The following items have been registered æthelmearc amaryllis Coleman

Download 0.54 Mb.
Date conversion15.05.2016
Size0.54 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5
for her documentation -- and that website seems to be quoting Black, but the page number is different. The website gives the desired spelling. Copies from the website will be enclosed for Laurel's evaluation.)

The Web site implies that the information listed is from Donald Whyte's Scottish Surnames. Under the header "p. 173 - MacTAVISH", the Web page states that "Duncan McThomais is recorded at Glassary in 1355, when he served on an inquest regarding the lands of that parish". However, Whyte has no entry for MacTAVISH (or any spelling thereof). While Whyte gives dates, most of the listed names seem to be modernized. This factor, combined with his failure to note sources, makes this an unreliable source for our purposes.

Black (p. 566 s.n. MACTAVISH) states that "Doncan M'Thamais was one of those cited in 1355 to give evidence regarding the lands of Glassre in Argyllshire (HP., II, p. 139)". HP indicates that Black's source for this information was the Highland Papers. The Highland Papers are notorious for modifying spellings from the original documents and cannot be considered reliable for representing spellings of names from our period. In most cases, there are enough other spelling variants in Black's entries to support a dubious citation from the Highland Papers as being plausible in our period. However, the spelling -ais in the submitted name is indicative of a Gaelic rather than Scots form of this byname. As Black (s.nn. MacTavish, MacThomas) lists no other dated examples of a -ais spelling of this byname in period, we must assume that the single example of M'Thamais cited from the Highland Papers is a post-period "updated" form, and is, therefore, not registerable.

As the submitter allows any changes, we have changed this byname to the form McThomas, dated to 1537 in Black (s.n. McThomas), in order to register this name.

A number of commenters expressed concerns about the posture of the serpent. They cited a precedent concerning a sea-serpent ondoyant emergent, an SCA invention which is described in the Pictorial Dictionary under Sea-Serpent:

[Per fess azure and Or, three flanged maces palewise in fess argent and a sea-serpent emergent ondoyant to sinister vert.] While there is perhaps a precedent for the peculiarly fragmented partial sea-serpent in Caid in the armoury of the Barony of Calafia, this is an old one. The serpent emerging from thin air does not seem to be a period charge and the effect here is to have three charges in fess in chief with another three non-identical fragments in base [the three separated pieces of the sea-serpent] (LoAR of June 1990).

We believe that the stylistic problem with ondoyant emergent serpents is that they incorporate two steps from period style (also known colloquially as "two weirdnesses"). The serpent is broken into "non-identical fragments" (one step from period style) that are disassociated from each other because they are "emerging from thin air" (the second step from period style). Armory incorporating two steps from period style is not registerable.

A serpent ondoyant and issuant from a [line of division], however, is only one step from period style (colloquially, "one weirdness"). Period armory is replete with animals issuant from lines of division or from charges. In some of these cases, there is even a small degree of fragmentation of the charge: the tail of a demi-lion issuant from a line of division may sometimes be separated from the rest of the demi-lion. The fact that a serpent ondoyant and issuant from [a line of division] is broken into three or more "non-identical fragments" when it emerges from the line of division is still one step from period style. However, these fragments are associated with each other by the line of division from which they all issue, so this design does not have the second step from period style, that of disassociation by "emerging from thin air." Armory with only one step from period style may be registered.

Jimena Montoya. Name and device. Gules, a demi-maiden in her modesty and on a chief embattled argent a sword fesswise gules.

Kazdoya Ruslander. Device change. Purpure, a chief trefly-counter-trefly Or.

Her previous device, Purpure, a garb and a chief trefly-counter-trefly Or, is retained as a badge.

Rhys Gethin. Name and device. Vert semy-de-lys Or, the Archangel Michael argent haloed Or.

The submitter has permission to conflict with a badge of the Shire of Charlesbury Crossing, Vert, a winged man displayed maintaining above his head a spear fesswise argent.

Richard of Alder Tree. Badge. (Fieldless) In saltire an ermine spot sable and a sword inverted argent.

Vivienne la Louve. Name (see RETURNS for device).

William Alexander Johnston. Name and device. Argent, on a pile throughout gules between two bears rampant addorsed sable a torch Or.



Amaryllis Coleman. Badge. (Fieldless) A sexfoil Or seeded sable.

