Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 22:01:35
The way the masoning is handled on the top row of "bricks" obscures the heck out of the line of division. We also have color-on-color with hte masoning, so this will need an Individually Attested Pattern documented to proceed, or the submitter can choose instead to use white or yellow masoning.

Also, embattled should have square embattlements instead of shallow rectangles.

The per fess line of division is low. The embattlements should straddle the fessline, not be completely below the fessline.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 12:45:43
Yes, the bricks need fixing. What also needs fixing is how we treat masoned.

There is no period foundation I have seen for the SCA version of masoned, using a contrasting color for the mortar. The defining instance of masoned is Von Wirsberg from Siebmacher, 1605. Image #1 is various depictions of Von Wirsberg armory, from a roll of 1480, where it is simply "Per fess embattled gules and argent," to the later images (I don't know the date on the stone rendering) showing masonry. The brick design persists in later cadet coats, and I would describe it as "argent, masoned," because it is clearly drawn as bricks, but also clearly done with no intent of introducing more contrast than is strictly necessary to give you the idea that it is made of bricks. It is therefore more like diapering, but unlike diapering, we have ample evidence that the design is fixed.

So, the screamingly period option for the submitter is image #2, Per fess embattled gules and sable masoned. The mortar should be as close to black as it can be while still allowing us to see the pattern.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-16 15:22:33
Let's also note that the black-and-white line drawing is none of those things. That will be a bounce right there.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:40:59
The full discussion of the related bynames and their meanings didn't make it over from VHP Discord, so here it is:

<Masculus> Tengvik p. 351, from Latin masculus "'des Mannes würdig, kräftig, tüchtig, mutig' [of a man worthy, vigorous, efficient, courageous ]... perhaps corresponding to OFr masle or masculin "male:, cf. <Wliliam le Male> or <Maculus>, Percy Cart, <Henry Maskrlyn>"

<Trec> Tengvik p. 367, from Old English Þræc "force, courage, violence". "The nickname probably means 'the vigorous, violent one' or the like."

Since we can mix Old English and Old Norse, another tack to take would be Old Norse <karlsefni>, borne by a man named Þorfinnr in Landnámabók and Eiríks saga rauða, c.1000. "Man's equal", one who has the makings of a (talented) man, one who evokes sterling qualities. E. H. Lind Personbinamn col. 189 s.n. notes that in many places in the sagas, Þorfinnr is addressed simply as "Karlsefni" as if it were a given name instead of a byname. Efni is a neuter noun, so it won't change form in a feminine name.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 13:11:29
I think the name is well-documented (and very cool). My only question is whether this needs an article, but looking at Tengvik, that does not appear to be the case. At some point, at least in English (and it appears, in later Latin), virago picked up a pejorative usage, though initially, it was the word given to describe the Amazons, literally 'man-like' from vir 'man' +‎ -āgō (comparative suffix).

I don't think either element has ever been registered, so there's certainly no conflict issues.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-12 10:46:54
Note that the serpent is kind of squished... it has the room to be wider, and it would be kind to let the submitter know that as a primary charge, the serpent can proudly take up as much space as it has available to it.

This is not a bar to registration.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 16:51:04
I find no conflicts.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-11 22:21:41
(Irrelevant to registration: I'd enjoy announcing this persona to the populace.)

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 19:15:13
Docs check for most items, though "la Grande" is actually in the Nuns article under Venice, not Florence. That's the element that bugs me the most. The article states: There are two literal descriptive bynames attached to existing family names:

la grande "the big" la piccolo "the very little"

Juliana doesn't say what family names they are "attached" to or how, specifically, they appear in the full name. As far as the Gritti are concerned, the family was broken up into 7 branches, but not until almost 1800. The only Gritti I can find that bear an additional element are joined families, e.g. Gritti Morlacchi. Without more information on the usage, I'm reluctant to plop those descriptors after any family name. In particular, both examples use the article "la," which is feminine singular, and without knowing what the family name was, I don't know if it needs to alter to agree. (It's also a really short step in Italian to something that looks like an honorific, e.g. i grandei 'the great ones'.) I don't feel we have enough information to apply that element in any way other than how it was found, and I don't see that Juliana references the raw data.

