Middle
Kingdom - Internal Letter of Acceptances & Returns – May 2003
This is the May 2003 Middle
Kingdom Letter of Acceptances and Returns for Escutcheon and Keythong’s
March 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 Aryanhwy merch Catmael,
Knut, Malcolm mac Lachlainn, Roberd
mac Cormaic, Pendar the
Bard, Lucien d’Artois, John ap Wynne, Rory mac Feidhlimidh, Moraig Drummond,
Ælfreda æt Æthelwealda, Mikhail of Lubelska, and Jaelle of Armida for
their commentary this month.}
{Please note that this is my
final LoI and ILoAR. Next month’s letter will be produced by Meisteri
Rory mac Feidhlimidh and all commentary should be sent to him at: Kevin
L Conlin, 820 E Monroe St, Bloomington IL 61701, rougescarpe@midrealm.org. If you have already sent your commentary
to me, I will forward it to Rory.}
1) Caedmon Wilson.
New Device. Argent, three Latin crosses azure.
{Name
reg’d 1/01}
The
crosses should be bigger, but we found no fatal flaws with the submission.
Device
Commentary
Knut:
These crosses should be larger.
Clear
Malcolm: Doing a search for
possible conflicts, I find Therasia von Tux, Via Caid, 1984: (Fieldless)
In fess three crosses couped, parted and fretted azure. One CD for Fieldless,
and I'd call one for arrangement, since hers are in fess. I'd personally
probably give a CD for the different cross style, but can find no precedents
for that, so it sounds like just one Herald's opinion there. :-)
My
only concern is that the crosses seem a little small on the drawing;
I'd draw them a little bolder myself. They seem almost small enough
for a semy.
Ary: The charges could all
stand to be drawn larger, but this is not a fatal flaw. No conflicts
found.
Pendar: They could stand to
be bigger, but probably won't get returned for a redraw since the identifiability
is maintained. No conflicts found through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Moraig: No conflicts found
but we feel that the submitter should be told that the crosses should
be fed.
Rory: A common refrain --
draw the charges bigger. They should aim to fill the space, not float
in mid-air. It is not enough to warrant a return - just a note to the
client for future drawings.
2) Grimon Toussaint de Mortaigne.
New Name and Device. Per pale azure and sable, three fleurs-de lys
in pall bases to center argent.
Grimon
is found in Friedemann, "Names Found in Commercial Documents from
Bordeaux, 1470-1520" (http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~sfriedemann/names/bordeaux.htm). Toussaint occurs as a given name
in Friedemann, "French Names from 1601" (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/french1601.html). de Moretaign is recorded in 1219
respectively in Reaney & Wilson (315, under “Morten”).
The
client cares most about sound.
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Is a Google Web Search sufficient documentation? I got similar results
using a like search, but I've become very suspicious of self proclaimed
geneological sites. Otherwise the name looks all right to me. Grimon
has already been registered at least once, also.
Ary: The only adequate documentation
on the LoI is that for the given name. What's the 1610 census of Paris?
I'm not familiar with it. Is it a book or a webpage? Did he provide
copies of the relevant pages so we can track down this source?
The
only reference to <Toussaint> that I found was to a <Toussaint
Giroux>, baptised in 1633, at http://members.mint.net/frenchcx/giroux1.htm; there
is reason to believe that this
source (a modern genealogy web page) has at least partially modernized
some of the names, as the byname is originally found as <Giroust>
at http://www.crosswinds.net/~tagiroux/girouxsrc/toussaint.htm, another genealogy
webpage. Dauzat was unhelpful; the entry s.n. Toussaint reads "anc.
n. de bapt. mystique, d'après la fête. V. <Ozanne>, <Tiphaine>.
Peut représenter (plus rarement), un enfant baptisé, né ou t. ouvé le
jour de la Toussaint." As best as I can render this with Babelfish's
help, this says "mystical ancient name of baptism, according to
the festival. Can represent (more rarely), a child baptized or born
on All Saint's Day."
<de
Moretaign'> and <de Mortaine> are recorded in 1187 and 1219
respectively, according to Reaney & Wilson s.n. Morten. The first
is most likely a scribal form of <de Moretaigne>. <Grimon de
Mortaine> is registerable, though not particularly authentic given
the divergence in language and time period.
The
given name <Toussains> is found once in Paris in 1421, in my "French
Names from Paris, 1421, 1423, & 1438" (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/paris1423.html). <Toussaint> occurs as a given
name in my "French Names from 1601" (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/french1601.html). (Yes, I confess, there's stuff in
my articles that even I don't know is in there; I didn't find either
of these the first time around).
Anyway,
with the other documentation, I can now support <Grimon Toussaint
de Mortaigne> as <given> + <unmarked patronym> + <locative>
for registration purposes at least.
