1. Compatibility.
- All names and armory shall be compatible with the period and domain of the
Society.
The Society for Creative Anachronism studies pre-Seventeenth Century Western
Culture. The period of the Society has been defined to extend until 1600 A. D.
Its domain includes Europe and areas that had contact with Europe during this
period. Usages documented to have occurred regularly prior to that date within
that domain shall be automatically considered compatible unless they have been
specifically declared incompatible by these rules, Laurel precedent, or a
policy statement of the Board of Directors. Usages not so documented may be
defined as compatible by these rules, Laurel precedent, or a policy statement
of the Board of Directors. In all cases, the burden of proving compatibility
shall lie on the individual making the submission or that individuals duly
constituted representatives.
2. Offense.
- No name or armory will be registered that may be offensive to a significant segment of the Society or the general population.
No submission will be registered that is detrimental to the educational purposes or good name of the Society, or the enjoyment
of its participants because of offense that may be caused, intentionally or unintentionally, by its use. See Part IV, Offensive Names, and Part IX, Offensive Armory.
3. Inappropriate Claims.
- No name or armory will be registered which claims for the submitter powers, status, or relationships that do not exist.
No submission will be registered that could confuse or offend members
of the Society or the general population because it expresses or
implies some claim that is not true. An explicit claim contains an
overt statement of the claim in the submission; an implicit claim
requires that its nature be inferred from the submission. A name and
piece of armory may reinforce each other and appear to make a claim
that is not perceived in either item by itself. If someone reasonably
educated in period and modern history and culture would perceive a
claim, that claim will be held to exist even if it is unintentional.
a. Conflicting Claims
- A name or piece of armory that creates a false impression of the identity of
the submitter will not be registered.
Someone may not claim to be another, either directly by using a name or armory
that is identical to anothers, or by unmistakably claiming close relationship
to an individual who is in fact unrelated. See Part V, Conflicting Names, and
Part X, Conflicting Armory.
b. Presumptuous Claims
- A name or piece of armory which expresses or implies presumptuous claims to
status or powers that the submitter does not possess will not be registered.
No name or armory will be registered that could be
considered presumptuous and thereby cause offense to a significant segment
of the Society. See Part VI, Presumptuous Names, and Part XI, Presumptuous Armory.
PART II - COMPATIBLE NAME CONTENT
Every word in a Society name must be compatible with period naming
practices, as is required by General Principle 1a of these rules. This
section defines the categories of words that the College of Arms has
generally found to be compatible.
1. Documented Names.
- Documented names, including given names, bynames, place names, and valid variants and diminutives formed in a period manner,
may be used in the same manner in which they were used in period sources.
The name "Bucephalus", although it is documented as the name of Alexander the Greats horse, should not be used as a name for a
human. Pronunciation and spelling variants are linguistically valid if formed according to the rules for such variants in the
language of the documented name. For example, the alternation of "C" and "K" at the beginning of names is a well-documented
feature of Welsh. Therefore, both "Ceridwen" and "Keridwen" would be permitted, even if only one of these forms had been found
in period sources. "Qeridwen" would not be permitted, since "Q" does not alternate with "C" and "K" in Welsh.
2. Constructed Names.
- Documented names and words may be used to form place names, patronymics, epithets, and other names in a period manner.
Constructed forms must follow the rules for formation of the
appropriate category of name element in the language from which the
documented components are drawn. For instance, the standard male
patronymic in Old Norse consists of the possessive form of the fathers
name joined to the word son, like Sveinsson is the son of Svein. The documented Old Norse given name
Bjartmarr could be used in this construction to form Bjartmarsson, even if this particular patronymic was not
found in period sources. Similarly, German towns on rivers regularly use the name of the river with the word brück ,
like Innsbrück, to indicate the town had a bridge over that river. A new branch could use the documented German name
of the river Donau to construct the name Donaubrück.
3. Invented Names.
- New name elements, whether invented by the submitter or borrowed from a literary source, may be used if they follow the rules
for name formation from a linguistic tradition compatible with the domain of the Society and the name elements used.
Name elements may be created following patterns demonstrated
to have been followed in period naming. Old English given names, for
instance, are frequently composed of two syllables from a specific pool
of name elements. The given name Ælfmund
could be created using syllables from the documented names Ælfgar and Eadmund
following the pattern established by similar names in Old English.
