ Suggested reblazon: Azure, two links of chain interlaced in cross argent. No conflicts found. 

 

1) Alzbeta Michalik. New Name.

Submitted as Alzbieta Michalik, we have changed the spelling of the given name to a period form. The Slownik Staropolskich Nazw Osobowych (II: 9) has Al{z.}bieta as a header and gives the following variants: Alzbeta (13^th-14^th centuries), Alzbetha (1420), Alszbetha (1420), Al{z.}bjeta (1404), and Al{z.}bjetja. Michal is dated to 1220 in the SSNO [III:450]. Michalik could be a dim of Michal, but it could also be a patronymic, as attested in Hoffman, Polish Surnames (2^nd ed) (33), who also notes that the –ik ending could be used to form “surnames derived from first names.” She will NOT accept MAJOR changes and wants an authentic Polish name. 

Name Commentary

Ary: The websites provided by the client give no indication that either element of this name is period.  Walraven's "Polish Given Names in Nazwiska Polaków" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/polish/) doesn't list any Polish form of <Elizabeth>.  In the masculine names section, there are three forms of <Michael>: <Michal>, <Michael>, and <Michail>.  I don't know how to form patronyms in Polish.

<Alz^be^ta> (where the ^ represents a hachek over the previous letter) is found in Walraven's article "Common Czech Names of the 15th & 16^th Centuries" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/lateczech/), where it is listed as being one of 8 names used by 60% or more of Czech women in the 15th & 16th C.  No form of <Michael> is listed in this article, unfortunately.  I also don’t know if a Polish/Czech mix would be appropriate.

My guess is that the name is probably acceptable, but I can't find any supporting documentation to help the client.  She should be directed towards Walraven, who probably can help. 

Richenda: Neither source is trustworthy for period documentation. The author of the site for the given name admits that he can not provide sources for his statements; that he didn’t do the research “a deceased friend” did. The site for the surname identifies that the name is currently in use in Poland, but provides no dates for the beginning of such use. I could find no documentation for this name in the St. Gabriel library in Polish or German. 

AElfreda, et al:  Mikhail sez, "Great last name!"  {Michalski is our mundane last name.} 

 

2) Böjei Temür. Change of Registered Name. {and New Device. Azure, two Mongolian phoenixes in annulo Or.}

{Name reg’d 6/99}

This is an odd one, the client originally submitted Böjei Temür in 1999, and this is clearly indicated on the original forms and documentation, but this Kingdom’s LoI changed the spelling to Timürwithout any indication as to why. This was a mistake and luckily the client has decided to simply submit this as a name change.

The given name is grandfathered. For the byname Temür, the client cites from Boyle, The Successors of Genghis Khan (20, 21, 105) as undated Mongol royalty. The name is also found in Baras’s “On the Documentation and Construction of Period Mongolian Names” (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/names/mongol.html) as a “Common Name Elements from Primary Sources.” The client will NOT accept MINOR changes.

{The device is being returned because the birds are not drawn truly in annulo. As several commentators noted, they are in fact drawn as inverted, which is not allowed. While the attached documentation shows that they were drawn this way in period, we need to have them depicted in a true annulo arrangement which would be more circular and less spirally.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: This can probably be listed as a "name correction" on the ELoI, since it honestly looks like the name was typoed the first time around, and no one noticed it; there is nothing on the ILoAR that says why the name was changed as it was.  Her name was actually registered 06/99, not 07/99. 

Richenda: I see no problem with this, especially as Laurel commented on the quality of the documentation. Where was the name changed and why? This name was registered in June of 1999, not July. 

Athenais: If the submitter=s documentation supports the name change, there shouldn=t be a problem.  

Device Commentary

Knut: From now on since there is no evidence that new world flora and fauna were used in period armory, while they will still be permitted, using them will now be considered a weirdness. (Abigail of Lough Derravara, 9/97 p. 8). Precedents Jaelle under Style-Weirdness

For purposes of registration, coastal sub-Saharan flora and fauna are considered the same as New World flora and fauna: they are a discouraged weirdness, but registerable. [Jamie Snawberd of Ross, 08/99, A-Caid] Precedents Elsbeth under Weirdness

Will this officially add Far Eastern Flora and Fauna to the Weirdness list? (I don't think this one will make it that far)

[A coney courant and another courant contourny inverted conjoined at the paws argent] The rabbits were originally blazoned as conjoined in annulo. However, the beasts were not drawn in annulo, where the two animals are embowed, but were drawn as courant and courant inverted. By precedent we do not register inverted animals unless they are part of an arrangement in annulo. [Eiríkr Þorvaldson, 10/00, R-Artemisia] Precedents - Elsbeth, under Arrangement

This is an artistic motif and not heraldic display.  The birds are not in a blazonable posture. They are not in annulo, they are oriented spiraling to the center.  The one in chief is inverted, violating the ban on inverted animals.

Return for multiple style problems 

Ary: I'm not too crazy about the armory, but since we have accepted artistic motifs not found in heraldry as heraldic charges in the past, this is probably registerable, since she provided docs that these birds were used in artistic motifs. 

Richenda: Regardless of whether or not the “Mongolian Phoenixes” are registerable, this device has a fundamental design flaw. As drawn, these two birds are not in annulo. Therefore, the upper bird is inverted which has long been disallowed in precedent. 

Athenais: The phoenixes aren=t really in annulo, and probably need to be redrawn. I=m not too sure that an Oriental artistic motif is appropriate for use in heraldry, but it=s probably best to send it up for Wreath=s call on that. 

AElfreda, et al:  This should be clear of Tatiana Ivanovna (reg 12/80) "Azure, a Russian firebird displayed Or, crested and its six tail-feathers each charged with a heart gules."  We find one CD for changing number of primary, and one CD for addition of the tertiaries. 

 

{* Cailin. New Name and Device. Argent, a wyern displayed Or.

This was numbered by Keythong and thus we are treating it as an official item. However, Keythong noted that it was pended. It cannot be pended, it must be returned. We assume that it has been returned by Keythong. No forms were submitted to this office (a requirement for any numbered item on an ILoI), so no file was created. This submission will cease to exist aside from this entry in the ILoAR and no record will be created in the RS database.} 

Name Commentary

Roberd: Pending, per the LOI. 

Pendar: I am confused by items 1 and 4. They are both returnable, but the letter says they are being pended. You can pend things for further research and commentary. (In my kingdom's internal letter's I pend things for redraws so

that the client doesn't have to put them through kingdom again) But in these cases both pieces of armory are completely unacceptable. They cannot be pended because no further research, commentary, or redrawing will make them any more acceptable. They must be returned. When the clients come up with different devices they can be placed on the next available internal letter as device resubmissions. 

Gevehard: Self -explanatory 

Athenais: The name violates RfS III.2.a, which requires that AA personal name must contain a given name and at least one byname...@ and should be returned. 

Rory: With only one name element, and the obvious metal on metal of the device, it should be returned to the client.

Re Submissions #1 & #4:  Are these items really "pended" or returned.  They violate clear Rules of Submission, the clients have been notified -- why not just call them returns rather than pends (and save commenters the time to review the submissions)? 

Device Commentary

Knut: I would blazon this as a python or legless wyvern which emphasizes the difference from a dragon which has legs. 

Athenais: The device violates RfS VIII.2.b.i, Armorial Contrast, which states AThe field must have good contrast with every charge placed directly on it and with charges placed overall.@ The device will need to be returned both for design problems and for lack of a name. 

 

3) Cassandra Felicia. Device Resubmission. Azure, two sheep passant respectant argent, on a chief argent, a shepherd’s staff fesswise sinister proper.