Moraig: No comments about the
name
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Clear
Malcolm: Simple and elegant,
very visually appealing. All standard divisions and charges, search
for conflict reveals Carloe the Grim in 1973 (?) with Per pale azure
and sable, in chief two fleurs-de-lis Or and in base a crescent pendant
Or; CD for number, CD for color, CD for arrangement, Taking a charge
away from the primary charge group - doesn't look like a problem there.
Pendar: No conflicts found
through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Moraig: We do not think this
is a conflict but we found - Per pale sable and argent, a chevron rompu,
between three fleur-de-lys argent - Vivienne Marie de Beauvais
3) Jimena Xemenez de Castile.
New Name and Device. Per chevron gules and azure, two swans wings
elevated and addorsed respectant and a crescent argent.
Jimena
was the name of the wife of Rodrigo Dias Vivar (El Cid). Xemenez was
the surname of the King of Navarre. Both are cited in Ebersole,
The King Book. De Castile appears to be an English spelling
(with de Castilla being grammatically sounder but late period).
The
client cares most about having a name from Castile Iberia and wishes
it to be authentic for the 13th century. Aryanhwy suggested
in internal commentary that the client’s wishes might be best met by
changing her name to Jimena Jimenez, but as it is not our place to make
such a drastic change, we submit it as is and let Pelican decide how
best to handle the issue. We are also wondering if there is an issue
of presumption here (the name of a royal wife and the name of a kingdom
of Spain). Would we register Katherine Windsor of England?
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Did either of those survive in that form until the 13th Century? I don't
know enough about it to say for sure, but it is a consideration.
Ary: <Jimena> is found
in Diego Mundoz's "A Partial List of Leonese and Castilian Given
Names 1050-1200" (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/diego/reilly.html). <Xemenez> is a patronymic
from the masculine form of the name name, which is found as <Jimeno>
in Diego's data. <Jimenez> is much more likely for 13th century
Castile. <de Castile> is English, not Spanish; the Spanish name
for <Castile> is <Castilla>. She could be <de Castilla>,
but it is unlikely for 13th C Castile for a number of reasons: The byname
<de Castilla> in all periods until the late 15th C or so was restricted
to the ruling class of Castille. In general, identifying oneself as
"from Castile" while still living in Castile was fairly useless;
she'd more likely be known by a locative formed from a smaller town
or city within Castile. Furthermore, the use of two bynames is almost
unheard of in the 13th century; it was still fairly rare in the late
14th C, and did not become moderately common until the late 15th
C. Given this, and given her request for an authentic name, I recommend
that this be forwarded to Laurel as <Jimena Jimenez>.
Moraig: No comments about the
name
Device
Commentary
Knut:
The charges should be larger, the swans should be closer to the sides,
and the per chevron should be steeper.
Clear
Malcolm: I don't really see
anything I'd call a conflict here, like #1 above, though, the charges
seem drawn a little small.
Ary: All the charges in the
device could stand to be drawn larger, but this is not a fatal flaw.
Pendar: No conflicts found
through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device. Suggested new blazon:
Per chevron gules and azure, two swans respectant wings elevated
and addorsed and a crescent argent.
In my opinion, the fact that the swans are facing each other is more
important than the fact that their wings are raised, so I would blazon
it first.
Moraig: No conflicts found
on the device. Please make the swans larger.
4) Juliana Montalto del
Mar. New Badge. (Fieldless) Three winged hearts conjoined in
annulo argent.
{Name
reg’d 3/00}
Badge
Commentary
Knut:
Clear
Malcolm: Oh, that is nice.
Pendar: As weird as it looks,
it doesn't violate any past precedents regarding weirdnesses. No conflicts
found through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this badge.
Moraig: We found ‘Fieldless,
a winged heart argent’ but feel this is clear of that.
5)
Kyrstyan Makfaill. New Name. {and Device.
Azure, an orle of lymphads and an escutcheon argent charged with
a hawk volent sable.}
Kyrstyan
is dated to 1450 in Scott, “Feminine Given Names in a
Dictionary of English Surnames” (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/reaneyAG.html) as a var of Christina (although the
name is actually found in Withycombe). Makfaill is dated to 1492 in
Reaney and Wilson (291, under “Makfail”). The client will NOT accept
MAJOR changes and cares most that the name be post-1400 English or Scottish,
with the Elizabethan period preferred.
{The
device is being returned for violating RfS XI.4 (Arms of Pretense) as
it has a charged escutcheon.
