This is the January 2006 Middle Kingdom Letter of Acceptances and Returns for Escutcheon’s November 2005 Letter of Intent.
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, devices, or badges in braces have been returned or pended. Commentary, rulings, etc. by Rouge Scarpe are placed in CAP PRINT. Thanks to Knut, Mikhail and AElfreda (A&M), and Talan, for this month’s commentary.
1) Adriana Laurend (F) -- New Name
(Fearann na Criche)
Client will accept all changes and is interested in 1300/1400's Dutch or Flemish
[Adriana] -- "Vlaamse Vrouwennamen," compiled by Guntram von Wolkenstein (http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/guntram/vlaamse.htm) The article lists the name from the Kortrijk region between1391-1428.
[Laurend] -- "15th Century Dutch Names: Surnames," by Aryanhwy merch Catmael (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/dutch15surnames.html) [Laurenz] 1478
[-end] -- means daughter, whereas "enz" means son. According to the paperwork she got this from a native Dutch individual in the Netherlands.
Name Commentary
Talan -
> compiled by Guntram von Wolkenstein
(http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/guntram/vlaamse.htm) >The
article lists the name from the Kortrijk region between1391-1428.
It should be noted that many of the names in this article are
Latinized. An obvious example is <Margareta>: the
vernacular at this time was <Margriete>, as may be seen
from Ary's 'Dutch Names 1358-1361' and 'Dutch Names 1393-96', at http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/dutch/earlydutch14.html and http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/dutch/dutch14.html
, respectively. The same articles show the corresponding
masculine name as <Adriaen>, corresponding to modern
<Adriaan>; the <ae> (and modern <aa>) indicate
a long vowel. Very likely the feminine name also had a long
vowel, but according to the rules of Dutch orthography, the
second in <Adriana> would automatically be pronounced long,
because it's not followed by a consonant in the same syllable.
Thus, it's very possible that <Adriana> is in fact a
vernacular as well as a Latin form.
> [Laurend] -- "15th Century Dutch Names: Surnames,"
by Aryanhwy merch Catmael
> (http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/dutch15surnames.html)
[Laurenz] 1478
This is inaccurate: the patronymic is actually <Laurenz.>
and is an abbreviation for <Laurenzoen> or the like; see
below.
> [-end] -- means daughter, whereas "enz" means son.
According to the paperwork she got this >from a native Dutch
individual in the Netherlands.
This is nonsense, though I can see where it comes from. The
modern Dutch words for 'son' and 'daughter' are <zoon> and
<dochter>; in period other spellings of the 'son' word are
found, including <zone>, <zoen>, and <soen>,
but they typically also begin with <z>. The simplest
Dutch patronymic (or metronymic) was formed with the father's (or
mother's) name in the genitive (possessive) case, followed by the
word for 'son' or 'daughter'. For instance, at http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/_jaa002186401_01/_jaa002186401_01_0012.htm
, which gives the text of a 15th century copy of a 14th
century manuscript, one can see the names <Zegher Jans
Zone> 'Zegher, son of Jan' and <Diederic Arnouds zone>
'Diederic, son of Arnoud', and at
http://home.wxs.nl/~vera0000/ROLR2997.html , which gives the
text of a document of ca.1363, one can see the name <Heylken
Heymerics dochter> 'Heylken, daughter of Heymeric'. Another
example, <Engel Beernts dochter> 'Engel, daughter of
Beernt', from 1423, can be found near the top of
http://www.archieven.nl/pls/m/zk2.obj_start?p_id=7766427&p_zk=Specificaties&p_vast=0
.
In all of these examples the 'son' or 'daughter' word is written
separately, but the last-named site also has, for instance,
<Claes Hermanszone> 1436 'Claes, son of Herman'. I should
probably mention that the genitive ending <-s> was
sometimes omitted in writing, presumably because in the spoken
name it blended with the <z> or of the 'son' word.
