Unto Dagonell Collingwood, Garnet Herald, doth Juliana de Luna send greetings on the Feast of All Saints!
Enclosed find comments on the AEthelmearc IloI #45. Due to various attacks of life, the normal commenting group didn't meet, so this is my work together with the help of Richenda du Jardin and Myfanwy verch Rhiannon.
<Citach> is the early (pre-1200) spelling; <Ciadach>, the modern spelling, is probably more compatible with <Fitzgibbon>, as they also mix Gaelic and English orthographies. However, I don't see any reason to change it here; let Pelican do it if he cares to. The mild distortion of the ferret is probably necessary to fit in the space. However, Myfanwy points out that this is really a weasel (the tail is different -- this issue came up during the October Laurel meeting on some submission or other and we checked some web sites for photos). It also looks more statant than sejant (c.f., PIC-DIC #262). Of course, the difference isn't very great if your legs are that short.
I believe that his device was submitted with his name (which was passed in Feb 2000). The device was returned because the chief was the opposite tinctures (blue chief, gold fleurs-de-lys). The chief and the fleurs-de-lys (note that you have it as fleur, not fleurs) could stand to be bigger.
<Dorieann> is the modern (post-1200) spelling. <the Wanderer> is TSCA, but passable. The water lily is almost unrecognizable, but that's exactly the Pic-Dic depiction. Myfanwy says (call the papers): make the chief smaller (artist's note).
<Fergus> is also cited in R&W, with <Fergus filius Suein> dated to 1188. <MacInnes> is found in this spelling (capitalization too) in R&W as a header form. As depicted, this pale is sable, not vert. The wolves as drawn are in chief; they should either be redrawn to occupy the space, or be reblazoned as in chief.
Name registered Feb. 1994. I'm worried about the flames; the bottom part is not clearly separable into something to make it "proper." This could be fixed with a few added lines. Since the dragon has wings, it's segreant.
The bynames is a header form in Withycombe, as cited. It's also a header form in R&W, who dates <Plesantia West> to 1275. Th spelling of the byname is not supported from Dauzat, though I can't check Dauzat and Rostaing (which I believe you have). The spelling is supported from derivational notes only in R&W; the closest dated spelling is <de Coisnieres> 1196. Without an emblazon we cannot evaluate the submission - pend it until you can give us the drawing.
<Sorcha> is as cited. R&W (s.n. Lake) supports <of the lake> with Norman <Richard de la Lake> 1200.
The pomegranate appears to be inverted (c.f., PIC-DIC #580), but I checked with the submitter and she says the emblazon is correct.