Quoting
from commentary that was received: “Period and modern heraldic practice
asserts a claim to land or property by surmounting an individuals usual
armory with a display of armory associated with that claim. Such arms
of pretense are placed on an escutcheon. Similarly, an augmentation
of honor often, though not necessarily, takes the form of an independent
coat placed on an escutcheon or canton. Generally, therefore, a canton
or a single escutcheon may only be used if it is both uncharged and
of a single tincture. For example,
Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an escutcheon sable charged with
a roundel argent has the appearance of being arms of pretense or
an augmentation. Or, in saltire five escutcheons sable each charged
with three roundels argent does not have this appearance, as it
has multiple escutcheons, as so is acceptable. The exception to the
restrictions of this rule is when the submitter is entitled to an augmentation
as described in RfS VIII. 7. Augmentations of Honor.”
The
client should consider a redesign that eliminates this feature of the
emblazon.}
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
No commentary here
Moraig: No comments about the
name
Ary: The citation for the
surname comes from _Reaney & Wilson's_ Dictionary, not _Withycombe's_.
The name is, currently, a mix of English and Scots; this is a weirdness,
but registerable. Since she has a clearly Scots byname, if she's interested
in authenticity she may want to consider a Scots form of the given name.
Talan's index of names from Black (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/scottishfem/) has <Cristiane> 1424; this
would be pronounced almost the same as <Kyrstyan>. Effrick's "Early
16th Century Scottish Lowland Names" (http://www.medievalscotland.org/scotnames/lowland16/) has <<Cristiane> 13 times
between 1500 and 1516, as well as <Crystane> 1540 and <Kristene>
1532; based on these, I can tentatively support <Krystiane>; I
can't support the <i/y> switch in the second syllable for Scots.
Device
Commentary
Knut:
A charged inescheutceon violates RfS XI.4.
Argent,
a hawk volant sable and a bordure azure semy of lymphads argent looks
clear.
Return
for redraw.
Ary: The primary charge should
be blazoned first: "Azure, on an escutcheon argent a hawk volant
sable within an orle of lymphads argent." This must be returned
for presumption, because of the charged escutcheon. RfS XI.4 says "Generally,
therefore, a canton or a single escutcheon may only be used if it is
both uncharged and of a single tincture." While the precedents
of Francois says "[on a lozenge argent a fleur-de-lys gules] As
per the rules change in the cover letter to the June 2001 LoAR, the
fact that the charged shape is not an escutcheon means that this is
not an inescutcheon of pretense. An inescutcheon charged with a single
charge also avoids the appearance of an inescutcheon of pretense. [Alethea
of Shrewsbury, 08/01, A-Lochac]", I'm not sure that this ruling
would actually be upheld; my first thought upon seeing this was immediately
"Oh, she has an escutcheon of pretense with the arms "Argent,
a hawk volent sable." This cannot be reblazoned as "Argent,
a hawk volant sable within a bordure semy of lymphads (lymphaddy?) argent,"
because this is too wide to be a bordure. It could be redrawn as such,
though.
Malcolm: I'd need some clarification
on the rule about an "escutcheon of pretense." If it's clear
of that, hmm - hawk on escutcheon on field – too deep?. I would like
for the blue to be more blue. I also have a question about the blazon
for the rest of the commenters, to wit, would the lymphads be better
blazoned "in orle?" Would the number then have to be specified,
i.e. "Ten Lymphads In Orle?"
Ye
gods, but I'd hate to have to do the applique for a tabard from this,
though. Makes me wonder about complexity, but I only count 7.
Pendar: With the current blazon
this would violate RfS XI.4, arms of pretense, as it has a charged escutcheon.
A narrowing of the area the ships are on would make this Argent, a hawk
volant sable within a bordure azure semy of lymphads argent.
Ælfreda: As blazoned, this
device would run afoul of RfS XI.4 - Arms of Pretense and Augmentations
of Honor, as a charged escutcheon is generally considered presumptuous.
The device could be reblazoned, however, as "Argent, a hawk volant
sable, a bordure azure seme of lymphads argent." If so, the "bordure"
needs to be thinned out some.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device. Suggested new blazon:
Argent, a hawk volant sable within a bordure azure semy of lymphads
argent. The current blazon has a charged escutcheon which violates
RfS XI.4 (Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor):
“Period
and modern heraldic practice asserts a claim to land or property by
surmounting an individuals usual armory with a display of armory associated
with that claim. Such arms of pretense are placed on an escutcheon.
Similarly, an augmentation of honor often, though not necessarily, takes
the form of an independent coat placed on an escutcheon or canton. Generally,
therefore, a canton or a single escutcheon may only be used if it is
both uncharged and of a single tincture.”
Changing
the blazon should address the issue, but the device might need to be
redrawn to make the bordure smaller.
Moraig: This submission violates
RFS XI-4, which states that charging an escutcheon is arms of pretense
and therefore may not be registered. We fear that as drawn we could
not describe this a ‘Argent, a hawk volant sable within a bordure azure
an orle of ships argent’ because then the ships become difficult to
see as they become too small to distinguish from other white objects
on an orle. And the bordure would have to be narrower.
