Caid College of Heralds Badge

Minutes of the July 8, 2007 College of Heralds Meeting

Caid College of Heralds Badge

Meeting commenced at 11:18 AM.

In attendance were: Lachlan Crescent, Su Dolphin, Catherine de Winter, Cassandre Nicole Loustaunau, Marion Coral, Cormac Mor, and Anne Cathryn of Wicken Bonhunt.

Upcoming meetings are: August 26, September 23, October 14, November 18 and December 16. The August meeting is the last meeting prior to Crown Tournament. Please explain this to any who may need to know it.

The West kingdom is volunteering to host a Field Herald's symposium for Western kingdoms. Several people in the college have expressed interest in attending.

Unless otherwise noted, all submitters will accept the creation of a holding name, if appropriate. Approved submissions will be forwarded on the September 20, 2007 Letter of Intent.

Angels, Barony of the

Angels, Barony of the. New badge. (Fieldless) A set of seraph's wings Or.

[Name] The group's name was registered "at some point".

[Armory] This badge is to be a populace badge.

We do not know of any examples of seraph's wings, minus the seraph head, being used as a charge. This then is an extension of the example of eagle -> vol or pair of wings conjoined in lure. We request a ruling on whether this is a recognizable charge group, suitable for use in SCA armory.

This does not conflict with Azure, a vol Or, (Brioc Morcannuc, 05/98 via Outlands). There is one CD for fieldlessness, and a second for change in number of wings. Likewise it does not conflict with Gyronny azure and argent, a vol Or, (Kristr{o/}{dh}r Bjarnarson, 03/98 via Ansteorra) for the same reasons.

Badge approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Angels, Barony of the. New badge. (Fieldless) On a set of seraph's wings Or a mullet of six points saltirewise gules.

[Name] The group's name was registered "at some point". This badge is to be associated with Seraphic Star, Order of the, registered 04/81.

[Armory] We do not know of any examples of seraph's wings, minus the seraph head, being used as a charge. This then is an extension of the example of eagle -> vol or pair of wings conjoined in lure. We request a ruling on whether this is a recognizable charge group, suitable for use in SCA armory.

Badge approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Angels, Barony of the. New badge. Gules, on a pall between three vols wingtips outward Or two swords and an arrow points outward Or.

[Name] The group's name was registered "at some point". This badge is to be associated with Seraph, Order of the, registered 08/03.

[Armory] This design does not resemble period style in our experience, but the problems are not so great as to require return.

Badge approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Angels, Barony of the. New order name Soggy Maunch, Order of the and badge. (Fieldless) A maunch Or gouttee de larmes.

[Name] The group's name was registered "at some point".

We see no documentation that "soggy" is a period term. 1722 was the first citation we found. However, sogging appears to be a period term with the submitter's desired meaning.

Unfortunately, even if changed to "Sogging Maunch, Order of the", no documentation was provided and none found which suggests the construction "noun + adjective of a temporary nature" follows any period patterns of order names. This must be returned for more work due to this.

This would be clear of "Maunch Pursuivant" and "Maunch, Order of the", both registered to the East Kingdom by the addition of the adjective.

[Badge] This emblazon has far too many goutes, which reduces their recognizability. This is reason for return. Please advise the submitters to draw the maunch with fewer and larger gouts – 8-10 is a good number.

At the meeting, we brainstormed a few other (simpler) ways to represent the desired meaning in armory. An alternative depiction of this concept might be a maunch barry wavy azure and argent, or a maunch per fess Or and azure, or some such.

Name returned for lack of documentation for the construction. Device returned for redraw.

Cormac Mor. New badge change. (Fieldless) Two torches in saltire Or.

[Name] The name was registered in 02/03.

[Armory] If this device is approved, the submitter would like to release his current badge, (Fieldless) Two torches in saltire argent enflamed proper (Registered 04/03). This is a reworking of his older badge with a far better emblazon, plus a simplification of the tinctures.

