Last modified: March 27, 2006
27 March 2006
From the Office of Rampart Herald
Furukusu Masahide (John Newton)
rampart@outlandsheralds.org
Unto the Outlands College of Heralds, the esteemed submitters, and all others who come by these letters, on this 27th day of March 2006, A.S. XL, does Furukusu Masahide, Rampart Herald, send greetings.
My deepest gratitude to those who took time to send internal commentary: Ambrose atte Redehulle, Gwain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor Herald), Knute, Meradudd Cethin (Liber Herald), Timothy O'Brien (Trefoil Herald).
Line Emblazon Sheet
Color Emblazon Sheet
February 2006 Letter of Presentation
March 2006 Letter of Response
March 2006 Letter of Intent
July 2006 LoAR Results
Return to the Rampart home page.
The following items were sent on to Laurel for final determination:
The following items were returned for further work:
Submitter cares most about the sound and language/culture of the name and the desired gender is male.
"Donnchadh" is found in "Names and Naming Practices in the Red Book of Ormond (Ireland, 14th Century)" by Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasuryn. The spelling has a question mark but the author states "this seems likely."
"MacLachlan" is a Scots surname found in Black's "The Surnames of Scotland" s.n. MacLachlan, dated to 1308.
Consulting Herald's Note: I am not sure if "Donnchadh" is Gaelic or Anglicized Irish, but in combining with Scots, there is one weirdness for the former and no ruling for the latter. Temporally the names are consistent.
Name conflicts with Duncan MacLachlan, registered December 2000 via the Middle. Per the precedents of Elspeth (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents/elsbeth/name.html) "Donnchadh conflicts with Duncan [09/00]"
On resubmission, if articles off of www.sca.org are used, please include the full URL to the article with the documentation summary.
Name returned for conflict.
Commenters indicate that the bear's heads are not caboshed, they are closer to Erased. The precedents of François la Flamme (http://www.farreaches.org/~mranc/sca/wreath.html) define the style for Erasing and Couping (please refer to the full discussion within the precedents for further information):
For purposes of recreating period armorial style for erasing, the erasing should (1) have between three and eight jags; (2) have jags that are approximately one-sixth to one-third the total height of the charge being erased; and (3) have jags that are not straight but rather are wavy or curved. The predominance of the three-jag erasing is such that it can be recommended throughout our period and across Europe...
Submissions which contain ... erased charges that diverge significantly from the guidelines above risk being returned for unidentifiability or non-period style unless they are accompanied by documentation.
Device returned for redraw and lack of name.
Name passed on September 1995 LoAR.
Device returned on Outlands September 2005 LoR for violation of Rfs VIII.7.a - Identifiability of the otter, and Rfs VIII.4.c - Natural depiction.
The device resolves the issues with the prior submission, but results in more.
The October 2005 LoPaD states: The LoI blazoned the otter as proper. As there is no proper defined for an otter… (Uilliam Ó Cléirigh, 10/05)
This issue could be resolved with a change in blazon to something like Per fess wavy Or and Gules, in chief an otter passant brown.
Commeters feel that this device conflicts with Rima of Rockridge, August 1979: (Fieldless) A stoat statant gardant proper. One CD for fieldless.
A stoat is a small mammal similar to a ferrit or an otter, it is known as an ermine when it has a white coat. This would imply that it would be considered no different from an otter, per precedents regarding ferrits, otters, and coney:
[A ferret vs. an otter] There's ...nothing for [type of beast]. (Stevyn Gaoler, September, 1992, pg. 42) (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents/bruce/difference-armory-type.html)
[Coney vs. otter] [This] has ... a minor for the type of charge (the differences in tail and ears between the coney and otter are worth at least a strong minor when a single animal is in question). (LoAR 27 Sep 86, p. 5) (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents/alisoun/alisouncombined.html)
There is no difference between statant and passant according to Rfs X.4.h - Posture Changes which explains:
"Changes in the position of the head, for instance, are not significant, nor is the change from statant to passant, which essentially moves only one leg. Changing from passant to couchant, however, visually removes the legs from the bottom of the charge and is considered significant."
In the case of an otter however, even passant to couchant are not considered significant due to the short legs of the animal:
[an otter couchant vs a ferret statant guardant] It is extremely hard to tell the difference between statant and couchant on very short-legged critters like otters and ferrets; so much so that a visual comparison of the emblazons showed very little difference between them. [No CD was given.] (Iain MacDhugal Cameron of Ben Liath, 5/95 p. 10) (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents/daud2/armd2f.html)
Device returned for conflict.
