The Armour Archive

I am a herald, and I wish we could change it so that names didn't need to be unique and arms would only be checked against your kingdom of residence.

Donal Mac Ruiseart wrote:

JvR wrote:I like the LOTR and D&Dish names in the Armorial.

Don't get any ideas. Those names are from earlier days when the rules were less stringent. People who have such names can keep 'em but the rule allowing names from Tolkien and the like was rescinded years ago.

LOL I am not going to do one of those. It was just a slight bash towards those names in there.

Hell I doubt my name will get approved and its period but I dont really ever plan on getting any awards so its not a big deal to me anyway.

Submitted mine at a Kingdom event in March but from what I hear is it takes years to get it run through the mill anyway. I may not even be playing then or its possible I may grow sick of my name by then.

ursulageorges wrote:Derian and I could grant permission to our hypothetical son to be Derianus le Breton. But we couldn't give him permission to be Derian le Breton.

But what if his name is registered as Derian Derianson le Breton?
That seems to be the way real names are distinguished anyhow:
William Smith
William Johnson
William Willson
William Cooper
William of Brooklyn
Could there be a William Johnson Cooper of Brooklyn
versus William Johnson Smith of Jersey
?

I don't know about period english practice but in many languages you normaly have Name Patronimic Other (which became Surname) -
So Ivan Ivanovich Kuznetz (Ivan, son of Ivan, the Smith)
or Ivan Ivanovich Medved (Ivan, son of Ivan, the Bear)
or Ivan Ivanovich Medvedev (Ivan, son of Ivan, of the Bears)

Or, period Jews from Arabic countries at least, had a "son of" going back several generations and ending with a sort of Surname based on place, ancestor or tribe:
Nahum ben Gershom ben Moshe ben Ariel Rahmani
Nahum ibn Gershom ibn Moshe ibn Ariel ibn Rahman ha Cohen
(and notice there how you can swtich between arabic patronimic "ibn" and hebrew patronimic "ben" ...or you can also use the aramaic "bar" for more variety)
and you can double the first names (and then you can get a whole lot of permutations)
Nahum Tzvi ibn Gershon Ariel ibn Moshe ibn Ariel Zev ibn Rahman ha Cohen

And, since most of the name varies in everyday usage anyhow,
your son may register
Derian Derianson
but commonly use Derien le Bretton

Without meaning any trickery, I use my name like this -- I barely even remember what I registered, but may use
Nahum ben Gershom (hebrew with patronimic)
Nahum Kuzari (hebrew with origin place/nationality name)
Nahum haZev (hebrew with animal nickname)
Naum Gershovich (russian with patronimic)
Naum Khazarin (russian with origin place/nationality name)
or perhaps Naum Zhidovin (russian with nationality)

or just Nahum of Brokebridge

Anyhow - I'm not a big fan of the SCA heralds' skill --
If I remember correctly, the version of my name that I registered is actualy wrong -- I researched and proved it and they accepted it
but I have since realised that I missed some linguistic nuances (fairly broad nuances actualy)
and would realy shudder to see that version "immortalized" in an award scroll
(lucky for me that this is not bloody likely )
And I have noticed this issue time and time again with Russian and Hebrew SCA names.
...and what's realy frustrating is when (on some board) folks ask about a Russian name and some SCA-herald type gives advice based on some SCA-name lists and SCA articles and I try to point out to him (the herald) that the combination is just not good usage in the language and culture
and in the end the cossack-wannabe-newby walks away with some silly sounding SCAdianism.

Or the opposite - a frustrating argument trying to convince an SCA-herald type that a particular range of hebrew names is perfectly proper because he was relying on a thoroughly a-historical article by some Israeli rabbi (even though contentions in the article were directly contradicted by a number of practices I pointed out to him - including a period name list that he himself compiled)

JvR wrote:Submitted mine at a Kingdom event in March but from what I hear is it takes years to get it run through the mill anyway. I may not even be playing then or its possible I may grow sick of my name by then.

