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, [email protected]. 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 13^th 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 15^th 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 10^th-12^th 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 16^th 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 12^th to 13^th 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 15^th 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 16^th 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 12^th day of May, 

Paul Wickenden of Thanet, Rouge Scarpe Emeritus 

Paul W Goldschmidt

3071 Cimarron Trail

Madison WI 53719

[email protected]