28 May 2005
From the Office of White Stag Principal Herald
whitestag@outlandsheralds.org
UNTO
the Outlands College of Heralds, the esteemed
submitters, and all others who come by these letters, on this 28th day
of May
2005, A.S. XXXX (2005 CE), does Lady Sorcha MacLeod, White Stag
Principal
Herald, send greetings.
The
following items were sent to
1- Katrine van Deventer.
New Badge.
Per chevron ployé purpure and argent, a mullet of eight
points issuant.
Her name was registered in May 2003.
This submission is an
appeal of a return in kingdom for conflict.
The original return (May 2004 Letter of Response:
http://rampart.outlandsheralds.org/2004-04-lop/0405-lor.html) reads:
This device is being
returned for conflict with Katya Anna Sylvan, Per chevron
throughout
purpure and argent, two compass stars argent and a fox sejant gules,
with
only one CD for the change in number of the primary charge group (1 vs
3), and
Rivenstar, Barony of, Azure, a riven star argent, with only
one CD for
changing the field (azure vs per chevron purpure and argent).
The appeal, written by Lord Pendar the Bard,
reads:
The device of Pendar the
Bard, registered in December 2002, which was used as a basis for this
badge is:
Per chevron ployé Or and azure, a demi-fleur-de-lys issuant
from the line of
division azure.
http://www.wombatinfestation.org/rampart/2002-06-lop/pendar2.gif
If the same logic that was applied to Katrine's
return
was applied to Pendar’s, then it would have been returned for conflict
with
Elwyn of Snow Hill (8/79): Per chevron azure, ermined argent, and
argent, in
base a fleur-de-lis azure. With only 1 CD for changes to the field
(since
the move to base of the fleur in Elwyn's device is forced). We'd like
to see a
White Stag notes that applying the same logic
to
Pendar's device vs. Elwyn's, there is a CD for changes to the field,
and there
should be another for the difference between a fleur-de-lys and a
demi-fleur-de-lys:
[a jester's cap vs. a jester's hood] [There
is a CD]
for the difference between a jester's cap and a jester's hood; the
latter has
the fabric which would normally extend down over the shoulders and well
onto
the chest, with large dags, and a hole in the front for the face to
show
through. It was the consensus of those
at the
While some may argue that
there is no such difference between the two based on the return of
Elspeth
Fitzwilliam's device on the Dec99 LoAR, the return indicates that it
was the
manner in which the fleurs were drawn that brought in the conflict, and
not the
actual difference between fleurs and demi-fleurs:
This also conflicts with Alienor Beatrice
Lucrezia
(SCA) Azure, four fleurs-de-lys in cross bases to center argent., with
one CD
for arrangement, but nothing for the difference between the demi
fleurs-de-lys
and the complete fleurs-de-lys as drawn.
2- Lyonnete la Rousse. New
Badge.
Azure, a chimera statant to sinister Or within a bordure lozengy
sable and
argent.
3- Murchadh Mac Diarmada. Withdraw
Device. Per
pale Or and sable, a cross formy throughout counterchanged. The
submitter
wishes to withdraw this device, originally appearing on the Outlands
March 2005
Letter of Intent.
4- Murchadh MacDiarmada. Device
Resubmission.
Per pale sable and Or, a cross formy throughout counterchanged.
The submitter has obtained a Letter of
Permission to
Conflict from Dafydd Morrison Per pale sable and Or, a cross of
5- Rab Wylkyn. New Name. (see returns
for
device)
6- Sile O' Daragh. New Name. (see
returns for
device)
The following items were returned for further
work:
1- Estevan de Sepultura. New Device.
Argent a wyvern erect azure tail nole 3 lozenges sable 2 and 1
I
was unable to find any previous registration or submission of this
name, and no
name submission accompanied it. This
device must therefore be returned per AH II.A.1.
2-
Giovanna figlia di Meir. New Name. New Device. Argent,
on a
heart gules a dragonfly argent, chief gules.
Commentary
indicates that the proper manner to denote Giovanna daughter of Meir
would be
simply "Giovanna di Meir." Noted on the LoP as "Submitter
accepts all changes," the forms actually indicate that the submitter
accepts no major changes.
Unfortunately, that means that this name is not correctly formed
without
dropping the entire word "figlia," which would constitute a major
change, and this name must therefore be returned. Please
note that the s-gabriel website and
its reports are not on the no-photocopy list, and copies of the
full
report or copies of the leading pages and the
pages on which the name elements are found are required to be
attached -
one copy per each copy of the form.
Copies of webpages must include the url and the date accessed on
each
page of the copies.