For instance, on the web page just cited one can find
<Randtwijck Gijsbertsoen> 1465 'Randtwijck, son of
Gijsbert', instead of <Randtwijck Gijsbertssoen>.
In the examples that I just cited, the genitive case of the
father's name was formed by adding
<-s>. This is a very
common genitive suffix, especially with masculine names, but it's
not the only one: many names, especially feminine ones, form
their genitives by adding <-en> (or just <-n>, if the
name already ends in <e>). The ca.1363 document cited
above, for instance, has metronymics in <Peter Kathelinen
soen> 'Peter, son of Katheline' and <Art Lisen soen>
'Art,
son of Lise', and a patronymic in <Jan Otten soen> 'Jan,
son of Otte'.
Quite often, especially in genealogies, the 'son' and 'daughter'
words in patronymics and metronymics are abbreviated to <z>
and <dr>, respectively; this gives rise to forms like
<Claes Hermansz.>, <Claes Ottenz.>, <Engel
Hermansdr.>, and <Engel Ottendr.>, or even <Claes
Hermansz>, <Claes Ottenz>, <Engel Hermansdr>, and
<Engel Ottendr>. These can even appear in period
documents. In http://www.archiefalkmaar.nl/inventar/alk3a.htm
, for instance, we find <Geertruut Melgersdr> 1464
'Geertruut, daughter of Melger', <Claes Claesz> 'Claes, son
of Claes' <Aechte Pietersdr> 'Aechte, daughter of Pieter',
<Jacob Matijsz> 'Jacob, son of Matijs', <Pieter
Jansz> 'Pieter, son of Jan', <Werbout Hugensz> 'Werbout,
son of Hugen', and his sister <Haedwij Hugendochter>
'Haedwij, daughter of Hugen', all from 1465. Jacob and
Pieter appear a year later as <Jacob Matijssoen> and
<Peter Janssoen>. For that matter, the very first
entry, from 1394, has among other the names <Jan Gherytsz>
'Jan, son of Gheryt', <Jan Aechtenz> 'Jan, son of Aechte'
(a metronymic), <Rembrant Rembrantsz> 'Rembrant, son of
Rembrant', and <Ysebrant Fyenz> 'Ysebrant, son of Fye'
(another metronymic, from a pet form of <Sophia>).
The next, from 1397, has an example of an abbreviated <-en>
patronymic, <Zegher Ottenz> 'Zegher, son of Otte'.
The name <Laurens> makes an <-s> genitive, but since
it already ends in, the genitive is identical to the nominative
<Laurens>, and the patronymics (in modern spelling) are
<Laurenszoon> and <Laurensdochter>. A period
example of the latter can be found at http://www.archieven.nl/pls/m/zk2.obj_start?p_id=3060179&p_zk=regestenlijst&p_vast=0 : <Margriet Laurensdochter>
1542.
The name would be just fine as either <Adriana
Laurensdochter> or <Adriana Laurens dochter>.
It occurs to me that another type of patronymic can be seen in
the ca.1363 source cited above: the father's forename in the
genitive case, *without* the 'son' or 'daughter' word. A feminine
example is <Wendelmoet Didderics>, literally 'Wendelmoet
Didderic's', i.e., 'Wendelmoet, [daughter of] Didderic'.
Similarly, <Kateline Wouters> is 'Kateline, [daughter of]
Wouter'. This model seems to be much less common, but it
did exist and would presumably also justify
<Adriana Laurens>.
NAME CHANGED TO <Adriana Laurends> AND FORWARDED TO LAUREL.
2) Artemas de Grimsby – {Device Resubmission -- Per
chevron embattled gules and sable, two lions heads reguardant Or,
langued vert, a sundial Or.}
(Terre Haute, IN)
(Name reg'd Sept '01)
His last device resubmission (Chequy sable and gules, three lion heads erased contourny Or) was returned by RS Aug '03: "This design is exactly the same as his previous one, which was returned by Rouge Scarpe on 8/00 for poor contrast. To quote RfS VIII.2.b.iv Good Contrast: "Elements divided into multiple parts of two different tinctures must have good contrast between their parts. For example, checky argent and gules is acceptable, but checky azure and gules is not." By parity of reasoning, 'Checky sable and gules' is also poor contrast."