Nah, usually less than a year. I think mine took 11 months, and it was during a period when the heralds were extremely busy. My badge took less time.

-Derian.

Norman wrote:And I have noticed this issue time and time again with Russian and Hebrew SCA names.
...and what's realy frustrating is when (on some board) folks ask about a Russian name and some SCA-herald type gives advice based on some SCA-name lists and SCA articles and I try to point out to him (the herald) that the combination is just not good usage in the language and culture
and in the end the cossack-wannabe-newby walks away with some silly sounding SCAdianism.

Well, like all things in the SCA it's slowly improving. There are excellent resources by groups like the <A HREF="http://www.s-gabriel.org/">Academy of Saint Gabriel</A> (technically not SCA, but most if not all contributors are SCA members, as are most clients). What your random herald may know is very spotty, but most heralds know to do a few things:

1 - Check good names sites like the academy.
2 - Ask other heralds via mailing lists; there are experts in many areas out there.

Now, I have no idea about the status of Russian or Hebrew names in the SCA. Certainly, non-romance languages add significant difficulty, as the number of people who can translate things is smaller.

If you have sources for Russian or Hebrew names, I'm sure the people at the academy would love to have them for the <A HREF="http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/">medieval names archive</A>. Just like with armour, you can't <i>make</i> people do things right, but by guiding them to the right sources, the likelihood that they will becomes much higher.

-Derian.

Having lived in 5 kingdoms (and received armigerous awards in 3 of them) it seems funny to make it a "per kindom basis".

Thomas

My SCA Name is: Alexander Clarke

15th Century English.

I have done very minimal research on it, but from what I have done it seems like it should be fine.

I have never met anybody, else as of yet, with that name.
And If and when I get it passed I will write a letter to the College of Heralds stating that there if someone picks the same name I will allow conflicts.

I am one of 3 registered Snaebjorns in the entire SCA. Another of which is or was a regular on this board and has since changed his name when he joined the 14th century Mafia.

I am a herald in the SCA. I don't like the name uniqueness clause but I'm not going to bother fighting it because, like most traditions in the SCA, you will never get enough support. This group is dedicated to its self made traditions.

I specialize in Norse names though. Its probably one of the easiest name systems to specialize in too. *grins* Patronymics and the occassional nickname. The fun part is explaining to people that without evidence of the name or some thing similar having been used you can't register a nickname. I think that is pretty much shit though. I just tell people to register something easy to get passed then go by what ever they want.

"15th Century British. "

No such entity then.

England, Wales, Ireland or Scotland, Britain, not, it is important to note that because it also gives you more options.

Any objections to requiring continued membership to maintain uniquness? That way when somebody quits the SCA their name and device would revert to 'public domain'? Perhaps after a decent grace period? 5 yrs?

benz72 wrote:Any objections to requiring continued membership to maintain uniquness? That way when somebody quits the SCA their name and device would revert to 'public domain'? Perhaps after a decent grace period? 5 yrs?

There are many. Again, even if someone dies the SCA still protects their name(s) and armory.

The idea behind this campaign is to change things one step at a time. Sweeping rules revisions, while they may seem like great ideas, are unlikely to go anywhere.

-Derian.

Snaebjorn Hakonarson wrote: I don't like the name uniqueness clause but I'm not going to bother fighting it because, like most traditions in the SCA, you will never get enough support. This group is dedicated to its self made traditions.

Just like the old tradition of protecting all heraldry ever made? That one got changed...

-Derian.

Out of interest, how does the organisation decide on how a name was pronounced?

Documentation for pronuncation is almost non-existent and is based on conjecture.

The same words were spelled differently, as were names, and we can guess that they were, for example Henry is believed to be pronounced as the French, ie as in Harry, rather than a simple hardening of the n, mainly due to the way that henry is spelled, eg herry, herri, henry

Who makes that judgement and on what basis?

earnest carruthers wrote:Out of interest, how does the organisation decide on how a name was pronounced?

Documentation for pronuncation is almost non-existent and is based on conjecture.