Rory: The device needs to be
returned for Presumption. RfS XI.4:
4. Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor
- Armory that uses charges in such a way as to appear to be arms of
pretense or an unearned augmentation of honor is considered presumptuous.
Period
and modern heraldic practice asserts a claim to land or property by
surmounting an individuals usual armory with a display of armory associated
with that claim. Such arms of pretense are placed on an escutcheon.
Similarly, an augmentation of honor often, though not necessarily, takes
the form of an independent coat placed on an escutcheon or canton. Generally,
therefore, a canton or a single escutcheon may only be used if it is
both uncharged and of a single tincture. For example,
Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an escutcheon sable charged with
a roundel argent has the appearance of being arms of pretense or
an augmentation. Or, in saltire five escutcheons sable each charged
with three roundels argent does not have this appearance, as it
has multiple escutcheons, as so is acceptable. The exception to the
restrictions of this rule is when the submitter is entitled to an augmentation
as described in RfS VIII. 7. Augmentations of Honor.
6) Langry de Cluny.
New Name and Device. Sable, on a bend sinister between two ram’s
heads cabossed argent three cross crosslets fitchy palewise gules.
Langry
is dated to 1080 in Hopkins, Knights (39). Cluny is the site
of an abbey founded in 910 that functioned continuously until 1790,
according to a Catholic Encyclopedia entry online at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04073a.htm under “C: Congregation of Cluny.”
The client has expressed an interest in having an authentic 10th-12th
century French name.
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Langry of Cluny. Hmm. Pass. I'm still working on names, and I haven't
gotten to French yet. It sounds good to me, but....
Ary: The client's source for
the given name is a modern history book, which is generally _not_ the
best place to look for actual medieval names. The Academy of S. Gabriel
reviewed the scholarship of the source as well as the name itself in
report #2440 (www.s-gabriel.org/2440), and said:
"Here's
what we've found out: We haven't been able to find a reference to <Langry>,
other than the one you showed us, in our sources for names from France
or England. This doesn't mean that it wasn't in use, only that it doesn't
appear in the sources we've encountered to date. It's also possible
that <Langry> is an Anglicization or misinterpretation of a name
given in Latin in the original source used by the author of the book
you cited. Unfortunately, we don't have access to that original source,
so we can't be certain. Based on the way other French names developed
from earlier forms, we believe that <Langry> may well be an unusual
11th century French given name derived from a Germanic name something
like <Langrich>. However, we would not recommend it as the best
choice for your recreation, since we have no evidence of it having been
used in England, or into the twelfth century."
It
would be nice to have better support for <Langry>; such support
may be needed before this can be registered. <Cluny> is not in
Dauzat, but there is an entry for "Clugny (de)" which reads
"parait représenter une var. orth. de <Cluny> (Saone-et-Loire
ou Savoie)." I believe this translates roughly "represents
an orthographical variant of <Cluny>."
Moraig: We like the simplification
of this name from the one previously submitted
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Ulfrik Haraldsson av Strömö - February of 1994 (via Atlantia): Gules,
on a bend sinister between two ram's heads erased contourny argent,
three cross crosslets fitchy palewise sable.
CD
field, CD secondary posture.
Clear
Malcolm: No conflicts found,
Good bold definition. I like it.
Ary: These are lovely arms.
Pendar: Similar concept to
Ulfrik Haraldsson av Strömö (2/94 via Atlantia): Gules, on a bend sinister
between two ram's heads erased contourny argent, three cross crosslets
fitchy palewise sable. 1 CD for the field, 1 CD for the orientation
of the ram's heads. Nothing for changing the tincture only of the tertiary.
No conflicts found through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device. The blazon should read “...three crosses crosslet...”
Moraig: We found “Gules, on
a bend sinister between two rams heads erased contourney argent, three
cross crosslets fitchy palewise sable” registered in 2/94 to Ulfrik
Haraldsson av Stromo. But we feel that this is clear because of the
position of the heads and the color of the background
Northshield
wonders why this submission was not sent back to the client to submit
correctly or at least sent on to us, but since we have recently received
a submission from the Kingdom of Calontir we guess they did not want
to send it to us.
7)
Moira MacGillavrey. New Name and Device.
Per chevron sable and vert, a three towered castle argent, in chief
four mullets of four points Or.
Moira
was ruled SCA compatible by Jaelle of Armida in 1997. MacGillavrey
is a header spelling in Black (502) although the dated variants tend
to not be spelled with a G. The variants include Makillewray (1535),
McIluray (1542), McIliwray (1542), McIlvery, McIlverie (1541), M'Gillewra
(1549), and McIlwray (1542). The only period citation with the G is
M'Gillewra from 1549. The client cares most about sound.