Other kinds of patterns can also be found in period naming, such as
patterns of meaning, description, or sound. Such patterns, if
sufficiently defined, may also be used to invent new name elements.
There is a pattern of using kinds of animals in the English place names
Oxford, Swinford and Hartford, and so a case could be
made for inventing a similar name like Sheepford. No name will be disqualified based solely on its source.
a. Invented name elements may not consist of randomly arranged sounds or characters.
Use of components of name elements without reference to a period naming pattern, such as combining the syllables of
Ælfgar and Eadmund to form Ælfmunead, will not be allowed. Similarly, patterns from one
language or tradition may not be applied to elements from a different language. The existence of the two syllable pattern
in Old English cannot justify combining syllables from the Spanish names Pedro and Jose to invent Pese.
Elulol and Myzzlyk, which create nonsense syllables and link them without reference to any period pattern, are
also not acceptable.
b. Invented given names may not be identical to any other word unless a strong pattern of use of a class of words as
given names in the same language is documented.
Although China, Random and Starhawk have been used as given names in recent fantasy literature, they may
not be registered without evidence that names of countries, adjectives, or epithets were regularly used as English given names
in period.
4. Legal Names.
- Elements of the submitters legal name may be used as the corresponding part
of a Society name, if such elements are not excessively obtrusive and do not
violate other sections of these rules.
This allows individuals to register elements of their legal name that cannot be
documented from period sources. The allowance is only made for the actual legal
name, not any variants. Someone whose legal given name is
Ruby
may register
Ruby
as a Society given name, but not
Rubie
,
Rubyat
, or
Rube
. Corresponding elements are defined by their
type, not solely their position in the name. This means a person with the
legal name
Andrew Jackson
could use
Jackson
as a surname in his Society name in any
position where a surname is appropriate, such as
Raymond Jackson Turner
or
Raymond Jackson of London
, not just as his last name
element.
5. Registered Names.
- Once a name has been
registered to an individual or group, the College of Arms may permit that
particular individual or group to register elements of that name again, even
if it is no longer permissible under the rules in effect at the time the
later
submission is made. This permission may be extended to close relatives of the
submitter if the College of Arms deems it appropriate.
Only the actual name element
from the originally registered submission is covered by this permission. For
example, if an individual had registered a surname from a fantasy novel that
has no relation to period naming before such names were restricted, that
surname could be retained if that submitter decided to change his given name,
even though it might not be acceptable under these rules. He could not
register other surnames from the same novel, however. The College of Arms
might also agree to register this surname to the original submitters
children. This allowance will not be granted for submitters other than the
original owner under any other circumstances.
PART III - COMPATIBLE NAMING
STYLE AND GRAMMAR
All elements of a name must be correctly arranged to
follow the grammar and linguistic traditions of period names, as is required by
General Principle 1b of these rules. This section defines the requirements for
arranging acceptable words into a compatible name.
1. Name Grammar and Syntax.
- All names must be grammatically correct for period names and follow
documented patterns.
Standard grammatical rules for a language will be
applied unless documentation is provided for non-standard usages in period
names from that language. Names should generally combine elements that are
all
from a single linguistic culture, but a name may be registered that combines
languages. As a rule of thumb, languages should be used together only if
there
was substantial contact between the cultures that spoke those languages, and
a
name should not combine more than three languages. Each name as a whole
should
be compatible with the culture of a single time and place.
a. Linguistic Consistency
- Each phrase must be grammatically correct according to the usage of a
single language.
For the
purposes of this rule a phrase may consist of a single word (
Heinrich
,
Calais
) or
of a grammatically connected series of words (
the
Garter
,
the Dragons Heart
,
with the Beard
,
von
Königsberg
) in a single language. Although it seems to mix French or
Latin with English, the phrase
de London
is
documentably correct usage in the written language of Anglo-Norman England
and can therefore be registered. If a later form of a language differs
radically from an earlier form, the two may not be considered a single
language; thus, Old English and Early Modern English are different
languages. In the case of place names and other name elements frequently
used in English in their original form, an English article or preposition
may be used. For example,
of Aachen
might be
used instead of the purely German
von Aachen
.