The College did not feel that this flower, originally blazoned as an amaryllis flower, was clearly identifiable as an amaryllis flower. The flower in this emblazon is affronty and has six equally-sized and equally-spaced petals that come to slight points at the end. Both the commentary from the College and the documentation provided with the submission indicated that an amaryllis flower has petals that are significantly longer, thinner, and more sharply pointed than the petals of the flower in this emblazon. The documentation also indicated that the amaryllis flower has a trumpet shape that was visually apparent even when the flower was affronty, while this flower appears to be flat. We have reblazoned the flower in this emblazon as a sexfoil, as it is well within the range of depictions which we expect for that stylized heraldic charge.

This submission therefore conflicts with the Caidan badge for the Legion of Courtesy, (Fieldless) A rose Or barbed and seeded vert. There is one CD for fieldlessness. There is no difference for the miniscule tincture changes due to barbing and seeding, which is much less than half the charge.

There is no difference given between a rose and a cinquefoil by long-standing precedent, as noted in the LoAR of August 2001, which referred to the LoARs of September 2000 and November 1990. The difference between cinquefoils and sexfoils is heraldically negligible. The SCA does not give difference between things numbered five and six as stated in RfS X.4.f, and by extension, we do not give difference between charges with attributes that are enumerated five and six, such as mullets of five and six points. Moreover, cinquefoils are not infrequently drawn as sexfoils in period. A single piece of armory using multiple cinquefoils may be drawn with the occasional sexfoil in place of an (apparently random) cinquefoil.

Conflict is not transitive: if A conflicts with B and B conflicts with C, it is not required that A must conflict with C. However, in this case, given the very close depictions and occasional interchangeability of both roses and cinquefoils in period, and of cinquefoils and sexfoils in period, we do believe that sexfoils should not be given difference from roses under RfS X.4.e.

Mustafa the Red. Device. Argent, a bend azure between an increscent gules and a sword sable.

Conflict with Constance MacCallum of Hoghton, Argent, a bend azure between a jester's hat per pale gules and purpure, and a brimmed beret bendwise sinister sable, plumed purpure. There is one CD for changing the type of secondary charges. However, there is not a CD for changing the tincture of the secondary charges, as less than half the tincture of the secondary charge group has changed.




Aedan MacEwan. Device. Vert, a natural tiger displayed Or marked sable within a bordure rayonny Or.

The tiger was blazoned on the LoI as statant erect affronty, but no evidence was presented, and none was found, indicating that this is a period posture. Note that statant erect is a rare posture in period that is used almost exclusively for bears, and sejant erect affronty is an even rarer posture in period. Because these two postures are so rare, we do not believe that statant erect affronty can be reasonably extrapolated to be a period-compatible posture. None of the commenters who discussed the armorial style of this submission were comfortable with considering the posture of this tiger to be period style. We therefore will not be registering this posture now or in the future.

Much of the commentary suggested that the tiger is in the displayed posture, so we have blazoned it using that term. However, displayed is also not an appropriate posture for wingless quadrupeds. Per the LoAR of July 1995, p. 2, "The bear was blazoned as statant displayed in the LoI, but there was a consensus among the commenters that displayed is an avian posture inappropriate for beasts (as, for example, rampant is a quadrupedal posture inappropriate for birds)."

Note that the bear in the July 1995 submission referenced in the precedent above was in fact registered and blazoned with the statant erect affronty posture, rather than being reblazoned as displayed and returned for non-period style. However, the College has benefited from much research and learning during the years since that ruling, and its opinions have changed. In fact, al-Jamal, who was the Laurel who wrote the July 1995 ruling, commented on the current submission as follows: "Okay, I suppose it can be argued that it is only one step from a period leonine posture (sejant erect affronty), but that posture is very rare, and this one has not been noted in period heraldry, and is effectively 'displayed', a bird posture. I'm against it."

Corwyn de Wemyss. Device change. Per pale vert and azure, a Thor's hammer inverted and a bordure embattled Or.

Conflict with Ancel FitzCharles, Vert, a stone hammer within a bordure embattled Or. There is one CD for changing the field. Both the Thor's hammer inverted and the stone hammer have their heads to chief and their handles to base, so there is no change in charge orientation. A stone hammer has a head in the shape of a billet fesswise. Because the Thor's hammer is not a period heraldic charge, its difference from other types of charge must be determined on visual grounds per RfS X.4.e, and there is not sufficient visual difference between a stone hammer and a Thor's hammer inverted to give a CD.