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Yeah, Jaelle did, and it doesn't seem to be on the "Problem Names"
page. Not sure on MacGillavrey. I recall an old traditional song about
"Donald MacGillavrey" but it's hardly documentation. Black
with no page
number? I did a net search,
and other than the song about Donald, I only found MacGillavrey on SCA-related
sites. However, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and
I'm weak on names yet.
Ary: I sure hope she's the
sister of #11, and not his wife... The header in Black is MacGillivray,
and has the following forms: <Makillewray> 1535, <McIluray>
1542, <McIliwray> 1542, <McIlvery>, <McIlverie> 1541,
<M'Gillewra> 1549, <McIlwray> 1542. The only period citation
with the <G> is <M'Gillewra> from 1549.
Moraig: no comment
John: Moira: see Aczaek (46);
O Corrain/Maguire (133, under “Maire”); Conway (65); Todd (56).
MacGillavrey:
see Black (502); Norman (130, 138, listing name as one of Scotland’s
common from 1040-1542); Conway (179); Grimble (158-160); MacLean (70);
Whyte (174-175)
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Per chevron sable and vert, a three towered castle argent, in chief
four mullets of four points Or
Clear
Malcolm: Seems a clumsy Blazon.
I think it would go without saying that 4 mullets in chief would be
oriented fesswise. And it shouldn't be "in fess" I don't think,
because to me that implies being across the center. "...Mullets
of Four Points fesswise Or" might be better, if their orientation
has to be specified.
Pendar: This is right on the
edge of being picture heraldry. No conflicts found through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Moraig: We found Per pale sable
and vert, a castle and in chief three mullets one and two argent, registered
5/00 to Stella Seraphina von Leuchtenberg. Also, Per pale vert and
sable, a tower and in chief two mullets of four points argent, registered
in 1/97 to Sebastian Cormac M’Donaill. We think it is clear of both
but have a little bit of a twitch for the difference in the background
being the field division of two identical colors.
8) Odillia Marguerite du
Parc. New Name
Odillia
is dated to 1592 as the name of the daughter of Emilia Bassano, lady
in waiting to the Countess of Kent, according to a web page devoted
to Bassano genealogy (www.balcro.com/carol.html). Odilia is found in Withycombe
(236, under “Ottilia”) as an Old German woman’s name. Marguerite Gagnon
lived from 1598 to 1677, according to a genealogy webpage (www.er.uquam.ca/nobel/g17176/Ascendance/D0002/12507.html). It is also found in Friedemann,
“Provins Names 1587” (www.sit.wisc.edu/~sfriedemann/names/provins1587/htm). The byname du Parc is found in ibid.
The client has expressed an interest in a late 16th C French/English name but will NOT
accept MAJOR changes.
Name
Commentary
Aryanhwy:
If Withycombe gives dates for the various spellings, it would have
been nice to have had those dates included on the LoI. I could not find
<Odillia> in the U.Arizona website (a biography of Aemilia Lanyer,
christened 1569). The balcro.com website mentions <Emilia Bassano>,
baptised 1569, who appears to be the same person as <Aemilia Lanyer>.
The page says "Emilia was married off to Alphonso Lanier, musician
of the Queen, in October 1592. From their union Odillia was born, to
die at the age of nine months." The rootsweb site gives a 404 not
found error. Emilia was Italian; <Odillia> is likely an Italian
form of the name.
Withycombe s.n. Ottilia says
<Odala>, <Odila>, <Otila>, <Odilia> "are
foundin Old German as a woman's name...the corresponding mans' name
<Odila> occurs in Old ENglish. St. Otillia (French <Odille>)
was a 6th C virgin who became the patron saint of Alsace. <Ottilie>
is not uncommon inGermany, and <Odille> and its diminutive <Odette>
are fairly common in France." Since the client requests an authentic
French name, the name should be changed to the French form <Odille>.
I could not find an explicit date for <Odille>, but since she
was the patron saint of Alsace and the name is popular modernly, it's
reasonable to think that the name remained in use.
Roberd: I checked the Withycombe
reference mentioned in the ILoI, and found the reference to <Ottilia>
and all the spellings that accompanied it. However, the closest spelling
to <Odillia> is <Odilia>, mentioned as a name found in Old
German. In the second edition of Withycombe, there are no dates associated
with any of these names, so I'm at a loss for where to confirm the ILoI's
claim. The headed name, <Ottilia>, is listed as having been a
7th-century virgin who became the patron saint of the Alsace region,
where the name was rendered as <Odille>. There is no date attribution,
specifically. Unfortunately, I am not versed in naming practices to
ernder an opinion on where this name should go, other than to say that
the Withycombe reference in inconclusive for determining its suitability
as a late 16th-century Franco-English name.