2. Name Style.
- Every
name as a whole should be compatible with the culture of a single time and
place.
a. Personal Names
- A
personal name must contain a
given name
and at least one
byname
; each of these
components will be called a
name phrase
. A
byname
is any name added to the
given name
to identify its bearer more precisely.
Most period names contained no more than three name phrases; as a rule of
thumb a personal name should not contain more than four name phrases. (A
documentable exception is Arabic, in which longer period names can fairly
easily be found; an example is
Abû 'Abd Allâh
Muhammad ibn Isma'îl ibn Mughîrah al-Bukhârî
'
Muhammad
, father of
'Abd
Allâh
, son of
Isma'îl
, the son of
Mughîrah
, the Bukharan. )
i.
A byname may be one
of
relationship
,
like a patronymic or metronymic:
filz Payn,
Johnson, Bjarnardóttir, Guärúnarson, des langen Dietrich bruder
brother of
the tall Dietrich,
ingen Murchada
'daughter
of
Murchad
,
Smythwyf, Mac a Phearsain
'son of the parson,
abu Saîd
'father of
Saîd
.
ii.
A byname may be a second
given name
; in most
European cultures during most of our period this is a patronymic byname:
John
William
= John
Williamson
. Late in period in some cultures it
may be the second part of a double given name:
Gian Giacomo
Caroldo.
iii.
A byname may be
locative
, a byname of
origin
or of
residence
: Hubert
of York
, Jack
London
, Heinrich
von Hamburg
, William
atte Wode
, Robert
Undertheclyf
, Matthias
de Flandre
; Alphonse
le
Picard
, Dirk
der Brabanter
, Adam
(le) Flemyng
, Wautier
Alleman
, Herman
Münstermann
. Names of residence include
sign names
taken from
signs on buildings:
atte Belle
'at the [sign
of the] Bell,
zur Krone
'at the [sign of the]
crown,
zum blauen Esel
'at the blue Ass.
These are extremely rare in English but not uncommon in German.
iv.
A byname may describe
occupation, status, or office
: John
Bowwright
, Hans
Schneider
, Jehan
(le)
Changeur
, Maud
Webster
, Nicolaus
Ankersmit
, William
Parson
, Serlo
le Reve
, Adam
(le) Freman
.
v.
A byname may be a
descriptive nickname
: Osbert
le Gentil
,
Skalla-
Björn 'bald, Conrad
Klein
'small,
Klein
Conrad, Robertus
cum Barba
'with the beard, Ludolf
metter langher nese
'with the long nose, Henry
Beard
, Rudolfus
der
Esel
'the Ass, Gilbert
le Sour
, John
Skamful
, Thorvaldr
inn
kyrri
'the quiet, Iain
Camshròn
'hook-nose.
vi.
Finally, a byname may be a
sentence, oath, or phrase
name
: Geoffrey
Likkefinger
, Adam
Brekeleg
, Rudolfus
Drinkwasser
, Otto
Dumernyt
'Do nothing to me!, Nickl
Lerenpecher
'Empty the tankard, Serle
Gotokirke
, John
Falleinthewelle
, Godeke
Maketwol
'Make it well, Katharina
Gottvergebmirs
'God forgive me for it!, Richard
Playndeamours
'full of love, Henry
ffulofloue
, Petronilla
Notegood
, Hans
mornebesser
'better [in the] morning.
Some
bynames may fit into more than one category: Edward
Pepper
may be named for his temper or for his
occupation as spice-merchant; Herbert
le Knif
may have a notable knife, or he may be a cutler; and
Notegood
, like other phrase names without verbs,
can also be considered a descriptive nickname.
Lion
may be descriptive or an abbreviated form of
atte Lyon
'at the [sign of the] lion.
b.
Non-Personal Names
- Branch names, names of orders and awards, heraldic
titles, and household names must consist of a designator that identifies
the
type of entity and at least one descriptive element.
Common designators are
Shire
,
Barony
,
Guild
,
House
,
Order of the
, and
Herald
. The designator must be appropriate to the status of the submitter.
Society branches may use the designator established by Corpora for their
category of group or any authorized alternative form. The designator may be
included as part of a one-word name if the authorized form was used that
way
in period, like the English word
shire
, which
appears as a part of the one-word name
Worcestershire
.
i. Branch Names
- Names of branches must follow
the patterns of period place-names.
