> There's a submission in internal commentary in Æthelmearc that includes
the masculine given name "Anarawd". The only sources cited in the
submission are the first
<http://www.archive.org/details/ahistorywalesfr00lloygoog> and second
<http://www.archive.org/details/ahistorywalesfr02lloygoog> volumes of John
Edward Lloyd's _A History of Wales from the Earliest Times to the Edwardian
Conquest_. Unfortunately, the preface to that work says, "In the spelling
of Welsh names, I have sought to observe the rules laid down in 1893 by the
Orthographical Committee of the Society for Utilising the Welsh Language."
<http://www.archive.org/stream/ahistorywalesfr00lloygoog#page/n11/mode/1up>
>
> So. . .can anybody provide a period form of the name? The rest of the
name is documented to the 13th century, so I assume that would be the
preferred period, but none is specified in the submission.
In this case, the name of Anarawd hasn't been entirely modernized (most
likely because it fell out of use in medieval times). A fully modernized
spelling of the name would be "Anarod" but I don't think I've seen any
history books that bother to go that far in modernization.
To give some historic examples of the name, the earliest written example of
the name I know of is in the 10th c. Harleian MS 3859 genealogies (in
Bartrum's "Early Welsh Genealogical Tracts") referring to a ca. 7th century
individual using the spelling "Anarant" (read: Anaraut). A very rich
source of various spellings of this name (in addition to showing continuous
use of the name over a fairly long period of time) is the chronicle "Brut y
Tywysogion". As with many historic chronicles, dating the orthography is
fairly tricky as you need to discount the date of the individual being
named and make allowance for the date of composition and potentially
several layers of copying and "correction" until you get to the terminal
possible date, i.e., that of the manuscript itself (in this case, ca. 14th
century). In terms of the dates of the individuals bearing the name, the
citations are as follows:
910 anara6t vab rodri brenhin ybryttanyeit
952 anarawd vab gwry
1157 Eyn. vab anarawd ap gruffud nei y rys
1162 einyo~ vab anarot
1193 annarawt vab rys
1198 anaraawt vab Einyawn
Without going into a lot of detail, the versions with doubled "n" or
doubled "a" are atypical variants. "Anarot" is actually the most archaic
spelling -- even predating the "Anaraut" of the Harleian MS. The Brittonic
stressed long "o" seems to have begun shifting to the spelling "au" around
the 7th century and then developed into "aw" after the 10th century (maybe
not until the 11th, I'd need to dig a bit more to be confident). The final
consonant began as "t" with the "d" spellings beginning to appear probably
around the 13th century or so and supplanting the earlier spelling over the
course of a couple of centuries.
Oh, wait, I said I wasn't going to go into a lot of detail. To summarize,
in the 13th century, the most likely spellings in a Welsh-language context
would be "Anarawt" (slightly more archaic) or "Anarawd" (slightly more
innovative). If, however, the 13th century documentation for the rest of
the name is being taken from the Anglo-Latin legal records that form the
majority of the name data surviving from that period (i.e., if he's working
from any of my articles based on the Lay Subsidies, rentals, or court
documents of the 13th century), then you need to consider what spelling
would be likely in that particular type of linguistic context. Which,
curiously enough, takes us to a spelling coincidentally identical to the
Old Welsh "Anarot". (Briefly -- I promise! -- the diphthong of the last
syllable consistently appears in Anglo-Latin spellings as "o", and while
the pronunciation of the final consonant was, technically, voiced, the
quality of final voiced stops in Welsh at this time was regularly
interpreted by non-Welsh speakers as being voiceless.)
So, while it would be tempting to be lazy and suggest citing the anomalous
"Anarot" from the 1162 entry in the Brut in order to have a reference for
the most likely spelling for a 13th c. Anglicized context, this would be
badly misleading.
Of course, if the full name being considered had been provided I wouldn't
have to be second-guessing this aspect.