{Name reg: 9/00} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Azure, two sheep passant respectant argent, on a chief argent, a shepherd’s staff fesswise SINISTER proper. Clear

Richenda: This appears to be clear. 

{*) Cecilia Fiametta del Canto. New Name and Device. Azure, a squirrel three roundels argent.

We were not able to document the byname. Without a documentable byname, this name cannot be registered, so we are returning it for further work.

The armory is being returned with the name, but would have been returned in any case for conflict with Regana van Kortrijk (Azure, a squirrel argent) [reg’d 2/02]. There is only one CD for the addition of the secondaries.

To Ary: “Cecilia di Franco” is most definitely found in Mittleman and Scott, “Fourteenth Century Venetian Personal Names.” } 

Name Commentary

Ary: <Celia> is found once in the Florentine Catasto of 1427 (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/arval/catasto/) and

<Cicilia> is found in Rhian Lyth's "Italian Renaissance Women's Names" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/rhian/italian.html).  The spelling with the <e> *may* be an acceptable Italian form, but I don't know; contrary to the LoI, <Cecilia> is *not* found in the Venetian names article.  I highly suggest that this be changed to the documentable form; combining English and Italian elements was ruled a weirdness on the 09/99 LoAR (and confirmed on the 11/01 LoAR), and the use of two given names without any surname may be another one.  I couldn't find any specific ruling for double given names in Italian, but according to S. Gabriel report #2550 (www.s-gabriel.org/2550, dated 07-09-02), double given names in Italian were very rare.

I can't help with <del Canto> at all.  Since it looks like she allows changes, this element should be dropped unless documentation can be found for it. 

Richenda: While this name combines English and Italian elements, this should not be a weirdness. Withycombe (sn. Cecelia) provides additional documentation of Cecilia between 1197-1219. A quick Google search demonstrated that del Canto is a modern Italian name. I can’t say anything regarding its use in period. 

Device Commentary

Knut: Azure, a squirrel SEJANT ERECT BETWEEN three roundels argent. This squirrel is not maintaining an acorn and therefore isn't in the default posture. Clear 

Ary: Blazon-fu for the device: "Argent, a squirrel _between_ three roundels argent."  (Sejant erect is the default position for squirrels according to the SCA Glossary of Terms, therefore it doesn't need to be blazoned).  This conflicts with Regana van Kortrijk, (reg 02/02 via the Outlands), "Azure, a squirrel argent." 

Richenda: Blazon suggestion: Azure, a squirrel argent between three plates. This is in conflict with Regana van Kortrijk, Azure a squirrel argent. There is one CD for the addition of the secondary charges. 

Rory: Consider "Azure, a boreas between three roundels argent."   (B: Viljalempi Talventytar, 7/96) 

AElfreda, et al:  Conflict with Regana van Kortrijk (reg 2/2002) "Azure, a squirrel argent."  There is one CD for addition of the secondaries. 

 

4) Cecily Wytherlok’. New Name. {and Device. Purpure, a bird displayed argent blindfolded sable.}

Cecily is described as one of the “usual English form[s]” of Cecilia in Withycombe (60). It is dated to 1332 in O’Brien, “An Index to the 1332 Lay Subsidy Rolls for Lincolnshire, England” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/mari/LincLSR/GivCtoF.html). Wytherlok’ is found in ibid (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/mari/LincLSR/BynW.html). One commentator suggested that the apostrophe is a scribal abbreviation and that the byname should be expanded to Wytherloke. We are divided on this issue and solicit comments. The client would like to have an authentic 13-15^th century English name and cares most about sound and having it properly spelled.

{The device is being returned for conflict with Francesca of Bright Angel (Azure, a dove displayed, head elevated argent) [reg’d 1/73]. There is one CD for the change to the field, but none for the tertiary blindfold. Several commentators also noted that dove was missing its characteristic tuft. As a result, it is simply a bird and numerous additional conflicts appear. If the client decides to stick with the dove motif, she will want to make sure that the dove is more clearly recognizable as such.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Lovely name!  <Wytherlok’> is most likely a scribal abbreviation for <Wytherloke>; since we do not register scribal abbreviations (see Angharat verch Reynulf, 03/02 LoAR), the byname should be expanded. 

Richenda: Withycombe (sn Cecelia) gives does not date this form of Cecily. The closest dated forms are Cecilie (1450) and Cecille (1273). This form is dated by O’Brien in the cited web page. The surname is also as cited on the web page. I question whether or not the apostrophe at the end is a scribal marking and therefore not registerable. I suggest that be a question for Laurel to answer. 

Device Commentary

Knut: Purpure, a legless dismembered bird displayed argent blindfolded sable.

Though blazoned as a dove on the LoI, the bird here has none of the distinguishing features of a dove. There is a CD for the field but nothing for type of primary charge between a generic bird and any other specific bird. (Anna of Eichenwald, 8/94 p. 14) Precedents - Da'ud 2.2 under Bird

[an eagle displayed vs. a mockingbird displayed] While it is true that birds do not always conflict with other birds, only eagles were displayed in period. Therefore there is not a CD for change in type. [Arnaud de Gournay of Dragonsley, 10/99, R-Ansteorra]

Francesca of Bright Angel - January of 1973: Azure, a dove displayed, head elevated argent//Este, House of - December of 1994 (via Laurel): Azure, an eagle displayed argent crowned Or// Poland - December of 1994 (via Laurel): Gules, an eagle displayed argent crowned Or//John of Ean Airgead, called the Mad Celt - October of 1979 (via Meridies): Vert, a chimney swift migrant palewise argent. [Chaetura pelagica]//John of Ean Airgead, called the Mad Celt - September of 1980 (via Meridies): Vert, a chimney swift migrant palewise holding in its beak a holly leaf fesswise argent//The previous registrations all have a CD for the field, but nothing for the various types of bird or blazoned artistic details and therefore conflict.

Sabina MacPherson - October of 1993 (via Atenveldt): Purpure, in pale a plate and an owl displayed argent.

Single CD for the plate

Charles Cartmell of Storvik - October of 1993 (via Atlantia): Purpure, a gull displayed argent, a bordure checky sable and argent. Single CD for bordure

Dovanna of Atenveldt - August of 1971 (via Atenveldt): Azure, a dove wings displayed and inverted argent, perched upon an olive branch fesswise proper. CD field, CD if the olive branch is large enough to be considered sustained

Vladimir ap Gwynne - January of 1981 (via the West): Counter-ermine, an eagle displayed argent, armed Or, clutching a wild rose proper [Rosa sylvestre]. CD field, CD if the rose is large enough to be considered sustained

James Schoen MacAndrews - January of 1986 (via the East): Gules, vetu counter-ermine, a falcon displayed, wings inverted, maintaining a rod fesswise, argent, ermined gules. CD field, this is old enough that I would have recommended a check of the files to be sure of the maintained if there weren't so many other conflicts.

...Additionally any bird other than an eagle in a displayed posture will be considered a "weirdness" ... [01/00, CL] Precedents - Elsbeth, under Bird - Precedent on Difference. One weirdness for the bird displayed

Return for multiple conflicts 

Ary: The device conflicts with Francesca of Bright Angel (reg 01/73), "Azure, a dove displayed, head elevated argent," with one CD for the field, but none for the blindfold. 

Richenda: This is not a dove as it lacks a dove’s identifying characteristic tuft. In addition, this bird is disjointed. I recommend returning it.

Also, this is in conflict with Charles Cartmell of Storvik, Purpure, a gull displayed argent, a bordure checky sable and argent, with 1 CD for addition of bordure but no CD for bird to bird.

Another conflict is Francesca of Bright Angel, Azure, a dove displayed head elevated argent, with 1 CD for change to field and none for change from bird to dove or for head position. 