Some good Society examples are: Shire of
Carlsby
,
Standonshire
, Barony of
Jararvellir
, College of
Saint Carol on the Moor
, all of which closely
resemble period place-names.
ii. Names of Orders and Awards
- Names of orders
and awards must follow the patterns of the names of period orders and
awards.
These
are often the names of saints; others are similar to sign names (see RfS
III.2.a.iii). Some examples are: the
Order of
Saint Michael
, the
Order of Saint Maurice and
Saint Lazarus
, the
Brethren of the Sword
, the
Order of the Garter
,
La Toison dOr
(the
Order
of the Golden Fleece
), the
Order of the
Golden Rose
, the
Order of the Star
, the
Order of the Swan
,
La
Orden de la Jara
(the
Knights of the Tankard
), the
Order of Lilies
.
iii. Heraldic Titles
- Heraldic titles must
follow the patterns of period heraldic titles.
These are generally drawn
from surnames (
Chandos
Herald,
Percy
Herald), place-names (
Windsor
Herald,
Calais
Pursuivant,
Sicily
Herald), names of
heraldic charges (
Crosslet
Herald,
Estoile Volant
Pursuivant,
Noir Lyon
Pursuivant), names of orders of
chivalry (
Garter
King of Arms), and mottos (
Ich Dien
Pursuivant,
Esperance
Pursuivant).
iv. Household Names
- Household names must follow
the patterns of period names of organized groups of people.
Possible models include Scottish clans (Clan Stewart
), ruling dynasties (
House of Anjou
), professional guilds (
Bakers Guild of Augsburg
,
Worshipful Company of Coopers
), military units (
The White Company
), and inns (
House of the White Hart
).
PART IV - OFFENSIVE NAMES
Offensive names may not be registered, as is required by
General Principle 2 of these rules. Names may be innately offensive from their
content, like
John Witchburner
. A name element can
also be offensive because of its usual associations or the context in which it
is placed. Names may be considered offensive even if the submitter did not
intend them to be. This section defines the categories of names that are
generally considered offensive.
1. Vulgar Names.
- Pornographic or scatological terms
will not be registered.
Obscene
terminology, sexually explicit material, bathroom or toilet humor, etc. are
considered inherently offensive by a large segment of the Society and general
population.
2. Offensive Religious Terminology.
- Magical or
religious terminology that is excessive or mocks the beliefs of others will
not be registered.
Magical or
religious words are not usually inherently offensive, but may offend by
context. For example, although the name
Jesus
is
common in Spanish, the juxtaposition of it with reference to other religions,
like
Jesus the Imam
, could be considered a
mockery. Use of an unusual number of religious elements might disturb both
devotees and opponents of a particular religion.
3. Stereotypical Names.
- Allusions to derogatory
ethnic, racial, or sexual stereotypes will not be registered.
Such
stereotypes, even if documented from period sources, are innately offensive.
This is true whether the stereotype is inherent in the usage, such as
Pedro the Dago
, or created by context.
4. Offensive Political Terminology.
- Terminology
specifically associated with social or political movements, or events that
may
be offensive to a particular race, religion, or ethnic group will not be
registered.
Even if
used without prejudice in period, such terms are offensive by their modern
context. Thus, names that suggest participation in pogroms or repressive
movements, like
Judenfeind
, which is a period
German name meaning
enemy of the Jews
, may not be
used.
PART V - NAME CONFLICT
Names may not be too similar to
the names of others, as is required by General Principle 3a of these rules.
Names need to be distinguished from each other both in their written form and
when heard in announcements. This section defines ways in which submitted names
may differ sufficiently from protected names.
1. Personal Names.
-
Personal names must be significantly different from other protected personal
names.
a. Difference of Name
Phrases
– Two name phrases are considered
significantly different
if they differ
significantly in sound
and
appearance. Name
phrases that are not
significantly different
are
said to be
equivalent
.
