ÆTHELMEARC
COLLEGE OF HERALDS - commentary archive
Letter of Intent #86 Myfanwy ferch Riannon
Feast of the Venerable Bede
27 May AS XL
Greetings from Myfanwy!
Herein pray find commentary on Æ #86. Due to time constraints,
this was not
conflict-checked completely; it was however conflict-checked in the
LoARs dated
from 7/04 through 11/04 (those are the most recent LoARs online that do
not
seem to have been inter-filed in the online O&A as of yet. I did
try to be
fairly thorough on checking the name documentation where possible.
Lady Myfanwy ferch Rhiannon
Ruth Morrisson
myfanwy@nauticom.net
1. Æthelmearc, Kingdom of (badge) -- Per bend gules and sable, an
escarbuncle
argent and an escallop Or.
Nicely drawn. Not, of course, particularly good style, but nicely
drawn.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
2. Angel’s Keep, Canton of (resub) -- Argent, a tower within a laurel
wreath
and on a chief azure, three vols argent.
Nicely drawn.
clear of: Ildaria Nunez de Caminha (7/04 Lochac) -- Argent, a crescent
and on a
chief azure three mullets of six points argent.
There is a CD for changing the crescent to a tower, and one for adding
the
laurel wreath. Note, however, that there is only change of type of
tertiary on
the chief.
clear of: Cú Dub mac Lorccáin (7/04 Middle) -- Argent,
three wolf’s heads
erased sable, on a chief azure three eagles argent.
There are CDs for changing the type, number and tincture of the primary
charge
group. There may (at best) be only change of type of tertiary, however.
3. Bjorn Wulfricson -- Per pale Or and azure, a bear rampant
maintaining a
spear, a bordure counterchanged.
The exact cite from CA #35 is “Biorn”. Geirr Bassi (p. 8) has
“Bj{o,}n”. TheAnglo-SaxonChronicle (p. 91) cites a
Wulfric (died c.
897) as the King’s (King Alfred, if I understand the text) marshal and
Welsh
reeve. Another Wulfric (op. cit., p. 165 ff.) was consecrated abbot of
St.
Augustine’s in Canterbury in either 1043 or 1045 [apparently there is a
chronological error footnoted by the translator] and died in 1061 (pp.
190-91).
This is a Norse name with an Anglo-Saxon byname. According to the table
of
Lingual Weirdness rulings maintained by Aryanhwy merch Catmael [URL:
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/weirdness_table.html] this is one
step from
period practice.
Nicely drawn.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
4. Johanna Dorlandt -- Gules goutty d’eaux, a fess nebulée
argent.
“Johanna” can be found in Aryanhwy merch Catmael’s article “Dutch Names
1358-1361” [URL:
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/dutch/earlydutch14.html].
I did a Google search [URL: http://www.google.com] for “Dorlandt” and
found
many genealogy websites. One of them [URL:
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Cottage/6623/g018.html] cites a Jan
Dorlandt, born c. 1520 in Korten Hoefse, Vreeland, Holland; this may be
the
same individual cited in the provided documentation. (A number of the
other
Google hits were for sites dating the name to the early 1600s.)
While there is a couple of hundred years difference between the name
elements,
this is probably registerable.
Any particular reason for the nonstandard spelling of “nebuly”?
“Goutty” implies more than one gout; pluralizing “d’eau” is probably
unnecessary.
Why is there no herald of record?
Reblazon: Gules, goutty d’eau, a fess nebuly argent.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
5. John Michael Thorpe -- Quarterly barry wavy argent and azure and
argent, on
a bend sinister sable between two roses Or, a rapier argent.
There may need to be fewer and larger waves. Otherwise, nicely drawn.
Complexity count of seven (four tinctures, three types of charges);
eight if
you include the field divisions.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
6. Katari no Tashi -- Argent, a triquetra within and conjoined to an
annulet
vert.
The annulet is a bit thin line, but may be registerable.
The docs for “Katari” are as given. Note that it is a clan name, saying
that it
is of “ancient” origin. Note also that this is in the revised edition.
but that
the source is not listed in the LoI’s Bibliography.
“Tashi”, however, is *not* found in Solveig. I don’t know where it came
from --
it isn’t on the page cited, nor for that matter, is it found in the
name index.
The nearest I can find are the female names “Taki”, dated to 1183;
“Tarumime”,
dated to 784; and “Tata”, dated to 1392.
The other documentation, particularly the Dalby citation, is
inadequately
summarized. By merely giving the bibliographic information, one could
easily
surmise that it is for the armory. If it is for the name, it should say
so, and
exactly what the documentation says, especially if it is relevant to
the submission.
The URL for the Effingham citation should have been provided in the
documentation, or at the very least in the LoI's Bibliography.