Athenais: The dove lacks the distinctive tuft, and should probably be blazoned as just a bird. With the blindfold, this may have two weirdnesses: one for a bird that is not an eagle in a displayed posture, and a second for the blindfold. I don=t think the blindfold is large enough or distinctive enough, especially on the purple field, to count as a tertiary charge and thus count for difference.

ABecause only eagles among birds are attested as displayed in period, any other bird in a displayed posture will be compared to any bird in a displayed posture usuing the visual test of rule X.4.e for non-period charges....Additionally any bird other than an eagle in a displayed posture will be considered a "weirdness"....This also means that in the future I will be stricter about requiring that a bird be drawn with its defining attributes (i.e., a dove should have a tuft). Without the defining attributes, the bird may just be blazoned as "a bird."@ [01/00, CL]

Because of this, there are several possible conflicts. With all of them, a visual check may be necessary to see if there is a CD between the birds: John of Ean Airgead, called the Mad Celt (reg. 10/79 via Meridies), Vert, a chimney swift migrant palewise argent. [Chaetura pelagica]. There is one CD for the field, but nothing for posture// Sabina MacPherson (reg. 10/93 via Atenveldt), Purpure, in pale a plate and an owl displayed argent. There is one CD for removing the plate.

Important non-SCA arms: Poland (reg. 12/94 via Laurel), Gules, an eagle displayed argent crowned Or. One CD for the field, nothing for the crown.

Vladimir ap Gwynne (reg. 01/81 via the West), Counter-ermine, an eagle displayed argent, armed Or, clutching a wild rose proper [Rosa sylvestre]. Again, one CD for the field, nothing for the arming. A visual check is needed to see if there is a second CD for the rose.

Important non-SCA arms: Este, House of (reg. 12/94 via Laurel), Azure, an eagle displayed argent crowned Or. (Also the arms of Modena) One CD for the field, nothing for the crown.

Francesca of Bright Angel (reg. 01/73) Azure, a dove displayed, head elevated argent. There is only one CD for the field, nothing for the head position. This is a conflict. 

 

5) Custance the Compassionate. New Name and Device. Per fess wavy argent and sable, in chief a decrescent and an increscent azure.

Custance is cited in Withycombe (72, s.n. Constance) as a given name. She says that it “was introduced into England at the Norman Conquest…and soon became common, being anglicized as Custance, which is found as late as 1561.” The byname is found in the OED and dated to the 16^th century: “Compassionate, a.    1. a. Affected with, characterized by, or expressing compassion; pitiful, sympathetic.  1587 Mirr. Mag. (1610) 687 As if that heau'n vpon our state below, Foreseeing our harmes, compassionate had beene. 1588 SHAKES. Tit. A. II. iv. 217 My compassionate heart. a1620 J. DYKE Worthy Commun. (1640) 139 Christ was compassionate, they are mercilesse. 1625 DONNE Serm. 3 Apr. 19 It is a fault..to bee too compassionate of an Heretique. 1683 BURNET tr. More's Utopia 180 Tho they are compassionate to all that are sick. 1752 FIELDING Causes Increase Robbers, A..compassionate disposition. 1870-4 ANDERSON Missions Amer. Bd. III. iv. 69 Compassionate persons interceded, and his condition was alleviated.”

{Ary: The name is TSCA, but probably registerable.

Richenda: I checked very carefully and could find no indication in Withycombe that Custance was a byname. My apologies if I overlooked something.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Reaney & Wilson give nothing like the surname.  The earliest citations the OED has for “compassionate” are Shakespeare.  This is far too late for the word to have been used as a literal descriptive byname; by the 16th century in England, inherited surnames had been the norm for almost three centuries.  The client may be interested in some other possibilities, found in R&W s.n. Compain, from the OFr <compain> “originally the nominative of <compagnon> ‘chum’,” with <Compyn>, <Compayn> 1327 and <Cumpainun> 1221.  S.n. Comper is <Cumper> 1224, <Compere>, <le Compeyre> 1332, from ME, OFr <comper> ‘companion, associate, comrade.’ 

Richenda: Withycombe (sn Constance) dates this spelling only as a byname. She does state that Custance is an Anglicized spelling of the Latin “constantia” but does not date it. I am concerned regarding the byname. While Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary states that compassion is a Middle English and Middle French word, it does not make any such statements about the adjectival form.

Athenais: Since I have no access to the OED, I=m afraid I can=t help with the byname. 

AElfreda, et al:  From the Online OED: "compassionate, a.  SECOND EDITION 1989

  1. a. Affected with, characterized by, or expressing compassion; pitiful, sympathetic.

  1587 Mirr. Mag. (1610) 687 As if that heau'n vpon our state below, Foreseeing our harmes, compassionate had beene. 1588 SHAKES. Tit. A. II. iv. 217 My compassionate heart. a1620 J. DYKE Worthy Commun. (1640) 139 Christ was compassionate, they are mercilesse. 1625 DONNE Serm. 3 Apr. 19 It is a fault..to bee too compassionate of an Heretique. 1683 BURNET tr. More's Utopia 180 Tho they are compassionate to all that are sick. 1752 FIELDING Causes Increase Robbers, A..compassionate disposition. 1870-4 ANDERSON Missions Amer. Bd. III. iv. 69 Compassionate persons interceded, and his condition was alleviated." 

Device Commentary

Knut: Per fess wavy argent and sable, in chief a decrescent and an increscent azure.

The field is neutral and can technically have azure charges centered on it, although I would have

objected to the identifiability of these particular shades of azure and sable. The per fess wavy is slightly enhanced. Clear. 

Richenda: This appears to be clear. 

Athenais: The per fess division is high enough on this device to make it look like Sable, on a chief wavy argent a decrescent and an increscent azure. No conflicts found either way. 

 

{*) Dunecan de Moravia. New Name and Device. Vert, on a saltire between four wolves heads erased argent, two arrows inverted in saltire vert.

The name is being returned for lack of sufficient documentation. While the given name is documented and Moravia is known to be a real place, there is no indication that a Scotsman would have hailed from Moravia. We were unable to find the reference to Moravia that is alleged on the form to exist in Black. If it exists, the client should provide a page number or an indication of which header it is found under.

The armory is being returned with the name. There were no significant problems with it.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Black s.n. Duncan date <Dunecan> to 1240-49. <Moravia> is not a header in here, and the place is not listed in Reaney & Wilson.  If we can’t find the head word or the page number for the cite for Moravia, this will need to be returned. 

Richenda: No comments at this time 

John: Dunecan: see Black (p.228); dates at least to 1240-under ‘Duncan’; also see Reaney/Wilson (p. 145 under “Duncan”); Noramn (p.120, p.129, p.115) – dates name back even further. De Moravia: I don’t know about this one. According to LoI, client didn’t supply pagination or dates. I do know Moravia is a medieval principality/territory in central Europe. 

Device Commentary

Knut: The erased should be shown with fewer and larger jags, especially on these small secondaries. Clear. 

Richenda: The saltire should be slightly thinner to allow the heads to be slightly larger. This should not be a reason for return. This appears to be clear. 

 

{*) Gabriella da Milano. Device Resubmission. Azure, a knot of three loops and two ribands and a rose Or

{Name reg’d 5/01}

This is being returned because there is no reason to believe that the “lover’s knot” is a period heraldic or artistic motif. If the client could provide documentation that it is a period design, it would stand a better chance of being registered, but as is the consensus of the commentators was that it could not be registered.} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Is this the Bohemian love knot? ...submitted copious documentation for the period use of the Bohemian love knot as a motif. LoAR 07/84 Johannes aus Nierenfels - A East

If this is the Bohemian love knot, it's SCA armorial existance is limited to one person and it was originally documented as a motif at a time when the rules were signifigantly different than now. This will probably need to be documented heraldically, not as an artistic motif.