Variant
spellings of the same word or name, no matter how radical, are not
considered significantly different unless there is also a significant
difference in pronunciation. Low German
Flaschenträger
could be spelled
vlaschendreyger
in 1430, but the pronunciation was
essentially the same, so
vlaschendreyger
and
Flaschenträger
are equivalent. Such variant
spellings may be registered where appropriate but do not make the name
different. Examples and further restrictions for different types of name
phrase are given below.
i. Given Names
- Two
given names are significantly different only if they differ significantly
in sound
and
appearance. Irrespective of
differences in sound and appearance, a given name is not significantly
different from any of its diminutives when they are used as given names.
However, two diminutives of the same given name are significantly
different if they differ significantly in sound and appearance.
Mary
is equivalent to the French
Marie
, since
neither the appearance nor the sound is significantly different; it is
significantly different from the Hebrew
Miriam
, since it differs significantly in sound and appearance and neither
name is a diminutive of the other. Similarly,
Ali
is significantly different from
Auda
.
Hob
is a diminutive of
Robert
and therefore equivalent to it, and for
the same reason
Kunz
is equivalent to
Konrad
. But
Hob
and
Robin
are significantly different; though both
are diminutives of
Robert
, they look and
sound significantly different. The same holds for
Nickel
and
Klas
,
which are both diminutives of
Niclas
.
ii. Bynames
- Two
bynames are significantly different if they look and sound significantly
different. In general the addition or deletion of prepositions and
articles is not significant. Additional restrictions apply to certain
types of bynames as specified below.
Blacksmith
is
significantly different from
Smith
.
Le Vanur
'the basketmaker is not significantly
different from
le vannere
'the winnower or
maker of fans or winnowing-baskets because the pronunciations are not
significantly different.
Cum Barba
is
significantly different from
Beard
and
Witheberd
'with the beard, but
Beard
is equivalent to
Witheberd
.
Der grosse
Esel
'the great ass is significantly different from
der Esel
, and
with the
Long Nose
is significantly different from
with
the Crooked Nose
.
The Lion
is not
significantly different from
de Lyon
.
Brekeleg
is
significantly different from
Brekeheved
'break
head.
Waggespere
is significantly different
from
Shakespeare
.
(a) Bynames of
Relationship
- Two bynames of relationship are significantly
different if the natures of the relationships
or
the objects of the relationships are significantly different.
Smythwyf
is significantly different from
Smithson
because the nature of the relationship
is significantly changed; it is significantly different from
Tomwyf
because the object of the relationship
has been changed (from
Smith
to
Tom
).
Mac Thorcuill
'son of Thorcull is equivalent to
Nic
Thorcuill
'daughter of Thorcull, and
Richards
is equivalent to
Richard
and to
Richardson
; in each case the sound is
insufficiently different.
Hobson
is
significantly different from
Robertson
,
however, because
Hob
and
Robert
differ significantly in sound and
appearance and are not being used in given names.
(b)Locative Bynames
- Two locative bynames need not refer to different places in order
to be considered significantly different; they need only look and sound
sufficiently different.
Der Brabanter
is
equivalent to
von Brabant
; such bynames
were interchangeable in period. However,
de
Flandre
is significantly different from
le
Flemyng
because
Flandre
and
Flemyng
are significantly different in sound
and appearance.
York
is equivalent to
of York
,
Münstermann
is equivalent to
von Münster
, and
Undertheclyf
is equivalent to
del Clif
and
Cliff
.
Zum Roten Löwen
'at the Red Lion is
significantly different from
zum Löwen
and
from
zum Blauen Löwen
'at the Blue Lion.
Lion
(from a sign name) is not significantly
different from
de Lyon
because the bynames
do not differ significantly in appearance.
b. Conflict of Personal
Names
- Two personal names conflict
unless
at least one of the following conditions is met.
i. Given Names
- Two
personal names do not conflict if the given names are significantly
different.
Sancha Alfonso Carrillo
does not conflict with
Juan Alfonso Carrillo
.
Hob Gage
conflicts with
Robert Gage
because
Hob
is not significantly different from
Robert
(of which it is a diminutive).
ii. Number of Name Phrases
- A personal name containing at most two name phrases does not
conflict with any personal name containing a different number name
phrases.
Thóra Arnthórudóttir
does not conflict with
Thóra in spaka
Arnthórudóttir
;
Pedro Fernandez
does not
conflict with
Pedro Fernandez Perez
.
iii. Order of Name Phrases
- Two personal names that contain equivalent name phrases arranged in
different orders do not conflict if the change in order significantly
changes the meaning of the name as a whole.
