OSCAR Kingdoms: Trimaris Internal Letters

[ TRIMARIS Home | Trimaris Heraldry | Trimaris Submissions ]

Trimaris Heraldry
Trimaris Submissions



Create Account

MAIL ME my password.


Include LoI Text:
Include Comments:

Trimaris ILoI dated 2016-02-29

Here are the submissions for February.

May the commentary be productive and the criticism constructive!

In Service,

Lord Ephrem Orbeli

Lymphad Herald

Letter Comments:

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:23:45
Comments under my name on this letter are the consensus of the NE Calontir commenting group, consisting this month of Lord Caoimhin McKee, Rouge Sanglier Herald Extraordinary, Lady Rohese de Dinan, Shadowdale Pursuivant, Lady Zaneta Bassegio, Axed Root Pursuivant, and myself.

1: Brighid inghean Chonchobhair uí Néill -New Device

OSCAR finds the name registered exactly as it appears in March of 2008, via Trimaris.

Vert, a dragonfly Or, within a bordure ermine.

Device Comments:

Mayken van der Alst (Jack) at 2016-03-04 12:56:39
A couple of close calls but I don't see any conflicts.

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 17:39:07
I agree with Mayken van der Alst, a lot of close ones but no conflicts.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:24:03
No conflicts found.

2: Eoghan Murray of Atholl -New Name & New Device

Per pale Or and azure, a chevron between three mullets counterchanged.

Submitter desires a masculine name.
No major changes.
Client requests authenticity for Turn of the 16th Century Scotland.

Excerpt from Consultation Notes: "The Murrays have held title throughout...and have occupied land [in]...west...Scotland...in and around Perthshire, Atholl (Athole)."

Given name: Eoghan (1500-1600) - Link acquired from the Academy of St. Gabriel


Surname: Murray (13th-18th Century) - The Peerage of Scotland (1710). George Crawfurd, Esq. (Pages 26-28): Containing an historical and genealogical account of the nobility of that Kingdom.


Name Comments:

Coblaith Muimnech at 2016-03-04 03:13:35
There may be a presumption problem with this name, if the submitter's note is accurate. Per SENA PN.4.B.3, "Names may not contain both a family name used by an important noble family and the area from which that family derives their title or the seat of the family." (http://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#PN4B3)

The source cited for "Eoghan" is Sharon L. Krossa's "Scottish Gaelic Given Names: For Men". The name is indicated as having been recorded in the 14th and 16th centuries, but the recorded forms aren't given. All spellings in the article are normalized, and the preface states, "Currently most entries consist only of citations of raw evidence, with no discussion or evaluation of the nature and quality of that evidence -- extreme caution must be used when using this evidence.. . .As it stands, the entries in this article are best used only as a starting point for further analysis!" (http://medievalscotland.org/scotnames/gaelicgiven/)

The source cited for "Murray" doesn't appear to include any information on period forms of the name. It does indicate the use of some form as a surname by "Sir Walter Murray of Tillibairn" (d. ~1390), "Sir David Murray" (d. ~1446), "Sir Andrew Murray of Arngosk", "David Murray of Strathgeth" (d. ~1509), and "Sir John Murray of Tillibairn" (who "advanced to the Dignity of Lord Murray of Tillibairn, 25 April 1604"), as well as a number of post-period figures, but the sources for that information are not stated.

I see nothing here to support "Atholl" in any form.

I also see nothing to support the construction "[given name][inherited surname] of [placename]" or "[given name][toponymic] of [placename]" as plausible for either Scots Gaelic or Scots names from the 16th century. (I'm just guessing one or the other of those is the intent, here.) Unless I'm missing something in Appendix A (http://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#AppendixA), documentation is required (http://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#PN2C).