You will not find justification for three generations of literal patronymics in Appendix A, but you will find it in Ary's article "Names from Arezzo, Italy, 1386-1528", where she documents the pattern gdgdgdgf (10 examples, 3.7%), e.g. Bartolomeo di Giovanni di Piero di Bartolomeo Scodellari. https://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/italian/arezzo.html

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-11 22:24:45
Just to add the cap for the XLoI:

(Fieldless) In pale a lily of the valley vert flowered argent issuant from a fountain

(Irrelevant to registration: I have no idea why I find this particularly lovely.)

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:37:48
These are coprimary, I'd list them as conjoined rather than having the flower issuant.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-11 22:27:42
In case a single commenter's opinion at this level has any weight, I believe there ought to be a DC between them.

What say you all?

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 20:45:23
Not sure why the call for sword-and-dagger. We have registered examples of two springs crossed in saltire, and registered examples of a sprig crossed in saltire with something completely dissimilar, like a sword. I don't see what the problem is with two sprigs that happen to be from different plants.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-11 23:03:03
Starting with the quibble: That's not how "insole" is conventionally spelled. Which is moot, because that's not what it means, either. The OED along with several others online has as its first meaning 'the inner sole of a shoe or boot', and as a longtime shod native speaker I testify that doesn't mean the inner curve but the inner surface, separated from the ground.

"Instep" is 'the upper surface of the human foot between the toes and the ankle' which covers too long a part of of the curve anyway. But although these flat soles do not have an "arch" like many modern shoes, the foot wearing them does.

Moreover, for us "two" generally indicates two identical charges. So I suggest

(Fieldless) A pair of Roman sandals palewise heels to chief conjoined at the arch-points argent.

Saying merely conjoined would often produce the emblazon, though sometimes a conjoining also at the heels.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:32:17
This would be the defining instance of a Roman sandal in our heraldry. As such, we need a clear description, a period depiction, and preferably an indication that the term offered is appropriate for the charge.

As to the first and last, our trusty OED shows "Roman" meaning 'of ancient Rome' to be used in Old English. It defines "sandal" as

A kind of shoe with an open-work top, originally and still frequently consisting of a sole fastened by straps or thongs passed over the instep and round the ankle.

a sandal of a type worn by the ancient Romans; (esp.) one in which the upper is formed of leather thongs and extends some way up the calf of the leg

The shoe is somewhat like the roman sandal, a soal with straps over the instep and one between the great toe and the second holding it on the foot.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 18:11:35
All the problems already discussed with "sandal", but chiefly, EVERY piece of footwear we have in heraldic usage is viewed from the side, NOT from above. The only thing in that orientation is the "shoe sole" which obviously only exists that way.

I lobbied for talaria, but it was blazoned as "winged sandal" when registered. I don't know why it's worse to have to look up a word than it is to have an inexact emblazon, but there you are. I also think of "Roman sandals" as having long wrapped bits going up the leg, which is obviously not possible to depict without a leg in them.

The caliga is the closest thing I can think of that we know is a Roman thing, to the point that foot soldiers were "milites caligati". (Caligula reportedly got his name from wearing little tiny soldier shoes.) Image #1 is an extant shoe and a reproduction. So caliga(e) is fine, IN PROFILE.

Image #2 is a variety of Roman sandals worn by people of different stations, just driving home that "Roman sandal" isn't a single style, any more than a boot, a brogue, and a slipper are the same.

Image #3 is a result from putting "ladies' strappy sandal" into Google. (These are on clearance at Target.) There is nothing particularly Roman about them.

I think submitter should choose a design that we can connect with a specific Roman style, and that we actually use that word. I also believe that we need them depicted in profile unless support for a heraldic depiction as viewed from above can be found.

Iago ab Adam (Iago ab Adam (Boar)) at 2021-10-19 00:43:38
Here are 3 images from Armas o blasones de familias diferentes (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España, Mss 1378), http://bdh.bne.es/bnesearch/detalle/bdh0000134167, pp. 426-8

The library gives a date of "between 1601 and 1700?", but they throw that date at a lot of things that are clearly earlier. The manuscript was written by Jerónimo de Bolea, who died in 1593, so despite the date range they give it's almost certainly period.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:42:22
The name is correctly formed.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:40:16
I find no conflicts for <Biǫrn inn írski>.

Iago ab Adam (Iago ab Adam (Boar)) at 2021-10-11 23:01:56
The base device was registered in September of 2009 (via Ansteorra):
Quarterly azure and pean, on a lozenge argent a bear rampant sable.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:42:48
The augmentation is that standard for the kingdom.