Klein Konrad
conflicts
with
Konrad der Kleine
: they could well refer
to the same person.
Owen ap Morgan ap Gruffudd
does not conflict with
Owen ap Gruffudd ap
Morgan
: as they have different fathers, they cannot be the same
person.
Aed Dub mac Cormaic
'Black
Aed
son of
Cormac
does not conflict with
Aed mac Cormaic Duib
'
Aed
son of Black
Cormac
, and
Hrólfr
dúfunef Bjarnarson
'
Hrólfr dove-nose
son
of
Björn
does not conflict with
Hrólfr Bjarnarson dúfunefs
'
Hrólfr
son of
Björn
dove-nose
.
William Brun le Mercer
conflicts with
William Mercer le Brun
,
both meaning 'William with brown hair who is a merchant in fine
textiles.
iv. Change of Name Phrases
- Two personal names do not conflict if
each
contains a name phrase that is significantly different from
every
name phrase in the other.
William Jamesson the Smith
does not conflict with
William Jamesson the
Carter
because each of the phrases
the Smith
and
the Carter
appears in one name but not
the other.
Gilbert Fletcher the Long of Kent
conflicts with
Gilbert Long Fletcher
because (1) the latter name contains
no
phrase that is significantly different from
every
phrase of the former name, and (2) the
change in order of the second and third name phrases does not
significantly change the meaning of the name.
c. Historical Personal Names
- Protected historical personal names are protected in all of the forms
in which they commonly appear.
Charlemagne
, which
becomes
Carolus Magnus
in Latin and
Karl der Grosse
in German, is protected in all
three forms.
2. Non-Personal Names.
-
Branch names, order and award names, heraldic titles, and household names
must
be significantly different from other protected non-personal names.
a. Difference of Descriptive
Elements
- A
descriptive
element
is a word other than a designator, an article, a
preposition, or the name of a branch of the Society. Two
descriptive elements
are considered
significantly different
if they differ significantly in both sound
and
appearance. Descriptive elements that are not
significantly different
are said to be
equivalent
.
b. Conflict of Names with
the Same Number of Elements
- Two non-personal names with the same
number of descriptive elements conflict
unless
at least one of the following conditions is met.
i. Change of Elements
- Two such names do not conflict if
each
of them contains a descriptive element significantly different from
every
descriptive element in the other.
House Saint Mary
,
Saint Mary Herald
, and the
College of Sainte Marie
all conflict with one
another because their descriptive elements are equivalent;
House
,
Herald
, and
College of
, being designators, are not
descriptive elements. The
House of the Red Dolphin
does not conflict with the
House of the Blue
Dolphin
or the
House of the Red Lion
. The
Order of the White Scarf of Ansteorra
conflicts with the
Order of the White Scarf of
Atenveldt
because
Ansteorra
and
Atenveldt
are not descriptive elements as defined
above in clause 2. a.
ii. Change of Order or
Grammar
- Two such names containing equivalent descriptive elements do
not conflict if either the order of the elements or the grammatical
structure of the name has changed in a way that significantly changes the
meaning of the name as a whole.
The
Order of the Sword and
the Tower
conflicts with the
Order of the
Tower and the Sword
because the change in order does not significantly
change the meaning of the name. Similarly, the
Order of the Guardians of the Castle
conflicts
with the
Order of the Castles Guardians
. The
Order of the Castle of the Guardians
does not
conflict the
Order of the Guardians of the Castle
because the change in order significantly changes the meaning; it does
not conflict with the
Order of the Castles
Guardians
because the change in grammatical structure significantly
changes the meaning.
c. Conflict of Names with
Different Numbers of Elements
- Two non-personal names with different
numbers of descriptive elements conflict if the only difference in the
descriptive parts is the addition of one or more modifiers to a single,
already modified root element.
The addition of one or more modifiers to an
unmodified
noun is a significant change, so
Black Lion Herald
does not conflict with
Lyon King of Arms
. The
Order of the Black Rampant Lion
conflicts with the
Black Lion Herald
, however, since
Rampant
is added to an already modified noun.