If he's looking for a Scots name (which is the closer of the two to what has been submitted), The Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue offers these:

"Ewin Allanson" (1520), s.n. "Chaptan(e" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/chaptane); "Schir Ewin Fawlane" (1526), s.n. "closet n." (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/closet); "The said Ewin. . ." (1566-7), s.n. "Sasteing, Say-sting, -styng, n." (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/sasteing); ". . .the said Ewin. . ." (1548), s.n. "In-, Innormité, -itie, -ity" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/innormite) "Ewin Cambell" (1455), s.n. "browstar(e n." (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/browstare);

"Ellene Murray" (1542), s.n. "Ta(i)ng(i)s, Tongs, n. pl."(http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/taingis); "Johne Murray" (1526), s.n. "Nek n.1" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/nek_n_1); "Gilbert Murray" (1579), s.n. "Monk n." (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/monk); "Agnes Murray" (1561), s.n. "relict n." (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/relict_n)

". . .within the boundis of Atholl. . ." (1576), s.n. "justiciary n.1" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/justiciary_n_1); "He biggit ane were hous in Atholl. . .," (1531), s.n. "wer(e n.1" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/were_n_1)

"Johne Murray of Hingandschaw" (1501), s.n. "shaw n.1" (http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/dost/schaw_n_1) [I don't know whether this is a territorial name; you should find out before submitting it as evidence that the pattern is appropriate.]

Alys Mackyntoich (Ogress) at 2016-03-25 19:49:31
[given name] + [inherited surname] of [locative] is one of the most common naming patterns in Scots. I have no idea why it's not in Appendix A. Here is some data to support the pattern in Scots, as well as documenting <Murray> as a surname. All examples are from the Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707:

Dauid Murray de Gask (Latin, 1445) (http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/1445/9)

Vmfray Murray of Abircarny (Scots, 1479) (http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/1479/10/95)

Williame Murray of Tulibardin (Scots, 1513) (http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/A1513/1)

Andro Murray off Balwarde (Scots, 1560) (http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/A1560/8/1)

The spelling <Atholl> for the place also appears in multiple instances in the RPS. <Johnne, erll of Atholl> appears in a Scots-language document dated to 1567 (http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/1567/7/29/1).

It doesn't solve the presumption issue. But given name + Murray of Athole is certainly a documented pattern.

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 17:19:06
I did not see any conflicts.

As Coblaith Muimnech noted there does need to be documentation presented for "Atholl". Might I suggest you use the (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004896390.0001.000/1.18?rgn=div:view=fulltext) link. It mentions the spelling "Athole" if you run a search for Murray you will find it.

While I do feel this is a valid construction, sena mentions given+pat+loc, but does not mention given+byname+loc which we would hope for. So there should be documentation, as noted by Coblaith Muimnech. Other Languages in the same group do have this pattern so maybe you can try to make an argument from that, but that is not a clear path.

I do not wish to comment on the matter of presumption. My knowledge of the history and language does not allow me to say anything other than Coblaith Muimnech's concern seems legitimate and more commentary by knowledge folks would be appreciated.

Alys Mackyntoich (Ogress) at 2016-03-25 19:53:01
I really need to pester the necessary people about fixing Appendix A re: Scots naming patterns.

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 09:48:47
I have looked at the documentation given and I agree with Coblaith Muimnech. There does not seem to be enough to support the name . I like his suggestions .

Christopher Devereux (Liber) at 2016-03-14 18:33:27
Regarding the presumption, from the January 2008 LoAR:

Submitted as Allison McMurrye of Atholl, the combination of the name Murray or MacMurrey with the location of Atholl is a claim to be the chief of Clan Murray; Atholl is the seat of this clan. Precedent notes:

Baron Bruce covered the issue of pretention in the form of "X of Y" in Scottish names. "We will continue to prohibit the use of a Scots clan name with the seat or territory of that clan (e.g. Cameron of Lochiel), or a surname with the phrase of that Ilk (or its functional equivalent, e.g. Macintosh of Macintosh). That usage, with or without the given name, is the title of the actual chief of the clan or his immediate kin; its use in the SCA represents a direct infringement on actual nobility, and also appears to be a claim to rank, either of which is grounds for return. But by and large, the use of a Scots surname with a Scots placename is acceptable for SCA use." (LoAR March 1993, p. 8) Based on that precedent, [MacLeod of Duirinish] is registrable. [Duncan MacLeod of Duirinish, January, 1994]
So, the presumption issue is a cause for return by precedent.