If not, it needs documenatation as the first registration of a charge.

Clear but needs documentation. 

Roberd: I was unable to locate any reference for the knot, either using visual glossaries available on the net or my own resources. The closest I got was called a  "Hungerford knot", and that reference was from web site created by a member of the SCA, without attribution to her source (located at http://www.sonic.net/~lalovell/heraldry/knots.html).  The Hungerford Knot is also mentioned in the book "Basic Heraldry" by Friar and Ferguson as a badge (p.57, item 2). The same book, however, depicts a knot as emblazoned on the submitter's device on page 99 under a discussion of Hatchments: the knot is shown at the top of the lozenge upon which a widow's device is placed. However, the knot is not named, and no other information on it is given. I also have the "Design Your Own Coat of Arms" book, and no reference to date is given there, either. Would the submitter be amenable to emblazoning the knot as a Hungerford? 

Pendar: I am not familiar with this charge either. A ribbon or riband is often used as a term for a single diminutive of a bend or as a means of tying sheaves together. It can also be used to suspend medallions such as "Argent, three bars gules on a chief embattled of the last the representation of a castle with broken walls of the field; on a canton of the last a medal of Talavera or, suspended from a red ribbon with blue edges--FULLER" But the submitted charge is unusual. It does not match any of the known forms of knots and I am not confident that it can be recreated from the blazon provided. As with the defining instance of any new charge, substantial documentation will be required. BTW: There is no reason to call the charge in base an "heraldic rose". A rose is a rose. We don't use the term "garden rose" anymore, so there is no point in distinguishing an "heraldic rose". 

Gevehard: I agree that this charge does not seem to have a period foundation and would ask the submitter for more documentation, ps. the heraldic can be dropped from the rose description) 

Ary: Her name was registered as <Gabriell_a_ da Milano> in 05/01.  From the precedents of Da'ud II: "The ribbon is an SCA invention. ... There seems to be no compelling reason to register the ribbon as an heraldic charge. [i.e. the charge is banned from registration.] (Marlene Moneta, 9/94 p. 15)" 

Athenais: The name was registered as Gabriella da Milano 05/01 via the Middle.

Barring any evidence that this knot is a period design, the device will have to be returned for redesign. I wouldn=t have drawn what=s shown on the mini from the proposed blazon, nor can I think of a better way to blazon this. The Aheraldic@ may be dropped from the blazon, as this is the standard rose. 

 

6) Gorum Bodpa. New Name. {and Device. Gules, the tibetan glyph ‘Om’ Or and on a chief argent two human eyes proper.}

I am strongly aware of Da’ud’s precedent barring the registration of Tibetan names, made in 11/96 (and upheld during Elsbeth’s tenure): “[returning Vairocana Belnon of Uddiyana] There are several problems with this name...More important, significant interaction between Tibet and pre-seventeenth century Western culture has not been demonstrated. The Encyclopædia Britannica dates the first visits to Tibet by Western missionaries to the 17th century, and the fact that the 8th century Tibetan kingdom had some contact with the Arab conquerors of Iran still leaves Tibetans at least two removes from Western Europe. (Talan Gwynek, LoAR November 1995, p. 16).” However, the client has taken a novel approach to the issue that I believe may justify registering this name without overturning the precedent.

The client argues that in the late 16^th century, Tibetan monks and lamas frequently traveled to Buddhist shrines in India (according to R.A. Stein, Tibetan Civilization, p. 59). One such shrine close to the Tibetan-Indian border in the village of Sarnath was also close to the Portugese seaport of Hoogly, occupied from 1537-1640 (according to the Oxford Atlas of World History, p. 62 and 118). The client argues that the proximity of these places made interaction possible, even if the actual event is not recorded. To extend the argument further, if it is beyond dispute that the inhabitants of India had period interaction with Europeans (and that should be apparent), it is plausible that peoples residing in the areas frequented by Europeans would have had just as much chance of interaction, whether they were indigenous to the regions or not. In sum, while not asserting that Tibetans (in Tibet) had contact with Europeans in period, it is possible that travelling Tibetans could have.

Gorum is a given name found in Stein (295). Bodpa means “Tibetan” (ibid, 27) and as the client says: “The generic nature of the last name comes from how Gorum would have had to describe himself to the Portugese.” The client will NOT accept MAJOR changes and cares most about the sound of the name. He would like an authentic 15^th-16^th century Tibetan name.

{The device is being returned for contrast problems. The argent eyes cannot be suitably identified on an argent field. If this problem of contrast could be resolved, we believe that the rest of the armory could be registered as long as the documentation for the glyph is enclosed in the resubmission. Given the likely controversial nature of the name, however, we would recommend that the client waits to see if he will have a name to register this device to.} 

Name Commentary

Roberd: I have no comment on the name. 

Pendar: I have found no resources in my library or on-line to support the name, but do not begrudge him the opportunity. We register Mongol and Japanese names, why not Tibetan? 

Gevehard: I have no doubt that Tibetans had some contact with Europeans in period I would like to see more documentation (ie artifacts or period reference to this type of heraldic display) not having the book makes it hard to know when the names were taken from and if they work together in total. 

Ary: Also from the precedents of Da'ud II (though the ruling was actually Talan Gwynek's): "[returning Vairocana Belnon of Uddiyana] There are several problems with this name...More important, significant interaction between Tibet and pre-seventeenth century Western culture has not been demonstrated. The Encyclopædia Britannica dates the first visits to Tibet by Western missionaries to the 17th century, and the fact that the 8th century Tibetan kingdom had some contact with the Arab conquerors of Iran still leaves Tibetans at least two removes from Western Europe. (Talan Gwynek, LoAR November 1995, p. 16)" 

Athenais: Oh, my. To start with, unless the documentation for contact between Tibet and Europe in late period is absolutely overwhelming, the name will be returned per precedent:

[returning Vairocana Belnon of Uddiyana] Significant interaction between Tibet and pre-seventeenth century Western culture has not been demonstrated. The Encyclopæædia Britannica dates the first visits to Tibet by Western missionaries to the 17th century, and the fact that the 8th century Tibetan kingdom had some contact with the Arab conquerors of Iran still leaves Tibetans at least two removes from Western Europe. [The name was returned for this and other problems.] (Ko Fujibayashi Tashikage of Togakure, 11/95 p. 15)

Unfortunately, no documentation for contact between Tibet and Europe, the name, or the glyph in period was actually given in the ILoI, which makes it impossible to truly comment on the possible registerability of either the name or device.  

Device Commentary

Knut: The mainly argent eyes on the argent chief violates RfS VIII.2 Return for rework. 

Roberd: A question I might raise about this device centers on the use of the "om" character: is there any evidence that the written character "om" in the Tibetan culture was used to identify a single individual (the purpose of a personal heraldic device, after all). Would an individual have had the expectation that he or she could carry a banner or similar device with the character "om" incorporated into the design thereon, and be recognized strictly from that? In European practice, for example, a device where the primary charge was the written word "pray", or "think" (yes, I'm aware neither is a translation of "om"), would probably not have been seen.

Although the submitter has a single reference listed as being evidence of contact with Europe in period, there is little evidence in period art or literature that Tibetan writing was at all known outside of a very limited area of contact. I contend that the character "om" would have been nothing more than an abstract symbol to the European eye. The "om" in the submitter's device is certainly the central charge. However, I will concede the addition of the charged chief does make the "om" non-solitary, and therefore the current precedent on use of symbol as a solitary charge might be ignored. {"Current precedent disallows the registration of solitary abstract symbols (July 2000 LoAR)" [Sebastian Blacke, 08/01, R-Trimaris]}

I would like to see more documentation from the submitter regarding the use of "om" in personal heraldry (or its equivalent) in Tibetan culture, and a review of the device under the spirit of the precedent cited. 