Juetta Copin at 2021-10-12 07:20:17
Does the augmentation have acceptable contrast with the base coat?

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 22:39:05
The problem with the plan is that too many of the names have the same derivation, either patronymic/matronymic or locative.

In English, you can only have one parental given name. (Currently watching Andromeda, with Nietzscheans who give their lineage like racehorses, Tyr Anasazi, out of Victoria by Barbarossa. Not in period England.) Also, check out DMNES; there are lots of Ed- choices that are more gender ambiguous than Edgar. I think both Edmer and Edwy are better choices; if I didn't see that Edwy was a guy, I would assume -wig was feminine. They also seem to have dropped Ead- to Ed- much earlier.

Edbro is an inherited surname coming from a locative, so again, you're doubling up with place. It's unlikely that you would have an inherited locative and a literal locative in the same name. Also, you can't assume that a name at Family Search ending in -bro is derived from anything like the same root without more of a trail of breadcrumbs. Again, there are plenty of surnames in Ed(d)- to use in that position that are superior for gender-neutral, but they won't have the "dude bro" humor impact.

I have not seen a literal matronymic with an inherited surname, so without support, there's no way to get Edwine in there with the rest.

You can't claim lingua societatis for a placename based on the modern derived surname, when the placename became Yeldland and Yeldham later in period and afterwards. There are seriously more than a dozen English placenames whose modern forms are transparent to "Ed", including Edstone, Edlestone, Edmondsley, Edmonsham, Edwardstone, Edwinstowe, Edworth... a lot.

A Latin Edwy Edwine de Edelond, Edmer Edwine de Edelond, or Edgar Edwine de Edelond are all fine for 11th-13th c., with a given name, a literal matronymic, and a locative.

16th c., Edgar Edwin Edds is not even unlikely. Something like Edgar Edwin Edds of Edworth is certainly registerable.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-17 21:37:57
I did not find conflicts. Closest I saw was: Hope Baldwin "Per pale purpure and argent, a pair of wings counterchanged." 1 DC for changing half the tincture of the charge. 1 DC for the fieldless gimme.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-17 21:50:26
I find no conflict. The attitude seems to clear many potential conflicts.

Magnus von Lübeck at 2021-11-11 21:05:17
(Fieldless) An enfield passant azure charged on the shoulder with a quatrefoil argent.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:43:18
The name is correctly formed.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:53:59
I find no conflicts for <Finnr Biarnarson>.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:58:20
Does not conflict with <Gwen verch Llywelyn> Jun 2014, nor anything else I can find, but submitter may wish to be aware of that Atlantian registration.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-12 23:19:04
The "standard" form is not found in the data set for that article; that is the modern spelling. It seems to be considered close enough for registration purposes, but if submitter is interested, the spelling Llewelyn is much more likely.

Tang's 13th c. Lewelin, Lewelyn Tang's 16th c. Llewelin, Llewelyn Talan's 16th c. Llewellyn

Morgan & Morgan, s.n. Llywelyn, have examples of forms in Lle- still in use in the present day.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 00:59:28
I urge more visible branches, but I believe this is registerable.

Juetta Copin at 2021-10-12 07:23:33
I see the three charges as co-primary.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:14:36
The tree is definitely not in chief. Also, there may not be enough root structure to be considered eradicated.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:45:31
You never get <hinn> or <inn> with a noun byname. It still means "the smith" or "smith" - either translation is valid. The name is formed correctly.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:02:32
I find no conflicts for <Hákon the Blacksmith>.

ffride wlffsdotter (Morelle) at 2021-10-12 02:04:01
As the submitter is interested in a name from Sweden, Nordiskt runnamnslexikon gives the Old East Norse form of the name as Hákon.
That might be a slightly more relevant example to use?
http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Asprakochfolkminnen%3Adiva-582

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:11:22
This incurs a step from core practice for "a central charge on a gyronny arrondi field drawn with the corners of the field in the center of a gyron" (App. G, Motifs.) But I see no others.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:16:51
Consider http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2013/09/13-09cl.html#3, "From Wreath: Bordures -- Can You Really Be Too Thin?", which, having reviewed period practice, concluded: "In general, only when a bordure could be confused with a thick outline of the escutcheon, or when any charges on it are hard to identify, is it too thin. We will continue to register thin bordures without comment."