Christopher Devereux (Liber) at 2016-03-15 11:45:50
That said, we can document Eoghan, forms of MacMurray/Murray, and Athol or Atholl to period (or adjacent gray area).

If the submitter wishes to drop an element, either Murray/MacMurray or Atholl, the name could be worked into a registrable format that complies with the authenticity request.

Alys Mackyntoich (Ogress) at 2016-03-25 19:51:03
A name that combines Gaelic and Scots elements will by definition not be authentic.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:25:51
Agree with Coblaith that, based on the documentation submitted, the surname "Murray of Atholl" is right out. The Murrays are currently Dukes of Atholl, so this may have a presumption issue. The Earls of Atholl in period were not Murrays but the first Murray Earl dates from 1629 and the family holds the titles to this day. No other conflicts found.

Device Comments:

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 17:36:59
Simple and elegant. This feels like Medieval Heraldry! I found no conflicts.

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 09:49:43
This appears to be free of conflict .

Gunnvor silfraharr (Orle) at 2016-03-11 18:18:50
Beautiful armory.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:26:18
Nice clean device. No conflicts found.

3: Shire of Sudrholt -New Badge

OSCAR is unable to find the name, either registered or submitted.

(Fieldless) on a plate, a triskele throughout sable, between three acorns proper, all within a bordure sable.

Correction to Badge (2016-Mar-24 12:03:50): [This submission originally included an image of the petition. It has been removed at the request of Lymphad - Istvan]

Badge Comments:

Coblaith Muimnech at 2016-03-04 03:26:10
Shouldn't the legal names of the signatories be redacted from that image?

Milesenda de Bourges (Triskele) at 2016-03-04 10:03:40
Normally, yes. However not sure how that works with a petition. Someone higher up help? If it needs to be redacted we, obviously, will.

Seraphina Delphino (Golden Dolphin) at 2016-03-17 00:12:59
I would email Istvan and ask him to remove the petition, it only needs to be in the packet, if the submissions goes up to Laurel.

Tanczos Istvan (Non Scripta) at 2016-03-24 12:20:26
I removed it. Yeah, it really only needs to be in the packet, marked private. Mention you have one in the LoI, you should be good.

Mayken van der Alst (Jack) at 2016-03-04 09:41:23
Baby herald here so bear with me :)

The default color for an 'acorn proper' is brown in society heraldry if I'm not mistaken. So in this case we actually have 'acorns vert capped proper.' I don't see a bordure. The outline of the plate is too thin to be considered a 'bordure.'

Corrected blazon: "Fieldless" On a plate, a triskele throughout sable between three acorns vert capped proper two and one."

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 14:19:51
I don't seen any conflicts.

I agree proper acorns are brown. (http://heraldry.sca.org/coagloss.html#proper) If a border is wanted, a redraw would probably help it pass. The boarder may not be necessary. Neat Badge.

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 09:53:49
Isn't proper for acorns brown ? Nice design . I dont see any conflicts but I do question the coloration of the acorns.

Seraphina Delphino (Golden Dolphin) at 2016-03-17 00:20:47
As roundels are forms of heraldic display, we don't register fieldless charged roundels.

From the April 2002 LoAR Solveig Throndardottir
The lozenge was originally blazoned as fesswise, but, as noted in the February 2002 LoAR, "Because lozenges could be drawn with various proportions in period, including a square set on its corner (which can be neither fesswise nor palewise), it does not make sense to distinguish different proportions of lozenge in blazon."

We do not register fieldless badges which appear to be independent forms of armorial display. Charges such as lozenges, billets, and roundels are all both standard heraldic charges and "shield shapes" for armorial display. The SCA has never protected armory consisting of plain tinctures, except for two examples that are particularly famous: the (important non-SCA) arms of Brittany, Ermine, and the (important non-SCA) flag of Libya, Vert. If we do not protect, and have never protected, the arms Or, we should not be concerned about the possible appearance of a display of Or by using a single lozenge Or as a fieldless badge. This is parallel to our practices concerning inescutcheons of pretense. To quote RfS XI.4, Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor, "Similarly, an augmentation of honor often, though not necessarily, takes the form of an independent coat placed on an escutcheon or canton. Generally, therefore, a canton or a single escutcheon may only be used if it is both uncharged and of a single tincture." This rule demonstrates that an uncharged escutcheon shape in a single plain tincture does not appear to be a display of an independent coat of arms.