The same words were spelled differently, as were names, and we can guess that they were, for example Henry is believed to be pronounced as the French, ie as in Harry, rather than a simple hardening of the n, mainly due to the way that henry is spelled, eg herry, herri, henry

Who makes that judgement and on what basis?

Conjecture? Not entirely. There are many ways to reconstruct what language sounded like; transliteration is the most obvious one to me.

Phonetics and orthography are the two main branches of study in linguistics that can be applied here (how things were pronounced, and how they were written down). I do not do either, but I know there are techniques for studying the shift in pronunciation over time.

Decisions on names and armoury are made by a group of commenting heralds, with one having the final say in each area (Pelican and Wreath respectively). Each month a new batch of submissions is discussed in detail, both examining the historical and SCA precedence that may apply.

-Derian.

Reminds me of the first time I met Maryek from Pennsylvania. No not Maeryk but Maryek (or some such spelling variation). Not that I knew then or know now what either of their last names are/were but it was handled quite simply:

"Oh, so you're Maeryk..."
"No not that Maeryk."
"Oh, Ok then."

If squire "I'm also a Rhino" moves to land of "I'm the original Rhino" the names technicly don't conflict because "also a" != "the original" so even lacking blanket to conflict forms or permission to conflict there is plenty of opportunity for confusion. The rule for name uniqueness dosn't really protect anything.

I'm personally of mixed feelings on this. There are people who want a certain level of uniqueness. They may never earn a title that makes them unique but it's nice to know that someplace there is a name, not a SSN, that means a specific person. On the flip side if anyone wants to be historic enough to choose a name BECAUSE it is a common historic name then they shouldn't go hoarding 'John Smith' all to themselves.

I guess I'm comfortable with the optional blanket to conflict form although it could just as easily be added as a check-box to the name and device submission forms. I imagine that given the propensity of SCAdians to register more then one device over their careeiers and the hereditary aspects of period heraldry... One day the SCA will have more 'unique' examples of heraldry then there are documentable period examples.

Sean

If it worked like giving permission to conflict with a device I see
no reason to oppose this.

Make it something I have can choose to do or choose not to do.

I do not want it to be an automatic default of "I don't care if
someone conflicts with my name/device."

EDIT: AND if choosing to do it once does not make it fair game
for anyone from then on.

"Conjecture? Not entirely. There are many ways to reconstruct what language sounded like; transliteration is the most obvious one to me. "

Of course, there are means and ways of making guesswork, but it boils down to deduction, not proof as such. To proscribe a name based on historical pronunciation seems rather harsh and artificial, given that it is entirely possible that the same name may well have been pronounced differently in different places, even if spelled the same, which is what I was getting at in the first instance.

I wonder what the heralds are basing their criteria on.

earnest carruthers wrote:"Conjecture? Not entirely. There are many ways to reconstruct what language sounded like; transliteration is the most obvious one to me. "

Of course, there are means and ways of making guesswork, but it boils down to deduction, not proof as such. To proscribe a name based on historical pronunciation seems rather harsh and artificial, given that it is entirely possible that the same name may well have been pronounced differently in different places, even if spelled the same, which is what I was getting at in the first instance.

I wonder what the heralds are basing their criteria on.

Name conflict in the SCA has traditionally involved sound, as well as spelling. Heralds use their best extrapolation of the medieval pronunciation to make sound comparisons for a couple of reasons. One is that the SCA is supposed to be trying to re-create the Middle Ages. The other is that using the historical pronunciation is actually the most consistent available standard. It's easier to figure out what the correct historical pronunciation is of, say, the Middle Irish name Caillech Domnaill than it is to identify and protect every single way that a modern SCA member might pronounce or mis-pronounce that name.

How do heralds figure out how a name was pronounced? The short answer is that determining how the sound of words changed over time and identifying general patterns in those changes is what historical linguists do for a living, so heralds rely on the conclusions of linguists. (Several of the most respected name heralds have Ph.D.s in linguistics.)