I find this on the registerable side of being "confused with a thick outline of the escutcheon" but wonder if I am being too lenient. What say you all?

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:48:41
Displayed birds holding things hold them out clear of the body (compare the seal of the President of the United States, as an example). These hammers are hard to identify when they are tucked into its wingpits.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:17:25
I have trouble seeing this as anything other than a two-headed eagle.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-14 10:14:10
A quill pen has its feathers stripped back far enough so a hand may comfortably hold it. These very well may be reblazoned as feathers by Wreath, so if them being "pens" is important, the submitter should consider a slight redraw..

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:26:55
These peacocks are in default position according to "From Wreath: Concerning Peacocks", http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2007/04/07-04cl.html, so we can lose a word:

Or, two bendlets sinister sable between two peacocks respectant proper.

We could lose a few more syllables by calling the ordinaries scarpes, but I'm reluctant to make that change from a correct submission. What say you all?

Morina O'Donovan at 2021-10-11 22:29:13
Submitter should note that their name source for Hotaru uses a different kanji than the one depicted on their device. Hotaru as cited in the documentation is a male name. While it is also a female given name in the modern, submitter has not documented it as such in our period.

Worth noting also is that female names in period were rarely written in kanji, but were instead written in hiragana alone.



And now I see that the submitter indicated a desire for a masculine name, which requires much more than given here.

A masculine name would consist, as registered in the SCA, of a myouji (family name), a yobina, and a nanori. Both the yobina and the nanori are given names, but one is commonly used by family and friends (the yobina) and the other (the nanori) is more formal.

With the Tale of Genji for example, Genji itself is a yobina, not a nanori. Hotaru appears to come from Chapter 25, "Hotaru", in which fireflies play an important role. It is possible, even likely, that the name Hotaru is a nickname given to the character based on this event, rather than either a yobina or nanori. Without having the full text to hand, it would be impossible to say. Certainly this source: https://www.japanese-wiki-corpus.org/literature/Hotaru%20(The%20Tale%20of%20Genji).html seems to believe that to be the case.

Choi Min at 2021-10-24 21:30:14
Hotaru is 100% how that kanji is pronounced, so that part is good. The kanji used on the device is the old version of firefly, and not the modern one, and I find it easily readable, so that should also be fine to use.

Since the submitter has indicated they are fine with the name being registered with feminine name source support, that might be the easier justification route. As Morina has brought up, Hotaru is a name used for the character in the book because he is one of multiple characters with the same surname, and no given name is specified, so he is referred to with the chapter title: Hotaru. However, if we are justifying this as a nickname rather than a formal given name, Hotaru might be doable as "[nickname] of [clan name]" format. I am newer to the SCA's submission process and am not sure if there is a rule against registering only a nickname. Unfortunately, I do not think we could break down the sound of Hotaru to be justified with other kanji, I tried looking for names starting with just "Ho-" and am only getting kanji that provide the sound "Hoshi" "Hori" "Hou" et cetera. If someone can find a kanji with just the "Ho-" sound, I was thinking we could pair it with the common masculine ending "-tarou" but that would be changing the ending sound of the name and probably not what the submitter wants. As you can see, registering is a woman's name, with support from period women's names practices, as mentioned in the documentation, might be easier to justify this name in period.

Sláine báen Ronán (Diademe) at 2021-11-09 19:37:07
Sorry, as a person completely un-versed in Japanese culture I must ask...are none here Star Trek fans? Kobayashi Maru?? That was my first thought.

Based on commentary above this is probably a completely plausible name for the time/place, but as soon as I hear it I'm on the deck of NCC-1701

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:49:25
Where is the documentation for the period form of the kanji, and what does that kanji mean?

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:35:34
Has the submitter any argument against the chi-rho/rune precedent, or does she merely wish to have the precedent affirmed several months from now?

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:11:05
The cited conflict IS a conflict. Nothing between one symbol and another. Submitter might consider on redesign that it's a lot harder to get a clean image of kanji with light on dark. The image of the kanji in the documentation (image #1) is much neater than the emblazon. Recent registration of Fujiwara no Tsukime was pended for a month to clean up the depiction of the kanji. https://oscar.sca.org//index.php?action=145&id=103963

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:49:57
The name is correctly formed.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:39:21
I find no conflicts for <Kolfinna Biarnardottir>.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:47:14
I find no conflicts for <Liam Seamus Mac Sweeney>. I note that the <Mac Sweeney> argument was made and accepted from https://oscar.sca.org/index.php?action=145&id=65272 for Arryn Mac Sweeney.