Tangwystyl
References
Bartrum, P. C. 1966. Early Welsh Genealogical Tracts. University of
Wales Press, Cardiff.
Jones, Thomas ed.. 1941. Brut y Tywysogyon (Peniarth Ms. 20). University
of Wales Press, Cardiff.
5. Maeve ni Siurtain - Badge
(Fieldless) On a chamfrom azure in chief three crescents in pale
There is a tincture missing in this blazon. I would recommend reblazoning
this:
(Fieldless) a chamfrom azure charged on the forehead with in pale three
crescents argent (although I supposed "in chief" does it too)
These crescents are awfully small -- in the current design they almost
appear as artistic detailing rather than as tertiary charges.
By the way, I believe the previous return was in error. The call was
against:Conflict with Constancia Tattersall, September of 2002 (via An
Tir): Argent goutty, on a chamfron azure a cross patonce argent. As I see
it, there is a CD for fielded vs fieldlessness, and a second for
adding/removing the gouttes (I know, how can you add/remove strewn charges
when you don't have a field -- I don't think this matters for anything
except "placement" and "tincture" -- and the fielded/fieldless CD could
already be considered to be for tincture)
No conflicts found with the current device.
6. Marci of Hadley - name and device
Argent, a roundel azure within an annulet gules, overall a cross sable
Name documentation is fine; no conflicts found.
Device. No conflicts found.
I know there was a lot of chatter about this device vs Target (I still
don't see that as an issue; trademark is "in the same field" and SCA armory
is not violating anyone's trademark. The design itself is pretty generic,
and does not strike me as obtrusively modern. The only issue I have here
is that the crossbar of the black cross is rendered significantly less
recognizable by its placement on the azure roundel. Since we register the
emblazon and not the blazon, its a visual that needs to be considered. That
said, I think it's worth letting Laurel consider it.
7. Steffan Úlfkelsson - name and device
Name -- On Staffan - > Steffan--You can't just say something seems
reasonable, you need to demonstrate why it seems reasonable -- do you often
see "ste" --> "sta (or a and e used interchangably) in period Swedish
names, or are you basing this on the "it was spelled with an e in German,
and an a in Swedish, so an e in Swedish should be fine too" theory? The
former theory is fine (although dicey; we use it far too much with far too
little understanding of it in the SCA), the latter is just messy thinking.
Diplomatarium Norvegicum (volume I-XXI) in b.1 nr 284 has a "Arne Stefans
son" listed in the text. The documented is Dato: 19 Mai 1343.
<http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.prl?b=286&s=n&str=stef%>
b.1 nr 58 (dated 1263-64) lists a "mæistare H. sira Stefan" in the text.
<http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.prl?b=59&s=n&str=stef%>
The earliest this source has Steffan with two ffs is 1425. b.1 nr 700 has
"Steffan a Sæthnatweit"
<http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.prl?b=702&s=n&str=stef%>
Of course, that's Norwegian, not Swedish. FWIW, I did a google book search
on hits for the collection "Sveriges medeltida personnamn" and they show
"Staffan" in all hits I could see. (some were no preview)
Registerable -- yes -- although possibly with only the one f. Authentic?
Not as documented, but I don't think that's an issue here.
Device: No conflicts found. See comments about Marci's device for my
opinions on style.
8. Uilliam mac Cullaich - name and device
Per pall inverted argent, gules and sable, two bears rampant addorsed sable
and argent and an armorer's anvil argent
Name: No conflicts found.
When Black marks a name as G (Gaelic) he is talking modern (19th/20th C)
Scottish Gaelic. Only names marked MG (Middle Gaelic) are period forms
(they are what we normally note as "Early Modern".
I seem to have misplaced my photocopy of Woulfe, so I am unable to see
whether there is an Irish equivalent with a period anglicization.
9. Yamamoto no Sadataro Hikaru - name
I think the most excellent Solveig has provided ample commentary on this,
and I have nothing to add.