{*) Peredur Polydore Peripeteticus.
New Name and Device. Argent, a ?? sable.
The
name is being returned for violating
RfS III.2, which states
“every name as a whole should be compatible with the culture of a single
time and place.” We would need evidence that a Latinized Greek name
would comingle with Welsh and English. Two of the three might be plausible,
but all three seems like quite a stretch and given the College of Arms’
current sensitivities, the name would almost certainly be returned if
we sent it up. We suggest some sort of simplification.
The device is being returned for being unidentifiable.
RfS VII.7 states that “elements must be recognizable solely from
their appearance” and that “elements must be reconstructible in a recognizable
form from a competent blazon.” None of the commentators were able to
identify what this charge is.}
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Name: Oh. Um. This does seem wrong. Or maybe it just sounds evil. I'll
leave this to others.
Moraig: We have a problem with
Peripeteticus, this is a latin translation of a Greek word. We think
that the client should be asked to provide documentation for the use
of this Latinized Greek word used as an epithet. We would also like
to point out that without the epithet the name is two given names and
we feel he should also document the use of two given names with an epithet
in the 12th to 13th Century in the Welsh or Italian
cultures.
Rory: How much of a stretch
is this vying to be as a Welsh-Italian-Greek name??? RfS III.2:
2. Name Style. - Every name as a whole should be compatible with
the culture of a single time and place. This seems to be a bit of a
stretch.
John: Peredur: the only Celtic
element in client’s name, so I’ll limit my comments to this: see Conway
(113); Norman (173, 180, listing it as common Welsh male name between
47-1200 AD); see also Gruffudd (78); Ellis (181). In addition, name
can be found in the Mabinogion and the Arthurian legends.
Device
Commentary
Knut:
This appears to be a piece of statuary. Since I do not believe that
this particular motif has been previously registered it needs to be
documented per RfS VII. Particular attention to the concerns of RfS
VII.2, RfS VII.7.a and RfS VII.b should be addressed in said documentation.
Malcolm: Device: I don't know
what a ?? is either.
Ary: The device must be returned
for violating both VII.7.a and VII.7.b
a. "Elements must be recognizable
solely from their appearance."
b. "Elements must be reconstructible
in a recognizable form from a competent blazon."
This is neither recognizable
nor reconstructible.
Pendar: ?? indeed.
Ælfreda: While we could make
make guesses, we were unable to identify the primary. Return for unidentifiability
Lucien: The charge appears
to be some sort of stylized human figure. It does not look like a period
charge.
Moraig: Richard thinks that
this is a portrait of Jack Benny painted by Pablo Picasso, but neither
can be documented to period. We recommend that a kind herald perform
an intervention for this gentle as we suspect he does not understand
the RFS and needs assistance with his submission to enable him to obtain
something that will pass that he can be contented with.
Rory: Should be returned based
on RfS VII.7: 7. Armorial Element Requirements.
- Only elements from the preceding categories that satisfy the following
requirements may be registered in armory.
a. Identification Requirement
- Elements must be recognizable solely from their appearance.
b. Reconstruction Requirement
- Elements must be reconstructible in a recognizable form from a competent
blazon.
This
charge is NOT recognizable as anything, and as the client didn't tell
us what he thinks it is there is no reason to register it.
9) Phillipa of Otterbourne.
New Name.
Phillipa
is dated to 1195 in Scott, “Feminine Given Names in
A Dictionary of English Surnames” (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/reaneyHZ.html). Otterbourne is a village in Hampshire,
England, near Winchester, listed in the Domesday Survey of 1086 as “Otreburne”
according to Ekwall (353). The client will NOT accept MAJOR changes
and cares most that the name be English and retain the placename. She
has expressed interest in having an authentic English name but with
no specific period in mind.
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Phillipa has been registered several times before, and the Domesday
survey is a good enough source for me for "Otterbourne." I
find no name conflicts
Ary: Lovely name.
Moraig: No comment, we like
this very nice name
10) Sebastian Goulde.
New Name and Device. Per bend azure and gules, a reremouse pendant
from a branch argent.
Sebastian
is dated to 1577 in O’Brien, “Names of Members of the Frobisher Voyages
1576-1578” (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/mari/frobisher/). Goulde is found in Reaney and Wilson
(196, under “Gold”) where this spelling var is dated to 1332. The client
cares most about sound.
There
was some discussion in internal commentary about whether the raremouse
pendant (with wings closed) was identifiable and registerable. Given
the debate, we felt it best to send it forward for a clearer decision.
Name Commentary
Malcolm: Name: I don't see
any problems.
Ary: Fine name
Moraig: No comment
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Per bend gules and azure, a reremouse pendant from a branch argent.