Magnus von Lübeck at 2021-10-12 06:42:01
No relationship conflict found registered.

Ines Alfón (Blanch Tyger) at 2021-11-07 17:11:29
This says he is ok with the patronymic for Seamus, wouldn't it be closer to what he wants with Liam MacShemus MacSweeney (or Liam m'Shemus MacSweeney per the m' listed in the http://medievalscotland.org/kmo/AnglicizedIrish/ under the 1550s to 1590s Anglicized Irish)?

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:50:17
This is color on color and does not have sufficient contrast.

Iago ab Adam (Iago ab Adam (Boar)) at 2021-10-11 23:11:57
These chevrons aren't interlaced - this is a chevron inverted surmounted by a chevron. The trumpet is inverted, which should be blazoned. So I think we'd make this something like:

Azure, a chevron inverted surmounted by a chevron vert fimbriated sable, overall in saltire a rapier and a straight trumpet inverted Or

Which means that in addition to the contrast issues noted by Orle, this also has two overall charge groups, disallowed by SENA Appendix I.D: "There can be only one overall charge group in any design."

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:24:47
For redesign, image #1 is a chevron and chevron inverted interlaced. There's a natural space for either the rapier or the trumpet fesswise in chief.

Sigrun Sveinungsdóttir í Biarká (Sigrun de Birca) at 2021-10-16 17:16:15
Okay The draw is in error by me, I did not interlace proper - on discussion with the client can I redraw -Azure, a chevron sable voided vert and a chevron inverted interlaced sable voided vert, a straight trumpet fesswise in chief Or. - this should correct the issues at hand - with color, interlacing and charges .

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:48:27
I find no conflicts for <Losaneta Valeta>.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:27:36
Docs check.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:53:01
I find no conflicts for <Machteld van den stienhuse>.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 16:59:36
I did not find conflict.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 01:58:30
Since both "lemon" and "tart" go back to c1400 in English (per the OED), the joke seems very likely period.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:51:58
Since female cardinals are brown, we either have to call these male cardinals proper or cardinals gules marked sable.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:36:14
We'll need a little better documentation of the cardinal. There are many different species of cardinals with a range of colors and patterns and we don't register the binomial names so, I don't think we can go with 'proper'. We'll also need better documentation of the critter in period, especially as a defining instance. While evolution may take a while, migration can happen very quickly. The OED has the earliest listing as 1702. This particular type of bird may have been called the Virginia red-bird, which is listed in the OED as early as the grey period (1649).

Iago ab Adam (Iago ab Adam (Boar)) at 2021-10-13 19:45:51
Despite the submitter's wishes, this is definitely not the defining instance of a cardinal; two of them appear in the O&A.

The defining instance appears to be the device of Dennis Landhammer (September of 1990 via Ansteorra), Or, a cardinal close to sinister gules within a bordure invected sable.

Then, 27 years later, we have the device of Gregor the Vigilant (February of 2017 via the East, attached), Argent, on a bend sable between a brown bull's head cabossed proper and a cardinal gules, three Maltese crosses palewise argent, which was registered with the only comment on the bird being "There is a step from period practice for the use of the cardinal, a New World bird."

Note that Gregor's cardinal is marked identically to that in the current submission, and was blazoned as 'gules'.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:52:27
We need some documentation that the letters in the badge are in a period hand.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 17:11:06
DMF has: ...car lesdiz de l'ost estoient tant affamez, les joes velues et si pendans de maleureté qu'ilz avoient longuement enduré que plus n'en povoient, et la pluspart estoient sans chausses et soulers, pleins de poux et d'ordure. (ROYE, Chron. scand., I, 1460-1483, 123).

Sans chausses et soulers 'without hosen and shoon'. Chauce is certainly _A_ spelling of the word found in period, but by far the most common is chausse(s). The word is nearly always plural, because they are. I don't find Sanschausses to be implausible.