Pendar: Human eyes have been registered before, but usually as individual charges and not in pairs. Even when there are two eyes they are usually not distinguishable between right and left, they are just elliptical shapes with irises and pupils. The naturalistic way in which these are drawn might be his only snag, but it is still worth sending it up to see. He will need to provide documentation for the Tibetan glyph to show that it is a period glyph. The CoA regularly registers Norse runes and Arabic text, so this should be fine. 

Athenais: I did recognize the Om glyph instantly, as it=s very common in modern neo-pagan and spiritualistic culture. This wouldn=t fall afoul of the long-standing ban on armoury consisting only of abstract symbols, thanks to the chief and the eyes. The Ahuman@ may be dropped from the blazon, since that is the default for eyes. ATibetan@ should be capitalized, since it is a proper noun. 

Rory: More documentation will have to be provided than is listed in the ILoI for any judgement of the heraldic merits of this submission.  Regarding the "human eye proper" - since the exterior portions of the eyes are argent, can they go on an argent chief? 

 

7) Greylond of Dowglaß deGalloway. New Name. {and Device. Sable, on a bend cotised Or, three hearts gules.}

Greylord is found in Carroll-Clark, “Men’s Names from the Essex Feet of Fines” (http://members.tripod.com/nicolaa5/articles/men.html). ‘of Dowglaß’ is found in Maloney, “13^th & 14^th Century Scottish Names” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/symonFreser/scottish14/scottish14_sur.html). Reaney and Wilson (182, under Galloway) have de Galewaye (dated to 1284) and Galloway (1541). The double locative is probably a weirdness but should be registerable. The client is interested in having a period late-12^th - 15^th century “Scoto-Norman borderland” name. He cares most about having a name that indicates that he is from the Douglas clan.

{The device is being returned for conflict with Richard Ericksson (Sable, on a bend cotised Or, a castle palewise and a hurst of three pine trees palewise sable) [reg’ 10/82]. There is only one CD for the changes to the tertiary charges.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: The article cited for the given name covers 1182-1272 England.  However, an English-Scots mix should be acceptable.  More problematic is the use of two locative surnames: <of Dowgla{sz}> and <de Galloway>.  There is no evidence that anyone was ever known by more than one locative at a time; one must be dropped.  Reaney & Wilson s.n. Galloway have <de Galweia> 1208, <de Galewaye> 1284, <Galeway> 1359, <Galway> 1405, and <Galloway> 1541. 

Richenda: No comments at this time 

John: Greylond: I can find many references to ‘Gray’ and ‘Grayland’, but see Reaney/Wilson (p.203), which lists the name to 1338. Douglass: pardon, but my typewriter doesn’t have the Viking thorn. ‘Douglas’ is easy enough to find, and it’s well known that the Scots and Norsemen mingled, assimilated, etc. So, the Viking ending isn’t out of the question, but it wasn’t common. But see Dorwood (p.75);; Black (pp217-218); Grimble (pp.65-69); Whyte (pp.68-73); all the history a herald could possibly want. Galloway: a place name for a certain territory in Scotland, home to Robert Burns, among others. See Darton (p.126); Black (pp.286-287) 

Device Commentary

Knut: Sable, on a bend cotised Or, three palewise hearts gules.

Richard Ericksson, the Burgundian Norseman - October of 1982 (via Meridies): Sable, on a bend cotised Or a castle palewise and a hurst of three pine trees palewise sable. CD for type of tertiaries. Return for conflict 

Ary: The hearts are *palewise* on the device. 

Richenda: Suggested reblazon: Sable, on a bend cotised Or, three hearts palewise gules. This is in conflict with Richard Ericksson, the Burgundian Norseman, Sable, on a bend cotised Or, a castle palewise and a hurst of three pine trees palewise sable. There is only 1 CD for the changes to the tertiary charges. 

Athenais: It should be noted in the blazon that the hearts are palewise, since the default would be bendwise. This is close to but clear of Michel de Coucy, Sable, on a bend Or between two horse's heads couped contourny argent, three hearts palewise gules, registered 01/92 via the East, with one CD for changing the type of secondaries, and a second CD for changing their tincture. 

 

{*) Gudrun of the Hills. Device Resubmission. Pily, Gules and Sable

This was numbered by Keythong and thus we are treating it as an official item. However, Keythong noted that it was pended. It cannot be pended, it must be returned. We assume that it has been returned by Keythong. No forms were submitted to this office (a requirement for any numbered item on an ILoI), so no file was created. This submission will cease to exist aside from this entry in this ILoAR and no record will be created in the RS database.} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Not checked because of tincture violation. 

Roberd: Pending, per LOI. 

Pendar: I would suggest that he resubmit with "Per fess indented gules and sable." Which looks basically the same but the points do not touch the edges of the field so it does not count as dividing the field into multiple parts. I did not find any conflicts through March 2002. 

Athenais: The submitter=s name was registered 02/00 via the Middle as Gudrun of the hills. (Note the capitalization.) This should be blazoned Pily gules and sable. Since pily is an overly enthusiastic rendition of per fess indented, this may be registerable as is, since the piles don=t seem to actually touch the top or bottom of the shield. If the piles do touch the sides in the larger emblazon on the form, I would suggest simply having the submitter redraw the line of division. Per fess indented gules and sable would certainly be considered a field evenly divided into two parts, which would make the use of two colours not a problem. 

 

{*) Gunther von Stein. Change of Registered Name.

The client enclosed no documentation whatsoever. We were able to document the given name, but all references to the byname indicate that it should be spelled “vom stein.” While this is a fairly minor change, the client permitted no changes whatsoever, so we must return it. When the client resubmits, he would be well advised to provide documentation for his name.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: <Gunther> is found 7 times, (1240, 1280, 1320, 1344, 1348, 1360, 1420) in Talan's "Medieval German Given Names from Silesia" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/bahlow/). Bahlow s.n. Stein says it is “mostly from the common pl.n. Stein, hence also ‘vom Stein’.”  They give not dated citations of the surname.  A Roghallach the Strong was registered 02/90 via the Middle; my guess is that this is this gentleman.  If nothing was specified on the forms, his old name will be released upon registration of the new name.  He has also has a device registered to him (02/90 via the Middle), "Per bend sable and Or, a flexed arm bendwise sinister proper, upon a gloved hand vert, a crow close sable." 

Richenda: Günther is documented in Talan Gwynek’s Later Period German Masculine Given Names – Names from 15^th C. Plauen (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/germmasc/plauen15.html). He dates this name to 1401-1450. Roghallach the Strong was registered in February of 1990. 

Athenais: With no documentation given in-kingdom, this submission really should=ve been returned to the submitter for further work. The submitter=s original name is registered as Roghallac the Strong, registered 02/90 via the Middle. He also has a device, Per bend sable and Or, a flexed arm bendwise sinister proper, upon a gloved hand vert, a crow close sable, registered at the same time. <Günther> is dated to 1401 - 1450 in 15^th century Plauen, in ALate Period German Masculine Given Names@ by Talan Gwynek (Brian M. Scott). (This is found on the S. Gabriel website, www.s-gabriel.org; unfortunately, I don=t have the capability to pull the exact URL at the moment.) Not having access to many German resources, this is the best I can do for this name. 

Hinach: Gunther is a common enough German name, with anumlaut.  Since the client does not allow any changes, that might requirethat the name be returned.  Found at page 196 of the English translationof Bahlow. Stein can be found at page 540 of the Englishtranslation of Bahlow.  