[a
reremouse dormant dependent from an annulet] The bat was not dormant,
but was rather in its natural sleeping posture. We know of no examples
of this posture in period heraldic depictions of bats, and for good
reason: this posture eliminates any identifiable aspects of the bat.
Therefore the device violates VIII.4.c, Natural Depiction: ...Excessively
natural designs include those that depict animate objects in unheraldic
postures ... and VIII.3, Armorial Identifiability. [Aindrea Gille Eoghainn,
08/00, R-Atlantia] Precedents - Elsbeth, under BEAST -- Reremouse
Return
Malcolm: Device: From 1981
(Atenveldt), I find "Argent, on a pale between six fir trees sable
a bat close inverted Or pendant from a decrescent argent" I'd think
a little blazon-fu, of "a reremouse close inverted pendant from
a branch argent" might not be out of line here. I'm not fond of
the way the branch is drawn. I'm not sure that's a show stopper, though.
But it looks more like a club, not a branch.
Ary: The bat is "pendant
reguardant." This is clear of Chabi of Burkhan Khaldun, (reg. 10/95
via Atlantia), "Per bend sinister sable and vert, a reremouse argent,"
with CDs for the field and for posture; the default posture for a reremouse
is displayed guardant, per the Glossary of Terms.
Pendar: I don't know if this
is still registerable. The last time a bat was blazoned as pendant in
the SCA was 1983, but it's worth a shot. No conflicts found through
12/02.
Ælfreda: The default posture
for a bat is displayed guardant.
Two
precedents from Da'ud II (from the same letter, no less):
"[registering
a reremouse inverted] While the inversion of the bat is unusual, it
remains (even at a distance) identifiable... Because of the bird-like
nature of the bat, we believe that it should be allowed a posture which
is not so very different from "migrant to base", which posture
has not been disallowed under the ban on "inverted creatures"
noted in the September 1993 LoAR. [The badge was registered.] (Devora
Risee de Apors, 9/94 p. 5)
[returning a bat close inverted]
The bat is not at all identifiable in this posture. (Kiera Nighthawk,
9/94 p. 18)"
It
appears from these two statements that it is the closing of the wings
that makes the bat unidentifiable. We suggest return, based on the precedence
above.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Moraig: No comment
11) Sindri Jónsson. Device Resubmission. Or,
chape ploye purpure, a dagger inverted conjoined to a double horned
anvil sable.
{Name
reg’d 6/02}
The
client’s previous submission (Or chapé ployé purpure, a bickern sable
and in chief two daggers inverted Or) was returned by Laurel in June
2002 for charging the chapé.
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Per chevron ploye throughout purpure and Or, in base a dagger inverted
conjoined to a double horned anvil sable
Since
the field division line extends into the lower half of the field, I
have to call it per chevron, not chape.
Clear
Aryanhwy: The blazon given
on the LoI is fine; I wouldn't change it. His name was registered as
<Sindri Jónsson>, with the accent, on the June 2002 LoAR. His
previous device submission was "Or chapé ployé purpure, a bickern
sable and in chief two daggers inverted Or." This looks clear from
conflict.
Roberd: The first thing I
saw was an Arthurian allusion: sword in the anvil (like in the stone),
and a purple cloak (royal mantle). But then, I tend to associate like
that.
That
having been said, I could find no conflicts.
Ælfreda: Suggest reblazon:
"Or, chape ploye purpure, in pale a dagger inverted conjoined to
a double-horned anvil sable."
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
12) Torquil MacGillavrey.
New Name and Device. Per chevron sable and vert, an annulet Or between
three towers argent.
Torquil
is dated to 1338 in Black (538, under “Macleod”). MacGillavrey is a
header spelling in Black (502) although the dated variants tend to not
be spelled with a G. The variants include Makillewray (1535), McIluray
(1542), McIliwray (1542), McIlvery, McIlverie (1541), M'Gillewra (1549),
and McIlwray (1542). The only period citation with the G is M'Gillewra
from 1549. The client cares most about sound.
Name
Commentary
Malcolm:
Torquil has been registered before. See above for my take on MacGillavrey.
Ary: The header in Black is
MacGillivray, and has the following forms: <Makillewray> 1535,
<McIluray> 1542, <McIliwray> 1542, <McIlvery>, <McIlverie>
1541, <M'Gillewra> 1549, <McIlwray> 1542. The only period
citation with the <G> is <M'Gillewra> from 1549. Torquil
is a header in Black. It is originally from the Norse <Þórkell>.
The only dated forms given are <Torculane> 1504 and <Tairqueill>
1600, though he does say that this is "a favorite name among the
Mcleods." Ahah! S.n. Macleod is the entry <Torquil M'Leoid de
Leohus> 1338; this looks to be what was crytpically cited on the
LoI. Again, I hope he is Moira's brother and not her husband.