That said, there is no getting around that rayne is a valid spelling for reine 'queen'. Also, Sanschausses pretty much translates as 'barefoot', and if you Google Barefoot Queen, Barefoot Princess, Barefoot Contessa, etc., you will find that it is a really popular trope, either for a person putting on airs, or a noblewoman who has fallen below her station. The test for using a given name that is a rank is whether it makes sense to translate it as the rank, and this still does. She needs a patronymic surname like Girard that can't be construed as anything but a surname. She can still have barefoot, i.e. Rayne Girard (dit) Sanschausses, but I think another element is critical.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-17 20:44:26
I did not find conflict. I found two items of a single amphibian interacting with a single leaf (surprisingly) and they are both clear.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:56:35
<Máni> is not a descriptive byname at all. It's a masculine given name. We find it in a prefixed patronymic for a man called <Mána-Ljótr>, who is mentioned in Landnámabók, Eyrbyggja saga, and Sturlunga saga. Ljótr was the son of Máni (†1031). See Finnur Jónsson Tilnavne and E.H. Lind Personbinamn.

He could be either <Mána-Sævarr> or <Sævarr Mánason>.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:13:37
I suppose this is technically clear of incurring a step from core practice for "a central charge on a gyronny arrondi field drawn with the corners of the field in the center of a gyron" (App. G, Motifs.) But even if that applies, I see no other.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:15:36
As colored, I find the charge unidentifiable. What say you all?

Looking at the b&w, I suspect that (Fieldless) A panache of peacock feathers proper with vert and Or would succeed.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:41:45
I agree with the identifiability issues.

Iago ab Adam (Iago ab Adam (Boar)) at 2021-10-13 10:45:04
I find it just as identifiable as period examples of the same charge. For example here's a grey period panache of peacock feathers dated 1609, from the Stammbuch of Daniel Opitz aus Pöggstall (Niederösterreich Landesarchiv, HS StA 1467), p. 109

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 16:29:54
Image #1 is documented submitted with the recent successful registration of a panache of peacock feathers (image #2 is documentation of the term in French):

Lavinia du Bois. Badge. Argent, on a panache of peacock feathers proper eyed gules a camel statant Or, in base a crescent azure. While we have used the term panache in order names using the pattern of being named after heraldic charges, this is the first instance of the charge used in SCA armory.

A panache is a tuft or plume of feathers, especially as a headdress or on a helm, and may be found, charged and uncharged, in crests found in Wappen der zu Regensburg zur Reichsversammlung (1594, https://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/bsb00011882/image_89), the Ortenburger Wappenbuch (1466-1473, https://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/bsb00001755/image_128 and https://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/bsb00001755/image_129), as well as Wappenbuch (1540, https://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/bsb00001649/image_28). We allow items only attested in crests to be used as heraldic charges: "The bassinet is shown containing a swaddled infant, as in the crest of the Earls of Derby, mid-15th C." [Eẃa of Coppertree, June 2019, A-Æthelmearc].

A panache is granted a DC against a single feather. Given the variety of ways multiple feathers may be arranged, we decline to rule at this time regarding conflict against multiple feathers or fans. http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2020/09/20-09lar.html

The registered design is roughly fan-shaped, as in the docs, so I think this needs another feather on each side of the top row, plus a LOT more internal detailing. Peacock feathers in a single tincture are always problematic.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:17:09
It requires a certain exercise of natural faith to believe the wolf is paly wavy azure and argent. What say you all?

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:57:09
The name is correctly formed.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 17:33:53
I did not find conflict.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 17:31:07
I did not find conflict.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:23:07
Needs another indefinite article. And just a tree should have the roots ordinarily seen aboveground visible. So:

Per chevron azure estencely argent and Or, in fess a pine tree vert couped sustained by a bear rampant sable

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 01:20:45
Why is the bear climbing the Christmas tree? In the snow? I know we used to have issues with the weight of maintained charges, and I'm not sure what the bear is exacting doing with the tree, but sustaining isn't it. The coat of arms of Madrid (image #1) has a tree/bear duo, that is a little more natural. Ditto the supporters of Berwick-on-Tweed (image #2). Submitted design is going to be awkward with an inherently triangular tree being held by an upright bear, but there's got to be something that doesn't hide an entire bear leg. And speaking of hide, they have perfectly obscured the line of division, such that it could be per fess, or a mount.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:42:59
The per chevron division is so obscured that it's hard to make it out at all.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:31:30
Regarding the last point made in the headmatter: The problem with a whole badger is that it can be read as a supporter. But I believe this is moot.