The
device is returned for lack of a name to send it forward with. The submitter is cautioned that the chief
should be one-fifth to one-third the height of the field, and that her
chief is
closer to one-seventh the height. It is
possible that it might be returned at
3-
Hammar Bowswayer. New Name. New Device. Per chevron
inverted
argent and or, a phoenix gules.
Commentary
indicates that S. Gabriel report 1915 identifies "Hammar" as a
byname. This name has no given name, and
is therefore not properly constructed .
Listed on the LoP as "Submitter accepts all changes," the forms
actually indicate that the submitter accepts no changes. Please be aware that the s-gabriel website
and its reports are not on the no-photocopy list, and copies of
the full
report or copies of the leading pages and the
pages on which the name elements are found are required to be
attached -
one copy per each copy of the form.
Copies of webpages must include the url and the date accessed on
each
page of the copies. One commenter
suggests as an alternative:
I'd
tend to recommend the Old Norse masculine name <Ha/mundr> as the
name
that sounds the most like the submittor's proposed name yet can be
confidently
documented as an Old Norse personal name. <Ha/mundr> occurs in
West
Scandinavia from the time of the settlement of
http://www.sofi.se/SOFIU/runlex/
s.n. <Ha/mundr>).
Please
also be aware that "Three Hundred Viking Names from the Sagas" is not
a suitable source for our purposes - names have been normalized,
mistranslated,
and misdated, and the source includes names of mythical beings. If the submitter wishes to be put in contact
with Mistress Gunnvor, the Viking Answer Lady, that might assist him in
the
creation of a suitable Viking name.
Please note that the s-gabriel website and its reports are not
on
the no-photocopy list, and copies of the full report or copies of the
leading
pages and the pages on which the name
elements are found are required to be attached - one copy per each copy
of the
form. Copies of webpages must include
the url and the date accessed on each page of the copies.
The
device is returned for redraw and conflict in addition to a lack of
name to
send it forward with. The line of
division is neither high enough to be per chevron inverted, nor low
enough to
be a point pointed, blurring the line between the two and violating RfS
VII.7. It is much closer to a point
pointed, which brings in issues of contrast, since a point pointed is a
charge,
and must have good contrast with the field.
Further, a phoenix is a single charge, comprised of a flame and
the top
half to two-thirds of an eagle - this depiction is of an eagle and a
base of
flames. One depiction of a heraldic
phoenix may be found at:
http://www.rarebooks.nd.edu/digital/heraldry/charges/birds.html,
though the submitter should be careful to avoid copyright infringement
in the
redraw. Conflicts, assuming a properly
drawn phoenix and line of division, are with Laura Hawkwood - May of
1981 (via
the East): Ermine, on a pile Or a phoenix gules and Morgan
Morfydd
Gwilym - October of 1982 (via the Middle): Pean, a phoenix
displayed gules,
issuant from flames, maintaining in its beak a dexter hand couped proper,
with a single CD for the field in both cases.
4- Rab Wylkyn. New Device. Per bend sinister sable and gules, a bend
sinister argent between and eye of Ra and a rose slipped and leaved
bendwise
sinister Or.
This device is returned for lack of
documentation of
an "eye of Ra" as a period heraldic charge, or a suitable artistic
motif or artifact known to period. There
is precedent that the charge is not suitable, considering returns of
designs
using an "eye of Horus," as found in:
The Eye of Horus is an
abstract symbol or combination of symbols whose meaning was not
understood by
Europeans in the SCA period. Unlike the Eye of Horus, the occasional
word or
letter found in medieval and Renaissance heraldry were part of the
languages
and symbolic iconography of
5- Sile O' Daragh. New Device. Per chevron inverted abased Or, on a heart gules a rose slipped and leaved
bendwise Or and two chevronelles inverted abased gules.
This device is returned for redraw in an
attempt to
save the submitter excessive time. It is
a borderline case, and one commenter states:
I strongly suspect that the
line of division is too far abased to be acceptable.
The argent really appears to be an
unblazonable variant of a base, not a field partition.
There is also a possible
contrast issue. The line of division
doesn't approach dividing the field in half.
If the field isn't evenly divided, RfS VIII.2.b.iii allowing any
tinctures might not apply.
This last is particularly important to note -
RfS
VIII.2.b.iii states:
Elements evenly divided into
two parts, per saltire, or quarterly may use any two tinctures or furs.
For example, a field
quarterly could be composed of azure and gules, argent and Or, Or and
ermine,
or vert and vairy gules and argent.
Because
the abased line of division causes the field to be unevenly divided,
the low
contrast of the two metals is in violation of this rule, and I
therefore expect
that it would be returned at
Thus ends my Letter of Response.
In service and duty,