In the case where there was more than one way to pronounce a specific spelling of a name in a specific time and place (is the final 'e' in Wode silent or not? for instance), the SCA will generally protect both pronunciations.

--Ursula Georges.

I'm in favour of maintaining the uniqueness requirement, though I would like to see some sort of sunset provision releasing a name after a given period after the death of the holder.

Donal Mac Ruiseart wrote:I'm in favour of maintaining the uniqueness requirement, though I would like to see some sort of sunset provision releasing a name after a given period after the death of the holder.

Implementing a sunset provision is a lot like making name uniqueness optional: it won't happen unless a significant number of SCA members make it clear to the College of Heralds that this is how they want their own registrations to work.

If you'd like to release your own name and armory after your death (or will them to another SCA member), here's what you do.

You can find a standard Heraldic Will with suggested wording here:

http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/admin.html#APPENDIXD

(Scroll down past the letters of permission to conflict.)

Copy the heraldic will text into your favorite word processor, and fill in your name, SCA name, and the details about what you'd like to do with your registered items.

If you need to check what you have registered, use the search form here:

http://oanda.sca.org/oanda_np.cgi

(Searching for Ruiseart works nicely.)

Print three copies of the letter-- one for your own records, one for your kingdom's files, and one for the College of Arms files.

Look up the mailing address for submissions in your kingdom (unless you live in Caid, in which case you can PM me for my address, and I'll take your forms to the next Caid Heralds' meeting). Put two copies of the signed letter in an envelope. Address it. Add a stamp, mail it. (You DO NOT need to send the heralds money in order to file a heraldic will.)

--Ursula Georges.

Further to the pronunciation, I have as it happens a sample of a French grammar for English readers, mid 15thc, Paston letters, the first para explains some silent and sounded letters. It is only an extract, the full set of papers was published in about 1962, so that will be interesting to follow up.

Donal Mac Ruiseart wrote:I'm in favour of maintaining the uniqueness requirement, though I would like to see some sort of sunset provision releasing a name after a given period after the death of the holder.

My solution was 30 years from the date of registration, and you would be allowed to reregister it to maintain your ownership.

The potential glory inherant in that situation would be awesome.

Angusm0628 wrote:Think on this... Do you really want to see a small army of red armoured guys named "Nissan Maxima" comin at ya across a bridge??

@Ursula: I don't want the name released immediately on my death, but would want a reasonable time (maybe 10 years) to pass before it's freed up so that it wouldn't appear that someone is stealing my name. I rather doubt that anyone could get it anyway, because under the current rules of authenticity I don't think it would pass.

Donal Mac Ruiseart wrote:@Ursula: I don't want the name released immediately on my death, but would want a reasonable time (maybe 10 years) to pass before it's freed up so that it wouldn't appear that someone is stealing my name.

You can make a heraldic will that states precisely that.

-Derian.

Ingvarr wrote:Has to be a documentable spelling. I'm not really sure how much difference there has to be from any other name.

Not to derail, but I've always found this particular requirement to be rather tiresome. Medieval scribes were notoriously bad spellers, often simply spelling something like it sounds. Spellings also varied from region to region, and for many other reasons. Add to this the fact that most people could neither read nor write their own names throughout much of our period, and the issue of what should be "documentable" gets even sillier.

Gwydion Caithnes wrote:

Ingvarr wrote:Has to be a documentable spelling. I'm not really sure how much difference there has to be from any other name.

Not to derail, but I've always found this particular requirement to be rather tiresome. Medieval scribes were notoriously bad spellers, often simply spelling something like it sounds. Spellings also varied from region to region, and for many other reasons.

The trick here is "like it sounds". Different languages have different rules for which letter represents which sound. A medieval name or word may not have had a single fixed-in-stone spelling, but there were spellings that made sense and spellings that would have seemed crazy. And which spellings would have seemed crazy varied from language to language and place to place.

For instance, the letter 'Y' wasn't used in medieval Gaelic. So if you pick a modern American spelling of an Irish name-- Caitilyn, say-- you will get something that is glaringly not medieval.