Because this open book in no way resembles a display of "Per chevron azure and vert" or any other per chevron field. I expect the entire discussion in the headmatter is left over from a consultation preceding but not applying to the current submission and should be stricken for the XLoI.

Incidentally, I urge showing more azure in the side sections of the binding, but believe the current emblazon is registerable.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:57:47
The name is correctly formed.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:37:05
I find no conflicts for <Steingrímr þunnskeggr>.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:57:54
The name is correctly formed.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:49:16
I find no conflicts for <Þórir Biarnarson>. But it is notable that <Þorir Asbjarnarson> Jan 2016 (via Æthelmearc) differs minimally in sound and visually by 3 letters.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:54:46
I find no conflicts for <Thyra of Bjornsborg>.

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-10-11 21:58:44
I really have a hard time seeing the enflaming, because we expect a peacock feather to have those wispy filaments.

Etienne Le Mons (Sea Stag) at 2021-10-13 10:44:33
There are some definitely identifiability issues with the enflamed feather.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:54:11
Titus and Furius are supported in Simple Guide, and Lupus is supported in Cognomina of Roman Soldiers.

We have a Titus Furius Verus and a Titus Furius Victorinus, but nothing closer. They are probably cousins, what with being in the same gens.

Mālik ibn Jinnī (formerly Basil Dragonstrike) (Lions Heart) at 2021-10-27 20:04:26
Documentation is excellent, though it would be well to point to "A Simple Guide to Imperial Roman Names" by Ursula Georges for the formation of the name.

I didn't find any conflict.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 02:57:01
The letters are certainly in an appropriate period hand, but impossible to identify (though easy enough to guess) in the color emblazon. I blame the hues chosen. What way you all? Must this as is be returned?

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2021-11-11 09:26:54
Tertiaries go last. Let's make this: Or, on the blade of a gladius inverted between in fess a wolf's head erased and a trident head gules the letters SPQR Or, on a chief gules an eagle Or.

As a suggestion to the submitter, that chief has TONS of room. When you look at period chiefs of allegiance to the Holy Roman Empire, you get the eagle with its wings outstretched to either side taking up all the room in the chief. Your eagle should do the same.

Michael Gerard Curtememoire at 2021-10-12 03:01:34
Submitter's current device is (Aug 2014), Per chevron azure and argent, two zebras passant contourny and a peacock in its pride proper.

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:48:41
We tried. I could support a feminine Wulfgarde (from Uuolfgardis), but just nothing masculine with the D.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 17:21:14
Consider: Roesia de Grey Vert, a badger rampant Or maintaining a rose argent, barbed, slipped and leaved sable. I believe SENA Appendix I. E. would make this clear, but I welcome another opinion.

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 17:10:27
I didn't find any conflicts.

Sláine báen Ronán (Diademe) at 2021-11-09 20:32:23
Why are they burning this book?

Brian O'hUilliam at 2021-10-19 17:04:52
No conflicts found.

Magnus von Lübeck at 2021-10-21 08:27:30
Blazon as: "Quarterly sable and gules, an open book and on a base enarched Or a mullet of five greater and five lesser points sable."

Adelaide de Beaumont (Pympernell) at 2021-10-13 00:41:27
There should absolutely be a DC between a demi-sun and a ray. What probably DOESN'T is what Guillim shows as being an alternate depiction for Aldam, a pile wavy issuant from dexter chief (image #1 and #2). I therefore conclude that the defining property of a ray of the sun is that it stretches most of the way across the field, which a demi-sun does not.

Magnus von Lübeck at 2021-10-21 08:02:01
From Mistholme s.n. Sun.
A "ray of the sun" is a demi-sun issuant from the edge of the shield, with one ray elongated to cross the field. The arms of Aldam, 1632 [Guillim2 120] explicitly state the ray's direction, and this must be done in Society armory as well; the illustration shows a ray of the sun issuant from dexter chief (and therefore bendwise).

Magnus von Lübeck at 2021-10-21 08:05:21
February 1996 LoAR, A-Atlanta
Pascal Brendan Merredy. Device. Vert, a ray of the sun bendwise Or, in sinister chief a chalice argent.
The charge is a period one, and can be found in Parker, p. 491, and Guillim (1679 ed.), p. 83. It consists of a quarter sun issuant from dexter chief, issuing one very large ray bendwise across the field.