(Adding further modifiers to an already modified noun is not a significant
change because it is generally not good period style. ) The
Order of the Black Lions Heart
does not conflict
with the
Black Lion Herald
since the added
element,
Heart
, is not a modifier. Similarly,
the
Order of the Tower and the Sword
does not
conflict with the
Order of the Sword
.
PART VI - PRESUMPTUOUS
NAMES
Names may not claim status or powers the submitter does
not possess, as is required by General Principle 3b of these rules. This
section
defines categories of presumptuous claims.
1. Names Claiming Rank.
–
Names containing titles, territorial claims, or allusions to rank are
considered presumptuous.
Titles like
Earl
and
Duke
generally may not be used as Society names, even
if the title is the submitters legal name. Names documented to have been
used
in period may be used, even if they were derived from titles, provided there
is no suggestion of territorial claim or explicit assertion of rank. For
example,
Regina the Laundress
is acceptable but
Regina of Germany
is not. Claim to membership in a
uniquely royal family is also considered presumptuous, although use of some
dynastic surnames do not necessarily claim royal rank. For example, there was
a Scottish dynasty named
Stewart
, but there were
also many other Stewart families so use of that surname does not link one
unmistakably to the royal house.
Hohenstaufen
, on
the other hand, seems to have only been used by the line of Holy Roman
Emperors, so its use makes a clear dynastic claim. In some cases, use of an
otherwise inoffensive occupational surname in a territorial context may make
it appear to be a title or rank, such as
John the Bard
of Armagh
or
Peter Abbot of St. Giles
.
2. Names Claiming Powers.
– Names containing elements that allude to powers that the submitter does
not possess are considered presumptuous.
Society names may not claim divine descent, superhuman
abilities, or other powers that the submitter does not actually possess. Such
claims include divine patronymics, like
Vulcanson
; epithets peculiarly associated with divinities or superhuman beings,
such as
of the Valkyrie
; given names that were
never used by humans, like the names of some Giants or Dwarves in Norse
mythology; or descriptive epithets like
Worldblaster
.
3. Names Claiming
Specific Relationships.
- Names that unmistakably imply identity with
or close relationship to a protected person or literary character will
generally not be registered.
Explicit claims to descend from a particular person,
such as
Edwin fitzWilliam Marshall
or
Rhys ap Cariadoc of the Bow
will not be registered.
(The latter could be registered with a letter of permission from Cariadoc of
the Bow. ) However, since there are many people named
William
and
Cariadoc
,
Edwin fitzWilliam
or
Rhys ap
Cariadoc
would not conflict by themselves. In some cases a unique name,
surname, or epithet is so closely related to an individual that its use alone
can imply relationship to that individual. There is only one family that uses
the name
Baggins of Bag End
, so
Joan Baggins of Bag End
would not be appropriate.
4. Other Presumptuous Names.
- Some names not otherwise forbidden by these rules are nevertheless too
evocative of widely known and revered protected items to be registered.
Such items include the peerage orders of the Society
and such well-known items outside the Society as the
Order of the Garter
. The
House of the Rose and Laurel
does not conflict with
the
Order of the Rose
or the
Order of the Laurel
, but it is too evocative of both
to be registered. Similarly, the
Award of the Blue
Garter
is too evocative of the
Order of the Garter
, whose badge is a blue garter.
PART VII - COMPATIBLE
ARMORIAL CONTENT
Every element in a piece of Society armory
must be compatible with period armorial practices, as is required by General
Principle I. 1. a. of these rules. This section defines the categories of
elements that the College of Arms has generally found to be compatible.
1.
Period Charges.
- Ordinaries and other charges used in period armory may
be registered.
Use of a charge in heraldry after 1600 does
not guarantee its acceptability. Thus, even though they appear in modern
British heraldry, DNA molecules and hydrogen atoms may not be used.
2. Period Armorial
Elements.
- Lines of division, lines of partition, field treatments, and
other elements used in period armory may be registered.
Use of an element in period art does not
guarantee its acceptability for armory. Use of the Greek key design, which
was
common in period decorative art, never carried over into armory.
3. Period Artifacts.
- Artifacts that were known in the period and domain of the Society may be
registered in armory, provided they are depicted in their period forms.
A pen, for instance, must be depicted as a
quill pen or other period form, not a fountain pen. A wheel must be depicted
as a wagon wheel, not a rubber tire from an automobile.