While visually similar to the heralds' badge, we feel that this does not conflict with Vert, two trumpets crossed in saltire Or.

Trumpets are period charges. It is difficult to determine whether this shape of torch, the standard for SCA armory, is actually period. In period armory, torches tend to be drawn as rough logs held vertically with the top engulfed in flames, for example in an example from Tirol-Anton Wappenbuch ~1475-1550 ( There is also an example of a torch in the Zurich roll; the arms of Fackelstein, Argent, a torch or flaming gules. A photo of it can be found at (It's second to last on the page, so it may take some time for it to load). This torch is difficult to distinguish in the photograph of the original, but seems to have the "flaming ice cream cone" shape the modern emblazon emulates.

If torches are period charges, and we have nothing indicating that trumpets and torches were considered equivalent in period armory, then this is clear of the herald's badge by X.2.

If torches as we know them are not period charges, then difference must be determined by visual means. In this case, the flames are so significant as to comprise one-third of the charge. The PicDic says that torches are always depicted enflamed, even when it is not explicitly blazoned. Therefore we feel it is reasonable to grant at minimum a clear difference for adding significant flames, and added to the CD for removal of the field, this should be clear of the herald's badge.

Badge approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Calafia, Barony of

Eleanora di Gerardi. New device. Vert, three peacocks in their pride argent.

[Name] Registered 04/04.

[Armory] This is very attractive armory.

Device approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Darach, Shire of

Ismay of Giggleswick. New alternate name Ljúfvina íkorni.

[Name] Submitter's primary name registered 07/99. The submitter desires a feminine name. She will accept minor though not major changes and if changes must be made, she cares most about the unspecified meaning.

Ljúfvina is found in Gierr Bassi p. 13.

íkorni is from Zoëga's A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic

íkorni, m. squirrel. Gierr Bassi lists several examples of animals used as descriptive bynames in Old Norse, for example, brimill (large seal, phoca major, p.20), dýr (animal, deer, p.21), geit (nanny-goat, p.21), kaða (hen, p.24), karfi (carp, fish, p.24), kýr (cow, p.25) and so on...

Name approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Lyondemere, Barony of

Tetchubah of Greenlake. Appeal of kingdom return of new badge. (Fieldless) A human breast azure charged in base with three gouttes argent.

[Name] The submitter's name was registered 05/86.

[Armory] This is an appeal of a return by Crescent 06/07. This badge was returned for conflict with Barry argent and sable, a moon in her plenitude azure (Doniphan non Sequitur, 08/79). The return stated:

There is one difference via RfS X.4.a.iii for removal of the field. According to the submitter's documentation the gouttes are a defining characteristic of a woman's breast, since the example in period armory (the arms of Dodge of Stockport) is never depicted without gouttes. As a defining characteristic, they must be considered part of the charge, not separate charges. This is analogous to a rose proper, which is never interpreted as upon a rose a bezant. Thus we cannot give the second CD via RfS X.4.i for addition of tertiaries. Also, the gouttes are significantly less than half the charge, so one cannot argue that there is a significant change of tincture according to the requirements of RfS X.4.d.

We note that according to the reasoning above, this additionally conflicts with Per chevron Or and purpure, in chief a hurt (Ana Lucia de Andalucia , 04/02) as a fieldless badge can gain no difference for placement on the field. We apologize to the submitter for not noting this conflict previously.

The submitter's appeal is as follows:

The appeal takes two parts. The return states that the gouts are a defining characteristic of the charge; in other words, by definition they distinguish a woman's breast (as a charge) from a roundel. According to RfS X.4.e, "types of charges considered to be separate in period... will be considered different." Since both the roundel and the breast were period heraldic charges, if they are distinguished by the gouts, difference must be granted between them. Only if it can be shown that period heralds would have considered the charges negligibly different may the Society do likewise, and that has not been shown.