Moraig: no comment
John: Torquil: see Zaczek
(116); Conway (81); Black (775)
MacGillavrey:
see comments above for “Moira MacGillavrey”
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Per chevron sable and vert, in pall an annulet Or between three towers
argent
The
towers are large enough to make this a single primary group, not a primary
between three secondaries.
Clear
Malcolm: I refer to the color
scheme of number seven above for a good example, (Gee, Moira MACGILLAVREY.
I just caught that. How dense can I get?) as drawn here the green and
black are nearly indistinguishable. Other than that, it looks allright,
but more contrast on the field division is needed.
Ary: The device looks clear.
Pendar: No conflicts found
through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Moraig: We found “Per chevron
sable and gules, three castles argent,” registered 9/73 to Cheryl of
Castlewhyte. The only visual difference is the annulet, we do not think
the field is different enough because it is two colors for each device’s
field, and dark is dark, though technically it is clear. But when looking
at the contrast rules we only see one point of difference in the annulet.
13) Wernher von Wächtersbach. New Name and Device. Azure,
a boar passant and on a base wavy argent two bars sable.
Wernher
is dated to the 15th century in Arnsburg, according to
Scott, "Late Period German Masculine Given Names" (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/names/germmasc.html). The city of Wächterbach is first
mentioned in 1236, according to the city’s official website (http://www.satadt-waechtersbach.de/stadt/index.htm). The client is interested in an
authentic 16th C Hessen/German name but will NOT
permit MAJOR changes.
Name
Commentary
Aryanhwy:
His previous name submission was <Wernher Kailing>, and it was
returned for lack of documentation of <Kailing>. The URL for the
given name is typoed on the LoI. The article is Talan's "Late Period
German Masculine Given Names" and <Wernher> is dated to the
15th century in Arnsburg. The URL for the main page of the article is http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/germmasc/. <Werner> is also found in "16th-17th
Century Hessian Given Names and Surnames" by Kunegundis filia Theoderici,
at http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/kunegund/hessenames.html, so this name is fine for 16th C Hesse.
The URL for <Wächtersbach> appears to date the city to 1236, though
since I can't read German I do not know if it the *name* dates that
early or not.
Roberd: I was the consulting
herald on this one, so I am familiar with it. As an assist for those
who don't read German, I ran the web page for Wächtersbach through
a web-translator to find this in the second paragraph:
"In the year 1236 guard
brook is for the first time historically mentioned. But for the monitoring
of the realm forest a water castle was built here already before. Already
on 25 April 1404 received to castle marks municipal rights. The lock
come out from the romanischen water castle became after a Renaissance
change in 17th Century extends. At the beginning 19th Century the donjon
was torn off and filled approximately with the abort material the water
ditch around the lock, as well as put on a park in the English style."
I should point out that the
translator rendered the city's name literally: Wächtersbach = "guard
brook" or, a keep at a river crossing. It's also very clear that
the translator isn't perfect; the reference in the third sentence may
be confusing. It is meant to convey that Wächtersbach received municipal
incorporation in 1404.
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Clear
Aryanhwy: I note that the
coat of arms for the city on the page have the same base wavy argent
charged with two sable bars motif; nice allusion! I didn't find any
conflicts with the device.
Roberd: There is no conflict
on the device that I could find.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
14) Wolfram der Trüwe.
New Device. Argent, a falcon gules perched atop a mount azure, a
bordure sable.
{Name
reg’d 5/02}
Device
Commentary
Knut:
Argent, a falcon close gules perched upon a mountain azure, a bordure
sable
Are
the two peripheral ordinaries in the same or separate charge groups?
I
can't find any applicable precedents.
Karena
del Falco - February of 1988 (via An Tir): Argent, a falcon close gules.
One CD for each secondary charge group in the submission.
Pass
it up.
Malcolm: I don't think the
rock is distinguishable as a rock. Nor do I think the falcon has sufficient
detail or is distinguisable as a falcon.
Ary: Close is the default
posture for falcons, so this can be omitted from the blazon. This is
not a rock, it is a mount. Reblazon: "Argent, a falcon gules perched
upon a mount azure, a bordure sable." This looks conflict free
Pendar: Either the rock needs
to be blazoned as issuant/conjoined to the bordure, or it needs to be
reblazoned as a mountain, which would default to this. I recommend the
latter. There is nothing falcon-like about this bird. It is in the default
posture for a bird. Blazon-fu: Argent, a bird gules perched upon a mountain
azure, a bordure sable. No conflicts found through 12/02.
Lucien: I found no conflicts
with this device.
Done
by my hand this 12th day of May,
Paul
Wickenden of Thanet, Rouge Scarpe Emeritus
Paul
W Goldschmidt
3071
Cimarron Trail
Madison
WI 53719
goldschp@mailbag.com