Commenters
should not have to go on Google searches to find it (and personally,
pronunciation is not something the commenters generally have to worry
about --
that is for court heralds, and if they know their business they will
find out
on their own). In fact, the pronunciation information [URL:
http:/www.sengokudaimyo.
com/miscellany/miscellany.html] seems to be largely irrelevant to the
matter at
hand (i.e., this particular name submission).
That being said, the Effingham citation [URL:
http://www.sengokudaimyo.com/miscellany/names.html says:
The structure of names changed considerably over the nearly 1,500-some
years of recorded Japanese history. During the Heian and early Kamakura
periods, the names of the aristocracy would be rendered as Surname no
Given
name [sic]. The “no” [sic] is analogous to the German “von”
or the
French “de”
(yes, and the English “of”). Literally, the name Minamoto no Yoritomo
is
“Yoritomo of the Minamoto.” By the 1400s the particle was falling out
of use.
Technically, this naming structure reflects the use of clan names as
surnames.
When more and more people began adopting their own surnames (e.g., the
Ashikaga, Saitô, Ichijô) rather than using ancient clan
names, the use of the
particle died out.
Matsuya shows numerous mon with a charge within an annulet;
additionally, the
thickness of the annulet appears to vary considerably, even within
categories:
for example, p. 194, fig. 5 and p. 195, fig. 20, both show what appear
to be
Greek (i.e., equal-armed crosses) within and conjoined to annulets, and
both
the thickness of the cross and the thickness of the annulet are quite
different,
as they are to fig. 194, fig. 4, which is a [Greek] cross within an
annulet.
I also found a charge that looks quite similar to a triquetra: it is
one of the
(many) interpretations of Kashiwa (“oak leaf”), pp. 67- 72
(specifically, p.
70, figs. 16 and 20 [and to some extent, fig. 14]; p. 71, fig. 19; and
p. 72,
fig. 4). There is no direct conflict in Matsuya (i.e., nothing showing
a
“triquetra” shape within an annulet) although there are some mon that
could be
blazoned as “three oak leaves conjoined in pall inverted within an
annulet”.
clear of: Fíne Binnech (9/04 Outlands) -- Argent, a triquetra
purpure
interlaced with an annulet, a bordure wavy gules.
There is a CD for changing the tincture of the primary charge group,
and at
least one for adding the bordure. I’m not sure, however, how much
difference
should be given for interlacing the triquetra and annulet, rather than
having
the triquetra within and conjoined to the annulet.
7. Mattea di Luna -- Azure, a moon in her plenitude argent and three
cinquefoils
Or.
The name docs for “Mattea” are as given.
I don’t have the source for the byname, but the docs for “Luna” seem
fine. As
for using “di” instead of “da” there may be a hack we can use. The name
“Luna
Athanwulf” was registered 12/91 (via the East). In the LoAR, it says:
The LoI established "a strong pattern of use of a class of words [in
this
case
the names of Roman deities] as given names" (see RfS II.3.b). Based on
this
pattern we believe Luna to be acceptable. While the use of the
decrescent with
the given name is allusive, we do not believe that the name and charge
combination is so excessively allusive as to require return.
This suggests that “Luna” can be used as a name element that is not a
locative.
Since the particle “di” suggests a familial relationship, and since
“Luna” has
been registered as a name element (albeit with “stunt documentation”),
it
*might* be plausible to say “di Luna” as opposed to “da Luna”. Since
the
submitted documentation is for “Luna” as a place name, however, there
is no
guarantee that this argument will actually fly, and the submitter might
have to
accept “da Luna” after all.
Note that the armory, with it’s moon in her plenitude, might be
considered,
like Luna Athanwulf’s, merely allusive to the name, or might be
considered
overly so. That’s a judgment call Wreath will have to make.
Should the arrangement of the charges be specified (i.e., “one, two and
one”)
or is saying “in cross” sufficient?
Nicely drawn.
Possible reblazon: Azure, in cross a moon in her plenitude argent and
three
cinquefoils Or.
Possible reblazon: Azure, a moon in her plenitude and three
cinquefoils, two
and one, Or.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
8. Michael Gladwyne
The Withycombe docs are as cited; it should be noted that the header
form
spelling also has dated citations (p. 218): 1196-1215; 1218; 1303; and
1346.
The Saint Gabriel report cited is as given, except that it isn’t
entirely clear
which cited source is the one with the submitted spelling (there’s a
bunch of
footnotes, but not attached to actual documented forms). I don’t have
Bardsley.
Reaney and Wilson (p. 192, sn Gladwin) does not give the submitted
spelling,
but has other variants including “Glad(e)wine”, dated to about 1113,
and
“Gledewyne”, dated to 1317; this suggests that the submitted form is
reasonable.
9. Mugain ingen uí Bhraonáin -- Sable, in canton a
decrescent argent and a
demi-sun issuant from base Or.
The ÓC&M docs are as cited (p. 140); this is the pre-1200
spelling. Mugain
is said to be one of the daughters of Ailill mac Dúnlaing, king
of Leinster;
she and her sister Feidelm are patronesses of the parish of Tallaght,
Co.