In addition, the embattlements were drawn too shallowly to be registered. Please advise the submitter that embattlements should be as deep as they are wide.

Geoffroi FitzGeorge. Device. Argent, a scorpion fesswise contourny gules and a chief double enarched and on a point pointed sable a sheaf of arrows inverted Or.

Combinations of chiefs and bases of any sort are rare in period. The combination of the non-period chief doubly enarched and the vanishingly rare charged point pointed leads to issues of field-ground reversal. It is difficult to determine if the scorpion is placed on some oddly-shaped central argent charge on a sable field, or if the armory consists of a red scorpion on an argent field between an unlikely combination of sable peripheral charges.

The combination of tinctures and types of charge in this device add to eight. RfS VIII.1.a states "As a rule of thumb, the total of the number of tinctures plus the number of types of charges in a design should not exceed eight [or the armory will be considered overly complex]." The College felt strongly that in this armory, the combination of the complexity and the aforementioned style issues pushed the armory past the limits of registerable style.

Raffe Ó Donnabháin. Device. Per fess nebuly vert and sable, in chief three fir trees eradicated and in base a wolf's head erased Or.

The line of division is drawn with too many and too small repetitions to be registerable, particularly on a low contrast field division. RfS VIII.3 states "Identifiable elements may be rendered unidentifiable by significant reduction in size, marginal contrast..." It is acceptable to draw a nebuly line of partition between vert and sable as long as the identifiability is not lost for other reasons.

The wolf's head was originally blazoned as ululant, a term used in SCA heraldry for a wolf in some posture with its head pointed to chief and howling. In this emblazon, the muzzle of the head is tilted to dexter chief, which is a reasonable artistic variant for a wolf's head. We do not believe that it is necessary to blazon a charge consisting only of a head in profile as ululant.

Please advise the submitter to draw the eradicated trees with longer roots.


Isabeau Lia Rossedal. Device. Azure, a chevron ployé argent between two roses and a rod of Aesculapius Or.

Conflict with Triston de Grey, Azure, a chevron argent between three dragon's heads couped, those in chief addorsed Or. There is one CD for changing the type of secondary charges. There is no difference between a plain chevron and a chevron ployé: "[a chevron ployé vs. a chevron] Conflict ... there is only a single CD for the type of the secondary charges. [implying no CD for ployé vs. plain]" (LoAR of April 2000).

Please advise the submitter to draw the chevron with a steeper angle in the future.

John Gilson. Device. Vert, a rapier and in chief a billet argent.

Conflict with John of Gravesend, Vert, a sword palewise proper, surmounted at the tip by a helm affronty argent. This appears to simply be a change of secondary charge type, replacing the helmet with the billet. The helmet in John Gravesend's device is effectively a secondary charge conjoined to the tip of the sword. There is no difference for removing the conjoining.


Malise Athelstan MacKendry. Name.

This name has one weirdness for mixing the English Athelstan with an otherwise Scots name and a second weirdness for a double given name in Scots. As the submitter allows no major changes, we were unable to drop one of the given names in order to register this name.

Additionally, no evidence was found that the spelling MacKendry is a plausible period form. Metron Ariston found a spelling quite close to the submitted MacKendry:

Under MacHendrie in Surnames of Scotland, Black notes Gilchrist Makhenry from 1480, which is very close indeed.

His armory has been registered under the holding name Malise of Sundragon.


Phillida Parker. Device. Per fess wavy azure and Or, a natural rainbow and three fir trees couped vert.

The natural rainbow is drawn correctly for a natural rainbow as stated in the Pictorial Dictionary of Heraldry: "The 'natural rainbow proper', an SCA invention, has white clouds, and seven colored bands, as found in nature: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet." The order of the bands is given from top to bottom. This submission thus addresses the main reason for the previous return (in June 2001), which was that the bands of the rainbow were in the opposite order on the previous submission, starting with violet on top and ending with red on the bottom. The redesign also addresses a concern raised in the previous return, about whether the argent clouds of the rainbow kept the entire natural rainbow from having sufficient contrast with the underlying argent field.