(Esct Note: Client glued the escutcheon onto the form, that's why it doesn't quite fit.)
Device Comments
Talan - The term
'reg(u)ardant' is used when the head and body face in opposite
directions; in the absence of a body, it makes no sense.
This is 'Per chevron embattled gules and sable, two lion's
heads contourny or langued vert and a sundial or'. (If
the tongue isn't blazoned, it's 'Per chevron embattled gules
and sable, two lion's heads contourny and a sundial or', but
there are numerous period blazons that do specify the tincture of
a beast's tongue, so there is no reason to drop 'langued vert'
from the blazon.)
The line of division is a bit low, but it's clearly a per chevron
division and not a point pointed. Indeed, its identity
would be clear even if one didn't know that per chevron divisions
were far more common than points pointed, especially with fancy
lines of division. It's bad enough that the submitter ought
to be informed, but it's not bad enough to warrant a return for
redrawing.
The online armorial has no instance of the word 'sundial'; it
seems fairly unlikely that the charge would have been registered
under another name, so this would probably be the first
registration of a sundial. If so, the submitter will need
to provide evidence that this is a period design.
Knut – Gules, two
lion's heads contorney Or and on a point pointed embattled sable
a sundial Or
This isn't per chevron because it doesn't go above the fess line.
The point pointed is a bit high.
The sable point on gules violates RfS VIII.2.b.i.
This would be the first registration of a sundial. It needs
to be documented.
A&M - This sundial is, to be
specific, a horizontal sundial. I have found pictures of
period sundials that are vertical and/or inclined, but none that
are horizontal.
http://www.sundials.co.uk/~oxford.htm
The page of pictures from Oxford shows, near the bottom of the
page, a vertical sundial with inclined ones on top of the column,
dated to 1581, although it has had restorations since.
http://www.sundials.co.uk/~gorlitz.htm
The page of sundials from Gorlitz shows a double sundial from
1550. Again, it has been restored since then.
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kroch/scand/kirkdale.html
This dial is Saxon.
http://www.sundials.co.uk/massdial.htm
"Mass dials" are stated as being medieval, but I was
unable to find a dated example.
Even if a vertical sundial was used instead of a horizontal one,
it might be difficult to choose a particular depiction as being
the defining instance of a sundial.
DEVICE RETURNED. SINCE THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST REGISTATION OF A SUNDIAL, IT NEEDS TO BE DOCUMENTED.
3) Birna Gunnlaugsdóttir -- New Device -- Argent,
on a chevron vert between three irises purpue slipped and leaved
proper, five crescents argent
(Strongsville, OH)
(Name sent to Laurel Oct '05)
A permission to conflict note with Duncan Darroch's device (Argent, on a chevron vert five mullets of eight points argent) was included.
DEVICE FORWARDED TO LAUREL
4) Edana de Grimsby (F)-- New Name
(Strikkenwoode)
Client will *not* accept major changes. She prefers to have her name mean "little fire" and cares for 10th thru 14th century.
[Edana] -- According to the paperwork: "Edana is a plausible variant of Edith found in "Oxford Dictionary of Christian names," p 88. This entry cites both Edan and Edda to 1379. The SCA College of Heralds support this variant in the April 1996 Letter of Acceptance and Return (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/loar/1996/04/lar.html).
". . . It is therefore not out of the question that Eden or Edan might also have appeared in a Latinized part of the record as Edena or Edana." "
[de Grimsby] According to the paperwork: ". . . is dated to the 13th Century in Gillett, "A History of Grimsby," p. 12. According to Foster's "Dictionary of Heraldry," p. 101 . . . John de Grimsby is found on Richard II's rolls.