If, on the other hand, the breast is considered negligibly different from a roundel, then the gouts play no part in its identification. If the gouts do not define the breast -- i.e., it's possible to use the breast as a charge without the presence of gouts -- then the gouts in this submission must be treated as tertiary charges. (Certainly, if we'd substituted mullets here, there would be no doubt that they were tertiary charges.) In that case, the addition of tertiary charges does count for difference.

In this respect, the return's analogy to a rose's seeding is faulty: for the heraldic rose was often depicted with the seeding of the same tincture as the rose, or even without seeding at all (v. Heralds' Commemorative Exhibition, plate XXIV). In the rose's case, the seeding must be an artistic detail, not a tertiary charge, and certainly not a defining characteristic.

To sum up: if the gouts serve to define the breast as a charge, they must distinguish it from other charges -- and by RfS X.4.e, must provide a CD of difference from a roundel. If the breast is considered negligibly different from a roundel, then the gouts in this submission must be treated as tertiary charges, providing a CD per RfS X.4.i. In either case, this must be clear of the cited conflict with Doniphan.

We note that, in a previous submission of a woman's breast (Meredydd ferch Owain ap Eliseg, LoAR of May 06), a woman's breast proper distilling gouts argent was ruled negligibly different from a plate: "... there is no difference between a plate (that is, a roundel argent) and a woman's breast proper. The goutes count for naught." But in that case, the gouts had extremely poor contrast against the breast, and barely extended past its outer boundary; as the gouts couldn't be seen, it was reasonable to count no difference for them. In this case, the tinctures were chosen to provide good contrast between the breast and the gouts, and the gouts were drawn to be unquestionable tertiary charges. We feel, therefore, that the reasons for the May 06 return do not apply to this submission.

We agree with the submitter that, if a woman's breast and a roundel were considered distinct in period, then there should be at minimum a clear difference between a properly drawn heraldic woman's breast and a roundel.

We question, however, whether this emblazon qualifies as "a properly drawn heraldic woman's breast". The documented example has gouttes, which extend some distance down the pale, essentially doubling the height of the charge (group). But if this is not a properly drawn heraldic woman's breast, then what is it? It is reasonable to interpret this as a roundel azure with some artistic detailing, charged in base with three gouttes. By this interpretation, there should be a CD for the addition of the gouttes, and by removing the field, this is still clear.

While the college would prefer the defining instance of this charge be drawn in a period fashion, we support this appeal.

Device approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Starkhafn, Barony of

Margaret Hepburn of Ardrossan. Appeal of kingdom return of new badge. (Fieldless) A greyhound couchant reguardant azure ermined and collared argent.

[Name] Registered 07/01, via Outlands.

[Armory] This is an appeal of the return by Crescent of her badge submission dated April 1, 2007. Please see text of appeal below for a correct quote of this decision. The text of the appeal is as follows:

I write to you today to appeal to you to overturn the return by Crescent Principal Herald of my badge submission dated April 2007. This appeal is supported by proof that the original submission was returned in error.

My first badge submission was returned by the Outlands College of Heralds in October 2006 with the following comments:

Commenters indicate that while the device itself is clear, the depiction has too many and too small of ermine spots. This issue has caused return by Laurel as recent as May 2006:

Áine Finnólfsdottir. Device. Azure, a pegasus passant argent, a chief Or semy of trefoils vert.

This device is returned for a redraw of the semy of trefoils. Thirty trefoils is too many to place on a chief: drawn so small they become unrecognizable. We'd suggest about two-thirds of them should be removed, leaving seven to ten trefoils. This will allow the trefoils to be drawn larger, which will aid in their identifiability. [May-06]

In April 2007, I submitted my redrawn badge design to the Caid College of Heralds. It was returned for administrative reasons ("lack of funds" paid to Caid). The text of the return reads:

[Armory] The forms indicate this is a resubmission of a return by the Outlands College of Heralds. The original submission was returned there 10/06. It has never been ruled upon by Laurel. The Administrative Handbook IV.B states:

Kingdom of Residence - Submissions must be made through the appropriate heraldic officers as defined by the kingdom of which the submitter is a subject according to Corpora and Board policy. A submission already in process above the local level when a submitter leaves a kingdom may continue to be processed by the kingdom of origin until it is registered or returned by Laurel. In this case any resubmissions must be made through the new kingdom.