AElfreda, et al:  The previously name was registered as "Roghallach the Strong" in February of 1990 (spelled differently than in ILoI) 

 

8) Irial Féasruadh ó hlarnáin. {for House Bearheart. New Household Name and} Badge. Per bend sinister indented Or and gules, a bear salient counterchanged.

{The household name is being returned for lack of documentation. No documentation was supplied and none could be found. While it is possible to document the name as a byname using patterns found in other names, it is not really possible to document the use of names like this in period household names. Our rules state: “Household names must follow the patterns of period names of organized groups of people.  Possible models include Scottish clans (Clan Stewart), ruling dynasties (House of Anjou), professional guilds (Bakers Guild of Augsburg, Worshipful Company of Coopers), military units (The White Company), and inns (House of the White Hart).”} 

Name Commentary

Ary: RfS III.2.b.vi says "Household names must follow the patterns of period names of organized groups of people.  Possible models include Scottish clans (Clan Stewart), ruling dynasties (House of Anjou), professional guilds (Bakers Guild of Augsburg, Worshipful Company of Coopers), military units (The White Company), and inns (House of the White Hart)."  This household name follows none of these models.

If the clients are really interested in a household name appropriate for 16th century England, I strongly recommend they read Pelican's article "English Sign Names" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/mari/inn/). 

Richenda: Reaney and Wilson gives Bere as a prototheme in the name Bereward 1356 (sn. Bearward), meaning keeper of the bear. R&W give –herd/-hard as deuterothemes meaning brave in Whithed and Whithard 1327 (sn. Whittard). In addition, R&W give -hirst as a deuterotheme meaning of the wooded area, coupled with an animal referent as a prototheme in Derhirst 1304 (sn Deerhurst). However, documenting this name as a plausible byname does not ensure that it would be a plausible household name.

Irial Féasruadh ó hIarnáin was registered in November of 2000. 

Athenais: This household name doesn=t seem to follow any known period naming practice. 

Badge Commentary

Knut: Clear 

Ary: The line of division is "indented" not "dancetty." 

Richenda: This appears to be clear. 

Athenais: The badge is actually per bend sinister grady, since the indentations are stair-stepped at 90-degree angles. No conflicts found. 

 

9) Jason Irenfest. New Name. { and Device. Quarterly gules and azure, a cross gules fimbriated Or, overall a dexter plate gauntlet clenched argent. }

Jason is the client’s given name (a copy of his driver’s license is enclosed). Iren is documented from Jonsju “Studies in Middle English Nicknames,” which has ‘Irenbard’ (Ironbeard) , ‘Irnefot’ (Ironfoot) 1332, and ‘Irenside 1333. Fest is documented from the OED (971) Def 2a “ mani he smote of fot and fest” 1314. Jonsju, op cit also shows ‘Whithand’ 1197, Wytehande 1297, and ‘Whitehand’ 1328, so it seems ‘irenfest’ (Ironfist) would not be an unreasonable combination. Reaney and Wilson (249) provide support for the use of the prototheme Iron- with a body part as the deuterotheme with Yrenfot (Ironfoot) 1251 and Yrento (Irontoe) 1209, both under the heading “Ironfoot.” The client cares most about sound.

{The device is being returned because of the charged fimbriation. We do not allow the presence of charges laying over fimbriated field. The reason for this is that it impairs identifiability.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Lovely docs for the byname. 

Richenda: Reaney and Wilson provide support for the use of the prototheme Iron- with a body part as the deuterotheme with Yrenfot (Ironfoot) 1251 and Yrento (Irontoe) 1209, both under the heading Ironfoot. Reaney and Wilson also provide Hand (sn) as a surname in 1279. 

Device Commentary

Knut: Gules, a cross parted and fretted Or between a sinister canton and a dexter base canton overall a

dexter plate gauntlet clenched argent The submitted blazon is better, but the cross tincture matching one of the field tinctures makes this somewhat visually confusing.

Clear 

Ary: I have problems with the gules cross on the gules portions of the field; though the fimbriation removes the color on color problem, the overall effect makes it hard to identify the charges. 

Richenda: Bruce’s precedents state: Ermine fimbriation is disallowed (LoAR of 3 Aug 86, p.17), as are overall charges surmounting fimbriated ordinaries (9 March 86, p.12). (Cerridwen nic Alister, October, 1992, pg. 26) 

 

10) Middle, Kingdom of the for Baton, Award of the. New Badge. Or, a flanged mace bendwise sinister sable.

{Award Name Submitted on 3/02 MK LoI} 

Badge Commentary

Knut: Keara Caitlin MacLeod - September of 1991 (via the East): Or, in pale a thistle proper and a mace and a sword in saltire sable. CD number of primary group, CD orientation of mace

In general for mixed charges in saltire, the bendwise charge comes first. Clear 

Ary: That's "bendwise sinister," not "bend sinister-wise." 

Richenda: I believe this to be clear of Keara Caitlin MacLeod [9/1991], Or, in pale a thistle proper and a mace and a sword in saltire sable. There is 1 CD for the change in number of primary charges. There is a second CD for the change in orientation of the mace. 

Athenais: Typo: It should be bendwise sinister. No conflicts found. 

 

11) Middle, Kingdom of the. {for Evergreen, Order of the.} New {Order Name and }Badge. (Fieldless) A pine tree per pale purpure and Or.

{The order name is being returned for documentation of the word, “Evergreen.” I do not have direct access to an OED but as near as I could tell, the word Evergreen is dated only to 1664, which is not so good. Once we have a dated reference to the word, we should be able to make the following argument: Pine trees were heraldic charges and we know that period order names were sometimes derived from charges (Golden Fleece, for example). The forms indicate that the Kingdom is willing to surrender the registration of “Evergreen Herald,” if necessary, but we don’t believe that it should be, given that we have several kingdoms which have identical order names and heraldic titles (for example, the Order of the Pearl was registered to Atlantia 04/81, and they registered Pearl Herald 05/94; another example is the Order of the Diamond, registered to Meridies 10/97, and Diamond Pursuivant, registered to Meridies 03/98).

To all: my indebted thanks to everyone who correctly pointed out that we cannot “grandfather” an order name from a heraldic title. Hopefully, what I have done here should be sufficient to get it passed if we can get documentation for the word itself.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: The heraldic title "Evergreen Herald" was registered to the kingdom in 03/93. Attaching an email correspondance with Elsbeth Ann Roth: “So, if we have an registered Order, we could register a heraldic title of the same name. But if we have a title, we cannot register an Order. “Correction: not *automatically* register the title.  Some of the Atlantian orders taken from titles were registered, some were not. This is because one of the period ways heraldic titles were formed was from orders, so any order name makes a good heraldic title. There are also, however, types of heraldic titles that do not match in type any order name (such as mottos). Those cannot be registered as orders, *regardless* as to whether the title is registered.

“Therefore you do not have to release the title to register the order, you just cannot use the title as documentation.” 

Richenda: Is the name Evergreen Herald registered to an individual or the Kingdom? If it is the Kingdom, there is no conflict and the herald can continue using the title – they are just the herald representing the order. 

Athenais: Previous registration of a heraldic title is not documentation for registration of an order name:

The documentation submitted for this order name was the previous registration of Conch Herald (registered July 1982). However, while we have evidence of heraldic titles being taken from order names, no evidence was presented of order names being derived from heraldic titles. Since the Order of the Shell is dated to 1290 in Kwelland-Njal Kollskeggsson's article "Period Order Names" in the 2001 KWHS proceedings, this order name is registerable. (R-Atlantia, 12/01 LoAR)

If documentation can be found for the name as an order name, the release of Evergreen Herald isn=t necessary:

[Registering Golden Dolphin Herald.] To borrow from Baron Bruce's words in the March 1993 LoAR and apply them to this case, the title is taken from the Order of the Golden Dolphin, already registered to Atlantia. It is an ancient and honorable traditionto name heraldic officers after orders: Garter and Toison d'Or (Golden Fleece) are well-known medieval examples, while the classic Society example is (ahem) Laurel. [5/94, p.3]

For example, the Order of the Pearl was registered to Atlantia 04/81, and they registered Pearl Herald 05/94. Another example is the Order of the Diamond, registered to Meridies 10/97, and Diamond Pursuivant, registered to Meridies 03/98. 