However, as part of this redesign, the natural rainbow has moved from lying entirely on an argent (metal) portion of the field to lying entirely on an azure (color) portion of the field. The natural rainbow is more than half color, and thus has insufficient contrast with the underlying azure field per RfS VIII.2.a.ii, since the rainbow is not "An element equally divided of a color and a metal." In order to be such an evenly divided element, the white clouds of the rainbow and/or the yellow band of the rainbow would need to be disproportionally large. We thus overturn the portion of the following precedent that states that a natural rainbow is a neutral charge (as referred to in the Pictorial Dictionary):

A natural rainbow proper shall consist of the same band between two white clouds but with the natural spectrum, from gules in chief to purpure in base. This type of rainbow would count as a combined metal/color charge and thus be neutral. (Cover Letter of 25 May 82)


Kate Galleghure. Device. Argent, in pale a serpent erect vert and a crescent gules within a bordure embattled vert.

This serpent was blazoned as erect, but an erect serpent has its body fully palewise. The front half of this serpent is palewise and the back half of the serpent is mostly fesswise with the very end of the tail reflexed up over its back. No evidence was presented that this is a period posture for a serpent, nor was evidence presented for a term that would clearly blazon this posture. This submission is thus in violation of RfS VII.7.b, "Reconstruction Requirement - Elements must be reconstructible in a recognizable form from a competent blazon."

Kis Mária. Device. Argent, an escarbuncle of six arms per fess sable and gules in chief a gerbil sable.

The gerbil is a Mongolian animal that was first found by Western Europeans in the 19th C. While some members of the College suggested reblazoning this animal as a hamster, hamsters have vestigial tails and gerbils have long thin furry tails. Because this is not a period animal, and cannot easily be reblazoned using a period heraldic animal, it may not be registered under RfS VII.4, "Period Flora and Fauna".

Some commenters asked about the registerability of escarbuncles with six arms. Per the LoAR of February 2001, "Escarbuncles of six arms are found in period arms according to A Pictorial Dictionary of Heraldry."

Kjalgrimr Klugh. Name.

This name is being returned for lack of documentation of Kjalgrimr as a plausible given name in Old Norse. The LoI supported this name as follows:

Constructed name from elements found in Geirr Bassi. "Kjal-" from given names 'Kjallakr' and 'Kjalv{o.}r', pg. 12. "-grimr" from names such as 'Kolgrimr', pg. 12, and 'Thorgrimr', pg. 16. From Friedemann (aka Aryanhwy merch Catmael), Viking Bynames found in the 'Landnámabók' there are two instances of "Kjalki", meaning 'jawbone'. In Þorgeirsson, "Grímr (Gríms) m - from Grím-. Also a name suffix" and "Grím - A name prefix meaning 'mask, disguise, helm, night'."

Gunnvör silfrahárr found

In the submitted documentation with this name, the by-name (note the a-acute) would not be related to a proposed name element . The word is cognate to English "cheek" and does mean "jawbone" but would not be useful in documenting the submittor's proposed name of (see Cleasby p. 340 s.v..)

The name is simply an Old Norse adaptation of the Irish name (see, for example, Academy of St. Gabriel Reports #1392 and #1667 at and occurs in Old Norse texts as the name of a son of an Irish king, and also appears as a name in Iceland several times in Landnámabók (Netútgáfan Website. chs. 21, 27, 30, 32, 33, 40, 102). does not represent an Old Norse two-element name, and so the first syllable cannot be peeled off and used as a name-element elsewhere.

The Old Norse feminine name appears in Landnámabók ch 51. (Netútgáfan Website. Here does appear as one element of a two-element name, combined with the exclusively feminine second element <-vör>. As far as I am aware, appears nowhere else in other Old Norse names, and therefore we have evidence only that the name-element is used in (a) feminine name(s).

Lacking evidence of Kjal- used as a protheme in an Old Norse dithematic name, the constructed Kjalgrimr is not a plausible Old Norse masculine name and is not registerable. As the submitter is most interested in sound, he may wish to know that the closest sounding Old Norse masculine name found by the College was Kolgrímr found in Geirr Bassi (p. 12).

His armory has been registered under the holding name Jeremy of the East.

1   2   3   4   5

The database is protected by copyright © 2016
send message

    Main page