SCA Laurel Sovereign of Arms
Online System for Commentary and Response

Site News
LoIs
KLoIs
SENA
Prec
AH
Track
Sub Status

Name:

Password:

Create Account

MAIL ME my password.



SEARCH:

[ Site News | LoIs | KLoIs | SENA | Prec | AH | Track | Sub Status ]

Laurel LoPaD dated 2016-11-27

This letter contains the issues raised in the September 2016 LoAR for CoA discussion. The text in this letter is copied verbatim from that LoAR; it is provided here for convenience. As with a November LoI, these matters are currently scheduled for the Pelican and Wreath meetings in February 2017. Original commentary, responses, and rebuttals to commentary must be entered into OSCAR no later than Tuesday, January 31, 2017.

This item was on the 02-2017 LoAR

1: Areus of Sparta - New Name Change

OSCAR NOTE: the old name was registered in August of 2000, via Atenveldt.

Old Item: Phelan Ó Coileáin, to be retained as an alternate name.
Submitter desires a masculine name.
No major changes.

In commentary, Metron Ariston identified a possible presumption issue: one of the kings of Sparta was named Areus. SENA PN4D1 sets out the standards for whether a historical person is important enough to protect from presumption. It states in relevant part:

Sovereign rulers of significant states are generally important enough to protect. Some historical city-states are not considered significant states. Provinces or regions integrated into larger units like the Holy Roman Empire are not generally considered significant states. Sovereigns of small states that did not give rise directly to modern countries will not be protected under this clause, nor will legendary kings of any state (though these kings may be individually important enough to protect).

Sparta was a Greek city-state. It did not directly give rise to any modern country. Commenters are asked to discuss whether Sparta nevertheless is sufficiently significant to warrant protecting its kings from presumption. Alternatively, commenters should address whether Areus of Sparta himself was historically significant such that he should be protected from presumption.

This was item 2 on the Atenveldt letter of June 20, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=65450)


This item was on the 02-2017 LoAR

2: Jon MacLeod of Stornway - New Name

Submitter desires a masculine name.
Spelling (Jon) most important.

Submitted as Jon MacLeod, this form has a relationship conflict with Angus John Macleod (May 1995, Calontir) under PN3D of SENA. Because Scots uses unmarked patronymics, the name as submitted could be read as a claim to be the father of Angus John Macleod. After the close of commentary, the submitter agreed to add the locative byname of Stornway in order to clear the conflict. The place name Stornway is dated to 1606 in Mercator's map of Scotland (http://biblio.unibe.ch/web-apps/maps/zoomify.php?pic=Ryh_1901_6.jpg&col=ryh). We therefore have pended this name for commentary on the form Jon MacLeod of Stornway.

This was item 16 on the An Tir letter of June 30, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=65588)


This item was on the 02-2017 LoAR

3: Leonora da Ferrara - New Name

Submitter desires a feminine name.
Language (Italian) most important.
Culture (Italian) most important.

Following the Pelican decision meeting, the question was raised whether this name presumes upon that of Eleanor of Naples, also known as Leonora of Aragon, who was the first Duchess of Ferrara. Therefore, we are pending this name to allow a discussion on this issue.

Ferrara was documented in the Letter of Intent from Florentine Renaissance Resources: Online Tratte of Office Holders 1282-1532, which normalized the place names. The submitted spelling is also found in "Some Names From Giovanni Boccaccio's Il Decameron" by Giata Magdalena Alberti (2013 KWHSS Proceedings).

Her device is registered under the holding name Leonora of Østgarðr.

This was item 20 on the East letter of June 30, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=65737)


This item was on the 02-2017 LoAR

4: Naevehjem, Barony of - New Order Name

OSCAR finds the name registered exactly as it appears in December of 1992, via Caid.

Order of the Dragon's Hoard

In support of this order name, the Barony argued that the pattern "Order of Dragon's [treasure]" was grandfathered to the submitter by virtue of the prior registration of the name Order of the Dragon's Gem (Sept. 1994, Caid). We do not agree. A gem or gemstone is a heraldic charge. Thus, the registered order name fits the documented pattern of registering order names based on heraldic charges.

Additionally, the Barony currently has registered to it the names Order of the Dragon's Foot and Order of the Dragon's Wing, both of which support the grandfathered pattern as being "Order of the Dragon's [heraldic charge]" rather than "Order of the Dragon's [treasure]."

However, neither the LoI nor commenters addressed the Barony's other registered order name, Order of the Dragon's Blaze. (Feb. 1994, Caid). We are pending this submission for further commentary on the question of whether this order name should support a broader pattern of "Order of the Dragon's [thing]," where the thing is a noun that is not a heraldic charge.

This was item 25 on the Caid letter of June 26, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=65282)


Pray know that I remain,

In service,

Andrewe Bawldwyn
Laurel Principal King of Arms


OSCAR counts 2 Names, 1 Name Change and 1 Order Name. There are a total of 4 items submitted on this letter.

[ Site News | LoIs | KLoIs | SENA | Prec | AH | Track | Sub Status ]


Site Copyright © 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, Lewis Tanzos