Dublin (feast date December 9).
Possible (?) reblazon: Sable, a demi-sun issuant from base and in
canton a
decrescent argent.
Normally, charges in canton would be considered as secondaries. In
isn’t
entirely clear in this case, however, because they appear to be
co-primaries in
the emblazon (hence the question mark). That’s a judgment call that may
be for
Wreath to make (i.e., if there are no conflicts, kick it upstairs).
clear of: Willewyn of Three Rivers (8/04 Calontir) -- Per chevron
purpure and
sable, a sun issuant from the line of division Or and a decrescent
argent.
There is a CD for changing the tincture of half the field, and one for
changing
the arrangement of the charges.
clear of Elizabeth Dougall (11/04 ??) -- Azure, a frog rampant to
sinister,
issuant from base a demi-sun Or.
There is a CD for changing the field tincture, and at least one for
changing an
argent decrescent to an Or frog; there may also be one for position of
said
charge on the field.
no conflicts found in the LoARs
10. Niamh ingen Maolán -- Per bend vert and sable, on a bend
argent, three
sea-horses purpure.
Possible reblazon: Per bend vert and sable, on a bend argent, three
sea-horses
erect palewise purpure.
clear of: Agnes Moray (9/04 Meridies) -- Per bend vert and sable, a
bend argent
between two lions couchant Or each maintaining a sword argent.
There is a CD for removing the secondary charges, and one for adding
the
tertiaries to to the bend.
11. Niamh ingen aolán [sic] (badge) -- Per bend vert and sable,
on a bend
argent three natural sea-horses purpure.
I presume that this is the same person as #10, and that “aolán”
is just a typo.
Reblazon: Per bend vert and sable, on a bend argent three natural
sea-horses
palewise purpure.
clear of: Agnes Moray (9/04 Meridies) -- Per bend vert and sable, a
bend argent
between two lions couchant Or each maintaining a sword argent.
There is a CD for removing the secondary charges, and one for adding
the
tertiaries to to the bend.
12. Ragnar Brychenson
Geirr Bassi (p. 14) gives “Ragnarr”. I don’t know if adding the the
second “r”
is a major or minor change. (Contrary to what the submission says,
“Ragnarr” does
*not* appear to be a common name: there is only one instance cited in
Geirr
Bassi.)
The name “Brychen Silverfist” was registered in August of 1992, but
there is no
commentary as to why in the LoAR. Morgan and Morgan (pp. 57-8) give
“Brychan”
as a header form for what appears to be a (partially) locative byname:
The names of the town and of the former county come from the name of
the
fifth century saint and ruler Brychan [sic]; -iog [sic]
was one
of the suffixes used
when a territory was named after its ruler; as in Tudwal, Tudweiliog;
Rhufawn,
Rhufoniog; the suffix caused a vowel affection to the vowel -a
[sic],
hence
Brycheiniog: the English version Brecknock is a corrupt form of
Brycheiniog:
Brecknockshire and Breconshire have both been in use for the former
county.
Since “Brychan” is a given name, this suggests that the correct
spelling might
be “Brychanson”, not “Brychenson”; “ap Brychan” might be better
grammatically
(although this would probably be considered as a major change).
Hmm. If this were a fully Norse name, it isn’t clear whether the byname
would
be “Brychensson” or “Brychenarson” (c.f., Geirr Bassi, p. 17), since
Norse
names don’t appear to end in “-en”.
I checked the Lingual Weirdness Rulings table [URL:
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/
sca/weirdness_table.html}. There does not appear to be any definite
rulings,
one way or the other, as to whether Norse and Welsh name elements can
be used
together.
13. William fiz William -- Quarterly gules and argent, semy-de-lys
counterchanged argent and sable.
There appears to be a typo. Is it “fiz” or “fitz”? One form is in the
header
and the other in the documentation provided. Both spellings are
documentable
(c.f., Reaney and Wilson, p. 170, sn Fitz): examples given include
Reginald le
Fiz [sic], dated to 1193; Robert Fiz [sic], dated to 1212;, and
Osbertus le fiz
Fulco [sic], which appears to date to the 12th century. Reaney and
Wilson (p
171, sn FitzWilliam) gives the citations Rauf le fuiz William [sic]
dated to
1299 and Edmund Fitzwilliam [sic], dated to 1424.
clear of: Fu Ching Lan (badge, 9/04 Caid) -- Quarterly sable and
argent, in
cross four fleurs-de-lys in annulo counterchanged.
There is a CD for changing half the field tincture, and one for
changing the
number of fleurs-de-lys; there is probably also a CD for the
arrangement of
them.
Bibliography: Garmonsway, G. N. (trans.). TheAnglo-SaxonChronicle,
Rev. Ed. London: J. M. Dent
& Sons, Ltd.; and New York: E. F. Dutton & Co Inc., 1953, 1960.
[Everyman's
Library #624].