MAIL ME my password.
| Sub Status
Laurel LoPaD dated 2017-01-30
This letter contains the issues raised in the November 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 January LoI, these matters are currently scheduled for the Pelican and Wreath meetings in April 2017. Original commentary, responses, and rebuttals to commentary must be entered into OSCAR no later than Friday, March 31, 2017.
1: Alys de Bath - New Name
No major changes.
Sound (Alys of Bath or something similar) most important.
During the Pelican decision meeting, questions were raised whether this name presumes on the literary character the Wife of Bath from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, who uses the first names Alys and Alisoun. For example, in the Wife of Bath's Prologue and Tale one character says to the Wife of Bath, "I knowe yow for a trewe wyf, dame Alys."
SENA PN4D1, discussing presumption, states:
Fictional characters may also be considered important enough that their names need to be protected. Fictional characters are generally important enough to protect when two conditions are met. They are: a) a significant number of people in the Society recognize the character's name without prompting and b) the use of the name would generally be considered by those people a clear reference to that character.
This name is pended for discussion of two issues: (1) whether the character of the Wife of Bath from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is important enough to protect; and (2) if the Wife of Bath is important enough to protect, whether this submitted name presumes on the identity of that fictional character.
Her device is registered under the holding name Alys of the Outlands.
This was item 2 on the Outlands letter of August 31, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=67184)
2: Caerthe, Barony of - New Order Name
OSCAR finds the name registered exactly as it appears in January of 1973, via Laurel.
Order of the Pilgrim of Caerthe
Meaning most important.
Existing precedent states that a pilgrim is not a heraldic charge for the purposes of constructing order names. On the April 2015 LoAR, we ruled:
Submitted as Order of the Peregrine of Granite Mountain, the Letter of Intent argued that this order is named for a person, as a peregrine is a pilgrim or traveller in a foreign land. The examples of orders named after people or groups of people are the Order of the Grail-Templars of Saint George and the Order of the Fool. A fool is known by distinctive dress, so is a plausible heraldic charge. In June 2014, we ruled:
Submitted as Award of the Hero of the Middle Marches, the cited examples support the patterns of a type of person as a heraldic charge (known by a distinctive manner of dress, as a fool or a monk), and of a legendary group of people like the Grail-Templars (most likely the Arthurian knights). A hero does not follow either of these patterns. It is a generic term that is not associated with a particular depiction that would be known by people in period.
Similarly, a pilgrim is a generic term, not associated with a particular heraldic depiction. However, Peregrine can be documented as a given name. Therefore, we have changed it to Order of _Peregrine of Granite Mountain in order to register the name. This follows the period pattern of an order named for an individual. [Granite Mountain, Barony of, 4/2015 LoAR, A-Atenveldt].
After the close of commentary, Bruce Batonvert provided new evidence that a pilgrim was a period heraldic charge, found in the canting arms of Pelegrina in the Insignia Nobilium Veronensium, c.1550 (http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00001423/images/index.html?id=00001423&groesser=&fip=193. 174.98.30&no=&seite=89). Based on this new evidence, we are pending this item for commentary on whether the April 2015 precedent quoted above should be overturned.
This was item 7 on the Outlands letter of August 31, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=67190)
3: Franklin of Featherstone - New Name
Submitter desires a masculine name.
Sound most important.
Questions were raised at the end of commentary whether Franklin can be combined with a locative byname without appearing to be an improper claim of rank, landedness or official position.
Franklin is not a title protected by the Society. However, that fact alone does not determine whether the name "Franklin of [placename]" is presumptuous. For example, we returned the name Marquesa de Carvalhal as an improper claim to landed rank because the given name Marquesa was also a Spanish title meaning 'marchioness' (the feminine form of marquis), even though the Society does not use this title. [Marquesa de Carvalhal, 6/2011 LoAR, R-East].
Precedent states that the surname Hidalgo is registerable because "a simple claim of the status of gentry, no higher, is acceptable for registration. Therefore, the submitted name is registerable as it claims a status no higher than gentry." [Madelena Hidalgo de Valencia, LoAR 06/2003, Caid-A]. As part of that precedent, it was noted that being a hidalgo did not necessarily imply land ownership in medieval and Renaissance Spain. By contrast, although there is considerable dispute among medieval scholars about the exact social position and rank of a franklin in English society, most sources, including the Oxford English Dictionary and the Middle English Dictionary, agree that franklins were landowners ranked below the nobility. The precedent permitting a claim to be a hidalgo (non-landowning gentry) does not adequately address land-owning franklins.
We are pending this submission for discussion of whether a claim of landedness, ranked below the nobility, should be prohibited.
Commenters are also asked to consider whether the given name Franklin is identical to a form of address, and thus should be prohibited under PN4B1.
His device is registered under the holding name Franklin Baker of Aarquelle.
This was item 11 on the Outlands letter of August 31, 2016. (http://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=67197)
Pray know that I remain,
Laurel Principal King of Arms
OSCAR counts 2 Names and 1 Order Name. There are a total of 3 items submitted on this letter.
| Sub Status