The submitter's choices are to resubmit via Outlands or submit as a new submission to Caid, for which a fee is required.

I believe this return to be based upon a misinterpretation of the cited rule. The second sentence applies only to the initial submission, which may be processed by the kingdom the submitter has moved out of, not subsequent resubmissions, which must be submitted through the submitter's new kingdom. While that sentence does not specify what to do in the case that Laurel does not get a chance to register or return the submission due to kingdom return, the default should be that resubmissions are handled according to the sentence preceding it.

Note that the rule specifies neither that the submitter must resubmit via their old kingdom of residence nor that they may not resubmit with their new kingdom of residence.

I respectfully request that my badge submission be forwarded to the College of Arms for consideration. Thank you.

Done by my hand this 7th day of July, 2007, Margaret Hepburn of Ardrossan.

The College of Heralds supports this appeal, with Crescent's apology to the submitter. After extensive discussion with White Stag Herald and Laurel Queen of Arms, it is clear to Crescent that the intent of IV.B is that a submission should be forwarded in this situation, even though it does not clearly state this. We request of Laurel to consider revising IV.B to make it clear and explicit.

Device approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Wintermist, Shire of

Martin FitzJames. New change of device. Per chevron argent and sable, three roses in chevron proper and a sword fesswise argent.

[Name] Registered 01/00.

[Armory] If this is registered, the submitter desires his previous arms, Per chevron argent and sable, a rose chevronwise reversed proper slipped and leaved vert and a sword fesswise argent. (registered 01/00) to be released (form altered prior to submission). [Molto bene! Dolphin]

Device approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Thórbjörn Assa. Indeterminate name submission and new device change. Ermine, two ravens close respectant gules.

[Name] Submitted as Thorbjorn Ulfsson. The submitter's registered name is Thórbjörn Assa (01/92). In July 2004, his name change to Thorbjorn Ulfsson was returned by Laurel:

Aural conflict with the registered name Thorbjorn Olafsson, registered December 1987. The given names are identical. In June 2001, the name Astrid Olafsdatter was ruled an aural conflict with Astrith Ulfsdottir. Therefore, Olafsson and Ulfsson are also an aural conflict."

This submission was accompanied by a "New Name change" form to the same submitted name, Thorbjorn Ulfsson. We are unclear as to the submitter's wishes. If this is intended as an appeal, there should be additional evidence showing the return was in error, which there is none. If this is a resubmission of the Laurel return, then the submitter must make some change to the name to fix the cause of return. This is withdrawn for clarification of submitter's wishes.

Thorbj{o,}rn is found in Geirr Bassi p.16 as a compound given name (Thor + bjorn).

Ulfsson, son of Ulfr, a masculine given name found in Geirr Bassi p.15. This patronymic is formed according to the pattern Grimr -> Grimsson on p.17.

[Armory] The posture of the ravens is a bit more vertical than the typical "close" posture. This position was chosen however in order to draw the ravens as large as possible within the pointed shield shape. In period, a good deal of leeway was granted to the heraldic artist to manipulate charges to make them fit. Given this, we feel this is a reasonable emblazon and should be registerable.

The submitter is advised to use larger ermine spots in the future.

Name withdrawn. Device approved and forwarded to Laurel.

Order of Precedence Notes



Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme and Akagawa Yoshio. A Pictorial Dictionary of Heraldry as Used in the Society for Creative Anachronism. privately published, 1988. [PicDic]

Geirr Bassi Haraldsson. The Old Norse Name. Olney, MD: Studia Marklandica, 1977. [Geirr Bassi]

Zoëga, A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic

Return to the Minutes list
Return to the main Herald's page
Return to the Caid home page

Comments, suggestions or updates regarding this site should be sent to the .

Standard Disclaimer