Badge Commentary

Knut: Clear 

Richenda: This appears to be clear. 

Athenais: No conflicts found for the badge. 

12) Middle, Kingdom of the for Silver Acorn, Award of the. New Badge. Argent, on a pale gules three acorns argent.

{Award Name submitted 3/02 MK LoI }

{Knut: This is clear of Gwydion. There is one CD for changing the pale from vert to gules and another for changing the number (4-3) and tincture of the tertiary charges.} 

Badge Commentary

Knut: Middle, Kingdom of the - October of 1987 (via the Middle): Argent, on a pale gules, three pheons inverted Or. CD Tertiaries, Assumed permission to conflict

Gwydion Pendderwen - January of 1973: Argent, on a pale vert a crescent above three acorns Or. CD Tincture of primary, No difference for type of 25% of tertiary group, no CD for number only of tertiary group. Return for conflict. 

Richenda: This appears to be clear. 

 

13) Milica of Varna. New Device. Azure, four quill pens in fret and on a chief Or, two mullets azure.

{Name reg’d 4/02} 

Device Commentary

Knut: Azure, four quill pens fretted in saltire WIDDERSHINS and on a chief Or, two mullets azure. Clear

Richenda: Does this drawing satisfy the reason for return for redraw? This appears to be clear. 

 

14) Milica of Varna. Badge Resubmission. (Fieldless) Four quill pens in fret Or.

{Name reg’d 4/02} 

Badge Commentary

Knut: (Fieldless) Four quill pens fretted in saltire WIDDERSHINS Or. Clear

Richenda: Does this drawing satisfy the reason for return for redraw? This appears to be clear. 

15) Nezhka Petrovna Rostovskaya. New Name.

Nezhka is found in Holl, “Russian Personal Names: Name Frequeny in the Novgorod Birch-Bark Letters” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/predslava/bbl/women.html) and dated to the 12^th century. Petr is dated to the 12^th century in Wickenden (265). One of the possible feminine patronymic variants is Petrovna. Rostovskii is found in ibid (299) and dated to 1539-40. The feminine form is Rostovskaya. The client has requested an authentic Russian name and cares most about having a Russian name. The name isn’t authentic but it is registerable.

{Minor correction to Athenais: Wickenden is found on the Laurel website. There is merely a link to it on the Gabriel site – you gave me a minor heart attack there as I became worried about copyright violation.J Petrovna is a patronymic and not a locative byname – may I recommend the Grammar section of Wickenden for light bedtime reading?} 

Name Commentary

Gevehard: Found the following name, Nezhka Kiriena Petrova This name was registered in November of 2001 (via the Middle) seems to have at least two points of difference. 

Athenais: It’s not sufficient to simply cite a URL for name documentation. We need dates, and we need to know what the article or book says about the name. Insufficient name documentation can be cause for an administrative return from Laurel, and providing the information on the ILoI saves the kingdom submissions herald the time and trouble of having to look it up himself to put it in the external LoI.

The URL for the given name is Russian Personal Names: Name Frequency in the Novgorod Birch-Bark Letters by Masha Gedilaghine Holl (Predslava Vyarina), found on the S. Gabriel website, at www.s-gabriel.org. (Unfortunately, I’m unable to look up the specific URL at the moment.) The article gives the name as an Old Russian name, dates it to the 12^th C, and gives its meaning as Atender.

The URL for the bynames is Locative Bynames in Medieval Russia by Paul Wickenden of Thanet, also found on the S. Gabriel website. <Rostovskaya> seems to be a probable feminine form of a locative byname, according the article’s example, <Petr Semenovich Lobanov Rostovskoi. 1589. [RIB II 316] >. <Petrovna> seems to be a little iffier. The closest name given in the article is <II: Pestovo. 1467-74. [Woj 122]>. Unfortunately, I see nothing in the article that indicates that two locative bynames is found in normal Russian naming practices.

This seems to be a name to kick up to Rouge Scarpe as is and let the expert decide. :) 

 

{*) Olwen of Linby. New Name and Device. Per bend sinister erminois and vert, in base three trilliums argent.

The name is being returned for lack of documentation that the given name Olwen was used to name human children in period. The name only appears as the name of a mythical character in the documentation provided. If we had some indication that the name was also borne by humans, that would make it more possible to register. Mistress Tangwystl, who is generally considered to be the Society’s expert on Welsh names responded to our query about how the name had been previously registered: “To the best of my knowledge, the only pre-1600 example of Olwen is the title character in the story of Culhwch and Olwen.  I believe that it is on this basis that the name has been registered in the past.” We do not believe that this is no longer sufficient reason for registration.

The device is being returned with the name.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Past registration is no guarantee to present registerability.  Given that the only example of <Olwen> that I am familiar with is the name of the character in the Welsh myth of Culhwch and Olwen, I don't believe that this is registerable without evidence for the following a) that the name <Olwen> was not unique to this person, b) Olwen in the myth was human (I'm not too familiar with the story), and c) Welsh regularly named their children after mythical characters. 

Richenda: Withycombe does not give a dated citation for the name; she simple states that it is a name from Welsh tales. 

Athenais: Given that the documentation in Withycombe and in the LoI seem to indicate that Olwen is a non-human name, better documentation may need to be found for it, prior registration notwithstanding.

[I]t has been noted many times in the past that prior registration in the SCA does not constitute adequate documentation. [1/94, p.17] 

John: Olwen: see Norman (p.171, p. 184, p. 192) – dates back at least as far as 700 AD. Also: Conway (p.93); Todd (p.64). Linby: see Mills (p. 211); town dates to 1086. 

Device Commentary

Knut: Per bend sinister erminois and vert, three trillium INVERTED proper. Clear

 

Ary: The trillium in here need not be specified as "sinister", since the "in base" covers their position sufficiently.  

Richenda: A few fewer ermine spots would be nice. A more important issue is the distortion of the trillium flowers. The petals of the trillium flowers should be equally spaced around the center of a flower so a triangle drawn from point-to-point-to-point would be an equilateral triangle. This is not the case and makes the flowers difficult to identify. 

Athenais: The sinister in the proposed blazon seems out of place; these are not in the default positions of one and two for three charges. They=re also inverted from the PicDic illustration (#753), but that=s probably not worth blazoning. Since a trillium proper is white, it might be a nice idea to blazon these as three trilliums in bend sinister argent. No conflicts found. 

 

16) Quenild of Mercia. Change of Holding Name.

The client originally submitted Quinn of Mercia. This was changed by Rouge Scarpe to Quene of Mercia and then returned by Laurel for presumption. Her device and badge were registered under the holding name of Jennifer of Greyhope (reg’d 5/02).

Under Gunilda, Withycombe (141) says; “The name [Gunilda] survived the Norman Conquest, and was in use until the 14^th C, often in the Norman form Quenild.” Mercia was a Saxon kingdom in Southern England. The client would like an authentic 12^th-14^th century name and cares most about sound. She will NOT accept MAJOR changes.

Name Commentary

Richenda: Withycombe dates Quenilda (sn Gunilda) to 1332. The form of the name as submitted is listed before this cite as found in the Whitby Cartulary, but is not dated. I think this form is registerable. 