Therefore, a "shield shape" which is also a standard heraldic charge will be acceptable as as a fieldless badge in a plain tincture, as long as the tincture is not one of the plain tinctures that is protected armory in the SCA. This explicitly overturns the precedent "We do not normally register fieldless badges consisting only of forms of armorial display, such as roundels, lozenges and delfs in plain tinctures, since in use the shape does not appear to be a charge, but rather the field itself" (LoAR January 1998).

Note that this does not change our long-standing policy about such "shield shape" charges used in fieldless badges if the tincture is not plain (thus, divided or with a field treatment), or if the charge is itself charged. Such armory will continue to be returned for the appearance of an independent form of armorial display.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:30:22
OSCAR can't find the shire name because it was registered 2/11 as "Suðrholt, Shire of". Their web site uses the spelling shown in this submission. Do they want to change the registered name?

We agree that a fieldless badge with a primary charge of a shape normally used for armorial display, such as an escutcheon or a roundel, is considered to be a fielded badge. Here this is properly "Argent, a triskele throughout sable between three acorns vert capped proper." If they really want a bordure, it needs to be drawn much wider. No conflicts found with or without the bordure.

4: Uliana Kovenskaia -Resub Device

OSCAR finds the name on the Trimaris LoI of January 31, 2016 as submitted.

Per bend azure and Or, a bend sable, between a sun in its splendor Or, and a phoenix azure.

Device Comments:

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 17:30:19
Looks OK with the rules. No conflicts on a cursory search.

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 09:55:33
I dont find any conflict here. Sharp design . No rules issues that I can find

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:32:08
No conflicts found.

5: Viktor Drago Volkov -New Name & New Device

Per bend sinister engrailed sable and Or, a sun in its splendor Or, and an increscent gules.

Submitter desires a masculine name.
No major changes.
Culture (Slavic, Russian) most important.

Viktor Found at: http://heraldry.sca.org/names/paul/va.html

Paul Goldschmidt's Dictionary of Period Russian Names - Section VA

Viktor (m) -- "conqueror."

Viktor, martyr. 1356. [Lev 14]

Drago: Found at: http://heraldry.sca.org/names/paul/d.html

Paul Goldschmidt's Dictionary of Period Russian Names - Section D

Drago. 1293. [Mor 77] Drago (m) -- "dear."

Volkov: Found at: http://www.goldschp.net/archive/zoonames.html

Zoological Bynames in Medieval Russia

By Paul Wickenden of Thanet

Wolf -- Biriukov (1552) [27]; Volkov (c1495) [400]

Double byname allowed under: SENA, Appendix A: Patterns That Do Not Need Further Documentation by Language Group, Russian/East Slavic:

Paul Goldschmidt's Dictionary of Period Russian Names - Section VA


Name Comments:

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 16:40:33
No conflicts, the closest I found was Viktor Vukov (Middle 2005), the third name element clears the conflict.

The documentation looks good, all the sources are as represented. This looks like a well constructed Russian Name!

Isabel Margarita de Sotomayor y Perez de Gerena (Ensign) at 2016-03-08 07:36:45
No conflicts

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 10:02:35
Documentation seems to support the names and the timeframe. Nice construction.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:32:48
Docs check out. The patronymic may also be found at http://heraldry.sca.org/names/paul/vl-y.html. No conflicts found.

Device Comments:

Taran Saraev (Coracle) at 2016-03-05 17:34:03
Looks to be clear of conflicts.

Diderick van dem Mere (Archive) at 2016-03-09 10:06:59
I dont see any conflicts for this . Nice example of heraldry for this area.

Gawain of Miskbridge (Green Anchor) at 2016-03-22 10:33:14
No conflicts found.

OSCAR counts 2 Names, 4 Devices and 1 Badge. There are a total of 7 items submitted on this letter.