Submitter will not accept major changes to the name and the desired gender is female. Submitter will not allow creation of a holding name.
"Mary" is found as a Christian name in Withycombe's Oxford Dictionary of Christian Names, page 211, under Mary, citing the earliest known example in Britain is Mary, 2nd daughter of Malcolm III of Scotland and St. Margaret, born c.1082.
"Champernowen" is found as an English surname in Reaney and Wilson's A Dictionary of English Surnames (paperback edition), page 90, under Champernowen: Jordan de Campo Arnulfi 1172, RBE.
These references are on the "no photocopy required" list.
Commenters indicate that the Reaney and Wilson entry is for "Champernowne" not "Champernowen" and does not actually date "Champernowne." The entry shows the following surnames: de Campo Arnulfi (1172), de Cambernof (1189), de Chaumbernun (1230).
As changing to one of the three dated forms would be considered a major change, this name is being returned for rework.
Commenters stated that according to the Pictoral Dictionary a triquetra has a point to chief by default. It also does not have the annulet. There was also concern with the placement of the triquetra on the bend. A suggested blazon was Argent, on a bend sinister azure in chief a triquetra palewise interlaced with an annulet argent.
Conflicts with Erick der Rotnacken, registered in January 1997: Argent, on a bend sinister azure a savage palewise maintaing a club proper and an enfield statant fesswise Or. There is a single CD for multiple changes to the tertiaries.
Device returned for conflict and lack of name.
Please Note: The line drawing of the submission paperwork must be an uncolored line drawing, not simply a black and white photocopy of a colored version of the paperwork.
Submitter will not accept major changes, cares most about the language/culture, desired gender is female, and desires name to be authentic for Irish Gaelic language and/or culture.
Muireann - Irish Names by O'Corrain and Maguire, pg. 141. As a header spelling. Bearer died in 831.
Ghlass - "Glass" as listed in Feminine Names from the Index to O'Brien's "Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae" by Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasfryn (http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/irish-obrien.html)
inghean - located in the above article.
Faolain - Surnames of Ireland by Maclysagnt pg. 245 Gaelic spelling found under Phelan.
Commenters indicate that the header spelling referenced in Irish Names is marked as the Modern Irish version, the old Irish form that was dated to 831 is <Muirenn>. Tangwystyl's article cites <ingen> not <inghean>. <inghean> is the Middle and Modern Irish form. MacLysaght's Gaelic spellings are those of Late Modern Irish. Irish Names indicates that <Fáelán> is the spelling used in Old Irish.
The documentation for this name does not provide for the spellings of any of the elements of the name as presented. Changing any one of these spelling would be minor, but changing the spelling and/or accents of all of them would be considered major.
The name is being returned for rework.
Commenters indicate that the device may be in conflict with Miranda Douglas of Schiehallion, September 1983: Per bend sinister vert and argent, a horse's head erased, crined of flames, and two thistles conjoined pilewise counterchanged. There is one CD for change of half of the primary group (Horse's head to wolf), and there may be a CD for changing the thistle. This may be two thistles or it may be a double thistle.
Device returned for lack of name to send it forward.
Original device with an identical blazon returned by Kingdom on May 2005 LoR with the following comments:
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.
None of these issues (other than the lack of name) have been addressed with this resubmission. One commenter remarked that the only difference that was apparent was that the resubmission has a slightly narrower band of flames.
Device returned for redraw.
The original device Azure, a peacock feather between in fess a hand of Fatima bendwise and another bendwise sinister was returned on the May 2003 LoP.
This is a complete redesign of the device.
Commenters indicate that all charges on this device appear to be roughly the same size. This results in all charges being considered part of the primary charge group. Per Rfs.VIII.1.a Tincture and Charge Limit - Armory must use a limited number of tinctures and types of charges. This rule goes on to state that "three or more types of charges should not be used in the same group." I this case we have three different charges all appearing to be in the same charge group. One solution to this would be to draw the phoenix larger, making it a single primary charge, with the flowers and wheels being drawn smaller and treated as a secondary charge group.
Device returned for redraw.
Thus ends my Letter of Response.
In service and duty,
Furukusu Masahide
Rampart Herald
Line Emblazon Sheet
Color Emblazon Sheet
February 2006 Letter of Presentation
March 2006 Letter of Response
March 2006 Letter of Intent
July 2006 LoAR Results
Return to the Rampart home page.