 

17) Wilhelm Michalik. New Name.

Wilhelm is dated to 1423 in the Slownik Staropolskich Nazw Osobowych [VI: 96]. Michal is dated to 1220 in ibid [II:450]. Michalik could be a dim of Michal, but it could also be a patronymic, as attested in Hoffman, Polish Surnames (2^nd ed) (33), who also notes that the –ik ending could be used to form “surnames derived from first names.”

{Ary: it’s off topic, but why do you think that they would have to be brother and sister because they shared a patronymic? It’s common in Slavic languages for a patronymic form to be used by a woman to indicate her husband, brother, grandfather, or son, as well as her father. Be careful of committing the fallacy of assuming that what applies for one culture applies for others.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Walraven's "Polish Given Names in Nazwiska Polaków" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/polish/) has three forms of <Michael>: <Michal>, <Michael>, and <Michail>.  <Wilhelm> is listed in the article cited above as a Polish form of <William>.  I don't know how to form patronyms in Polish.  If this client is related to Alzbieta above, he might like to know that currently their bynames are indicating that they are brother and sister, and not husband and wife. 

Richenda: Wilhelm is documented as a Policized German name in “Polish Given Names in Nazwiska Polakow” by Walraven van Nijmegen (Brian R. Speer) (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/polish); however this source does not provide dates for the names. Talan Gwynek (Brian Scott) dates this name to 15^th C Germany in “Late Period German Masculine Given Names: Names from 15^th Century Arnsburg” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/germmasc/arnsburg15.html).

Neither source is trustworthy for period documentation. The author of the site for the given name admits that he can not provide sources for his statements; that he didn’t do the research “a deceased friend” did. The site for the surname identifies that the name is currently in use in Poland, but provides no dates for the beginning of such use.

I believe Michalik is a patronymic form of Michal, which is documented in the same article by Walraven van Nijmengen as I cited above. 

AElfreda, et al:  Mikhail, aka William Michalski, sez, "Wonderful name!" 

 

18) Zygmunt Nadratowski. New Name. { and Device. Per pale argent and gules a cross Osmorog sable.}

Zygmunt is dated to 1445 as a Polish form of Sigmund in the Slownik Staropolskich Nazw Osobowych [VI: 343]. In addition to being the client’s legal surname, Nadratowski is a locative byname indicating a person from the city of Nadratowo. There is apparently a Nadratowski (from Nadratowo) who was granted arms c1500, according to a source only listed in the documentation as “Kasprzycki [IX:17].” I’m not familiar with this source, but the name seems quite plausible on its own and the Modern Name Allowance can be invoked, if necessary.

{We are returning the device for redrawing. The depiction provided was insufficiently like the submitted documentation that several commentators noted the issue. We would suggest that the arms of the cross be drawn beefier, that they curve more and that the roundels on the ends be added (as shown in the documentation). The roundels do appear to be optional, but adding them will make this cross sufficiently different from a cross moline to improve its chances of being registered. We remain concerned that it may not be sufficiently different from a variety of devices already registered and advise the client to thoroughly conflict check against cross types that resemble this cross osmorog, including Maltese, moline, formy, Latin, and patty.} 

Name Commentary

Ary: Walraven's "Polish Given Names in Nazwiska Polaków" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/polish/) lists <Zygmunt> as a form of <Sigmund>. 

Richenda: Zygmunt is documented in “Polish Given Names in Nazwiska Polakow” by Walraven van Nijmegen (Brian R. Speer) (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/walraven/polish); however this source does not provide dates for the names. Talan Gwynek (Brian Scott) dates Siegmund, the German form of the name, to 15^th C Germany in “Late Period German Masculine Given Names: Names from 15^th Century Plauen” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/germmasc/plauen15.html). 

Device Commentary

Knut: The images supplied certainly appear to be heraldic achievements.  If the dates are accurate, the cross Osmorog appears to be acceptable by RfS VII.1 The roundels shown are in an unusual location for a secondary group.  Are they part of a standard depiction of this cross?

The following all have a CD for the tincture of either the field or the primary charge and almost

certainly a second CD for type of cross:

Maximilian Delmonico - September of 1997 (via the Outlands): (Fieldless) An equal-armed Celtic cross clechy sable// Allyn Samildanach - August of 1979 (via the West): (Tinctureless) A cross of Samildanach// Darcy Graham - February of 1981 (via Ansteorra): Argent, a bowen knot in cross sable// Clare RosMuire St. John - February of 1981 (via Ansteorra): Argent, a cross avellane sable, the center roundel gules// Aengus Stiubhard Mac Dhughaill - January of 1996 (via Calontir): Barry and per pale argent and vert, a cross crosslet fitchy sable// Peter fra Marstal - September of 1988 (via the West): Gyronny vert and argent, a Latin cross nowy pierced sable// Gwynneth Sanquebarr - November of 1977: Or, a cross gurgity sable// Lorraine Marcus - January of 1973 (via the West): Quarterly vert and Or, a cross of Lorraine sable

The following could be problems for this cross: Emeric Wendel - August of 1979: Per pale argent and gules, a Maltese cross counterchanged. CD field.  The Maltese cross, with it's splayed, although straight, arms and notched ends has some visual similarities with the cross Osmorog.

Teutonic Order - December of 1994 (via Laurel): (Fieldless) A Latin cross formy sable fimbriated argent.

Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin - January of 1973: Argent, a cross patty sable. CD field.  The cross formy and cross patty with splayed, usually curving arms also have similarities in appearance to the cross Osmorog.

Darya Kazakova - October of 1996 (via An Tir): (Fieldless) A cross of four ermine spots conjoined sable. CD This is where the possibility of roundels as part of a standard depiction of the cross Osmorog can be a very significant issue.  Due to the wide variation of ermine spots, all that I can say about this cross is that it probably has splayed arms with detached roundels at the ends of the arms, which also describes images of the cross Osmorog provided by the submitter in his documentation.

Pend for a translation of the submitted documentation or further documentation or pass it up for a

Laurel decision. 

Ary: I find the primary charge of the device unrecognizable and unblazonable, and insufficiently like the submitted documentation. 

Richenda: This cross does not match the exemplars given. In each exemplar, the cross has a roundel at the end of each arm. In addition, this stick figure is sufficiently vague that I would not have identified it as the same figure as in the exemplars without Escutcheon stating so. I do not think the alternative blazons work as the primary difficulty is with the emblazon. I do not believe that either alternative blazon matches the depiction of the cross in the documentation. Is it possible that this cross is a variant of the cross moline? I recommend that this be returned.  

Athenais: The charge is referred to as a cross osmoróg on the Polish charges website. The website also shows the cross without the roundels at the ends of the arms, so they might be optional. This type of cross may conflict with a cross moline unless the roundels are decided to be a part of this precise form. The submitter might be better off redrawing the device to show them, since the period renditions he provided show them. The cross could definitely use some charge chow, but seems like it should be registerable with the documentation supplied.

A note about the use of recercely or sarcelly:

The cross was blazoned in the LoI as recercely; this term appears to be an ambiguous one and should not be used in SCA blazon, much as we no longer use forceny, and for the same underlying reason: its ambiguity. "English heraldic writers seem, however, to have made two words, recercele and sarcelly, and have implied that they are of different origin and meaning; but there is no agreement as to what those meanings were. The French heralds seem equally at fault." (Parker, p. 494). Given this confusion among heraldists, the terms should be avoided in SCA blazon. (Merrick Xavier, 9/95 p. 3) 

 

 

Done by my hand this 16^th day of September, 

Paul Wickenden of Thanet, Rouge Scarpe 

Paul W Goldschmidt

3071 Cimarron Trail

Madison WI 53719

goldschp@mailbag.com