Name Commentary
Talan - With very, very few
exceptions, forenames in the historical period don't have
meanings. The name <Margaret>, for instance, does
*not* mean 'pearl', despite what most baby-name books will tell
you; rather, it is descended from a Greek name that originally
meant 'pearl' but eventually became just a name. A familiar
modern example of the process is the feminine name
<Heather>: it's derived from and is still identical in form
to the plant name, but it refers to human beings, not to plants,
and it may be bestowed on a child without any thought of its
etymology.
At an earlier date the etymology of a forename was much more
important, and it's probably fair to say that if you go back far
enough, most forenames were meaningful and not just labels.
In particular, the Old Irish masculine name <Áedán> must
have been recognizable to any native speaker as a diminutive of
<Áed>, which in turn would have been recognizable as
identical to an Old Irish word for 'fire'. But the name
<Áedán> would be interpreted as 'little Áed', not
'little fire'. In any case, as is pointed out in the 4/96
LoAR decision partly quoted below, <Edana> as an Anglicized
feminine form of <Áedán> (modern <Aodhán>) is
almost certainly modern (if it exists at all): such formations
simply aren't found in period.
In short, her desire for a 10th - 14th c. forename name having a
particular 'meaning' isn't really satisfiable in the first place,
and the etymology that she apparently has in mind has nothing
whatsoever to do with the name that she's submitted. I
propose to ignore the whole issue of 'meaning' and simply look at
the name as a name.
> [Edana] -- According to the paperwork: "Edana is a
plausible variant of Edith found in "Oxford >Dictionary
of Christian names," p 88. This entry cites both Edan and
Edda to 1379. The SCA >College of Heralds College of *Arms*
support this variant in the April 1996 Letter of Acceptance
>and Return
(http://www.sca.org/heraldry/loar/1996/04/lar.html).
More accurately, I (as Pelican KoA) rather unenthusiastically
permitted its registration on the grounds that it *might* have
been a superficial Latinization of <Edan>, which is
apparently a variant of <Eden>; 'plausible' is a bit
stronger than what I actually wrote in the LoAR.
Some of Withycombe's citations s.n. <Edith> are actually
masculine and hence irrelevant; the only certainly feminine
citations that I can find just now are <Edden>,
<Eden>, and <Edan>, all from the 1379 Yorkshire Poll
Tax and all given by Bardsley s.n. <Eden>.
> ". . . It is therefore not out of the question that
Eden or Edan might also have appeared in a >Latinized part of
the record as Edena or Edana." "
> [de Grimsby] According to the paperwork: ". . . is
dated to the 13th Century in Gillett, "A History >of
Grimsby," p. 12. According to Foster's "Dictionary of
Heraldry," p. 101 . . . John de Grimsby is >found on
Richard II's rolls.
For support from a more familiar source, Watts s.n.
<Grimsby> notes the modern spelling from 1328 on, as well
as <Grimesby> from 1155 to 1499. The form in Foster
may be the same as that on the roll from which it's taken, but I
don't trust it unreservedly: it may have been normalized to a
modern form. Similarly, I can't trust the Gillett citation
not to be normalized without actually seeing what he says about
his treatment of names.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=33528
is part of a calendar (abstract) of the letter-books of the City
of London; the names are treated in the usual fashion, i.e., the
forename, which will have been Latinized in the original, are
given in standard modern form, but the bynames are given in the
documentary form (with scribal abbreviations expanded). The
entries calendared on this web page are from 1337, and folio viii
notes a <John de Grimesby>. A 14th century seal of
the Abbey of Grimsby (or Wellow) also makes it DE GRIMESBY.