The SCA's rules do actually allow you to register spelling variants that aren't documented. But you have to prove that you have put together a plausible variant spelling based on *medieval* data, not modern ideas of which letters sound the same.

--Ursula Georges.

The SCA's rules do actually allow you to register spelling variants that aren't documented. But you have to prove that you have put together a plausible variant spelling based on *medieval* data, not modern ideas of which letters sound the same.

True. The problem comes when opinions on what is "plausible" come into play. Mileage varies significantly, here, and logic or rationale is often scarce. And I say that as a former member of a kindgom college of arms.

I talked to a different Herald the other day, sent in my money and everything.
took 2 days.

She looked for conflicts for both my arms and my name and couldn't find any. we'll see what the Eastern Heralds have to say though.

if it passes I am going to write a letter allowing conflict along with a clause that will allo for my name to be reused 10 years after I quit the SCA (should that happen, and a 10 year grace should I want to return) and 5 years after I die.

MJBlazek wrote:if it passes I am going to write a letter allowing conflict along with a clause that will allo for my name to be reused 10 years after I quit the SCA (should that happen, and a 10 year grace should I want to return) and 5 years after I die.

So you want the SCA College of Arms to add yet another layer of bureaucracy and record-keeping to what is already a very cumbersome process, keeping track of whether you are a member, and when you die?

Sounds like overkill, to me. (Pun intended...)

You can already write a heraldic will to dictate what happens to your name(s)/heraldry when you die, not for when you "quit the SCA" (is that even really definable?)

Regarding using documentable names and spellings... it seems much better to me to use names based on evidence than conjecture. Besides, if your favorite spelling is not documentable, you can always register an accurate spelling and then use your non-documentable one. There is no heraldic police.

-Derian.

Derian le Breton wrote:Besides, if your favorite spelling is not documentable, you can always register an accurate spelling and then use your non-documentable one. There is no heraldic police.

I've been telling my clients that for years. But I'll continue to argue that the term "accurate spelling" is somewhat of an oxymoron.

I think you mean "documentable spelling." That is to say, being able to point to an example of the name being spelled a certain way in an actual period document. Which may be the only measure that we have beyond conjecture, but is still open to weirdness because of the scribal issues I mentioned above.

Derian le Breton wrote:Regarding using documentable names and spellings... it seems much better to me to use names based on evidence than conjecture. Besides, if your favorite spelling is not documentable, you can always register an accurate spelling and then use your non-documentable one. There is no heraldic police.

-Derian.

Some of us chose names early in our SCA career without enough knowledge of medieval naming practices. Sadly the CoH won't register Blackrune anymore, so I have a name that I submitted that makes the heralds swoon and go all happy and squishey on the inside but use a name that makes them cringe.

And I have yet to run into a herald of any flavor that can pronounce my name correctly.

I changed mine after the 9000th field herald decided to read the card as "Karen".

Mine was even the Anglicized version of Ciaran.

While I like having a unique name and device I can see a problem.

The SCA is over 40 years old now. How many nanes and devices are in the system? How many people have not gotten a membership or attended an event in 10 years? 20? 30?

We are quickly filling up the books with unusable names and devices. Also with devices there are rules of conflict so you can not be close to another and still pass.

The question is what to do about it? I have seen knights come back after 10 plus years of retirement and get active again. Some people also have new personas but are still active so there would be confusion if someone else started using their old name or device even if they buried it 10 plus years ago.

Awards is not the answer though. I have been around over 20 years but have not received any kingdom award in over 15 years, my lady has been around 10 and never received even an AOA. Does this mean our names should be up for grabs? Membership should have a bit to do with it. Say if you do not renew in 10 years then you are reset. This will take care of the death issue. If you want to keep your name and device active then renew every 5 years or so, Just in Case. In the case of multi personas if it is tied to the mundane name vs membership then all will be protected or lost on one renewal.

Just a few random thoughts,