It seems likely that for most of her period of interest
<Grimesby> is the usual spelling, but the modern spelling
does seem to be available at least by the later 14th
century, the only time for which we actually have examples of
<Edan> and closely related feminine forms. (It's
possible, by the way, that these have nothing to do with
<Edith>. A feminine name of unknown origin whose
Latin form was <Idonia> was quite popular in Yorkshire at
the time, and it appears that its vernacular forms included not
just <Idony> and the like, but also <Idon> and
similar forms; the
<Edan> names are conceivably just variants of <Idon>
and the like.)
In short, <Edana de Grimsby> may be a possible Latinization
of a late 14th century vernacular Yorkshire name <Edan of
Grim(e)sby> or <Edan Grim(e)sby>. <Edana> is
a bit iffy, but in view of the 4/96 registration cited above, it
should be sent to Laurel.
NAME FORWARDED TO LAUREL WITH TALAN’S COMMENTS.
5) Tigernach mac Eoghain ua Aeda -- Device Badge -- Gules,
a serpent glissant palewise and in chief three mullets argent
(Barony of the Flames)
(name reg'd May '99)
According to the paperwork submitted with the submission: "My original submission of this badge, "Gules, a serpent glissant palewise argent" was returned by the Rouge Scarpe Herald on the September 2005 Middle Kingdom Letter of Acceptance and Returns. . . If this is registered, I wish it to be my second badge. . . I most emphatically do NOT want any of my current registrations released."
(Esct. Note: The badge (Gules, a serpent glissant palewise argent) was returned for multiple conflicts.)
Badge Commentary
Knut - Astridr
Thorgeirsdottir - June of 1995 (via Atenveldt): Vert, a
serpent nowed erect between three mullets argent.
CD posture, CD arrangement
Clear
BADGE FORWARDED TO LAUREL.
6) Westmere, Canton of -- Device Resubmission -- Azure,
a trident palewise, overall a laurel wreath argent, and on a
chief argent, two paw prints sable.
(Paw Paw, MI)
REBLAZON: Azure, a trident palewise surmounted by a laurel wreath and on a chief argent two pawprints sable.
According to the included paperwork: ". . .our device was rejected by Laurel due to the fact that the blazon for our device was not included in our petition letter, and because of our petition was electronically signed, rather then bearing the hand written signatures of our members and officers."
(Esct Note: A hand signed petition with the blazon is included with the paperwork. Also, Laurel return was in June 2005.)
Device Commentary
Talan - This appears to be the default orientation for
a trident, so the blazon can be 'Azure, a trident surmounted
by a laurel wreath and on a chief argent two pawprints sable'.
If the orientation is specified -- and there's no real harm in
doing so -- it's 'Azure, a trident palewise surmounted by a
laurel wreath and on a chief argent two pawprints sable'.
(The wreath isn't really overall, since it surmounts only the
trident.)
Knut objects that the precise relationship between the trident
and the surmounting wreath is not reproducible from any
blazon. This is probably true but not necessarily relevant:
in order for it to matter, the relationship would have to be
considered an essential part of the design. A blazon need
only specify such details as are heraldically significant, and
it's not at all clear that the exact relationship between the
trident and the surmounting wreath is such a detail.
Knut - Azure, a trident palewise, it's head
environed of a laurel wreath and on a chief argent, two paw
prints sable
There is a weirdness for the SCA compatible paw prints.
The wreath still doesn't evenly overlie the trident. The
haft extends below the wreath but the tines don't extend above
it. This arrangement is unblazonable and irreproducible.
This violates RfS
VII.7.
... The Laurel office has been known to give the benefit of the
doubt to a submission when a possible problem was not mentioned
in the previous return, but was present in the previous
submission and was clearly visible to Laurel when viewing the
submission. Such a "clearly visible" problem could
include possible problems with the artwork of the submission or
the general heraldic style of the submission...[Charles the Grey
of Mooneschadowe, 06/03, R-Ansteorra] Precedents - François,
under Administrative
Clear
Pass this up.
DEVICE FORWARDED TO LAUREL.
At your service,
Phebe Bonadeci
Rouge Scarpe Herald