4. Period Flora and
Fauna.
- Flora and fauna that were known in the period and domain of the
Society may be registered in armory.
Hybrids or mutations of period forms known to
have been developed after 1600 generally may not be used as charges. For
example, the English Sheepdog may not be used in Society armory because it
was
developed after 1600.
5. Compatible
Monsters.
- Monsters compatible with period armorial practice may be
registered in armory.
Monsters described in period sources may be
used in the Society, even if they were not used in period heraldry. New
monsters may be formed for Society use on the analogy of period monsters, so
long as all components remain sufficiently identifiable in the compound
monster. For example, the Society has created the sea unicorn parallel to the
sea lion and sea horse.
6. Compatible
Armorial Elements.
- Any charge, line of division, line of partition,
field treatment, or other armorial element that has been ruled compatible
with
period heraldic style may be registered in armory.
The line of partition
dovetailed
and field treatments designed to imitate
chain mail and honeycombs are some examples of undocumented armorial elements
that have already been ruled compatible with period heraldic style.
7. Armorial Element
Requirements.
- Only elements from the preceding categories that satisfy
the following requirements may be registered in armory.
a. Identification
Requirement
- Elements must be recognizable solely from their
appearance.
Any charge,
line of partition, or field treatment used in Society armory must be
identifiable, in and of itself, without labels or excessive explanation.
Elements not used in period armory may be defined and accepted for Society
use if they are readily distinguishable from elements that are already in
use. The compass star, defined in the Society as a mullet of four greater
and four lesser points, is immediately identifiable without confusion with
other mullets or estoiles once its definition is known.
b. Reconstruction
Requirement
- Elements must be reconstructible in a recognizable form
from a competent blazon.
Any element used in Society armory must be
describable in standard heraldic terms so that a competent heraldic artist
can reproduce the armory solely from the blazon. Elements that cannot be
described in such a way that the depiction of the armory will remain
consistent may not be used, even if they are identifiable design motifs
that
were used before 1600. For example, the Tree of Life occurs as a decorative
element in period and is readily identifiable as such, but it may not be
used in armory since it cannot be defined in a manner that guarantees its
consistent depiction.
8. Registered Armorial
Elements.
- Once an armorial element has been registered to an individual
or group, the College of Arms may permit that particular individual or group
to register that element again, even if it is no longer permissible under the
rules in effect at the time the later submission is made. This permission may
be extended to close relatives of the submitter if the College of Arms deems
it appropriate.
Only the actual armorial element from the
originally registered submission may be covered by this permission. For
example, if an individual had registered armory containing a fimbriated lion
many years ago, only that fimbriated lion would be covered under this rule,
not fimbriated wolves, eagles, or lions in other postures. The College of
Arms
might also agree to register this lion to the original submitters children.
This allowance will not be granted for submitters other than the original
owner under any other circumstances.
PART VIII - COMPATIBLE
ARMORIAL STYLE
All elements of a piece of armory must be
arranged into a design that is compatible with period armorial style, as is
required by General Principle 1b of these rules. This section defines the
requirements for arranging acceptable armorial elements into a design.
1. Armorial
Simplicity.
- All armory must be simple in design.
a. Tincture and
Charge Limit
- Armory must use a limited number of tinctures and types
of charges.
As the number of tinctures involved in a
device increases, the number of types of charge should decrease. As the
number of types increases, the number of tinctures should decrease. In no
case should the number of different tinctures or types of charges be so
great as to eliminate the visual impact of any single design element. As a
rule of thumb, the total of the number of tinctures plus the number of
types
of charges in a design should not exceed eight. As another guideline, three
or more types of charges should not be used in the same group.
b. Armorial Balance
- Armory must arrange all elements coherently in a balanced design.
Period armory usually places the primary
elements of the design in a static arrangement, such as a single charge in
the center of the field or three identical charges on an escutcheon. More
complex designs frequently include a central focal point around which other
charges are placed, like a chevron between three charges, but the design
remains static and balanced. Designs that are unbalanced, or that create an
impression of motion, are not compatible with period style.
c. Armorial Depth
- Armory may not employ depth of field as a design element.
i. Perspective
- Charges may only be drawn in perspective if they were so depicted in
period armory.
A pair of dice may be drawn in perspective
since they were routinely drawn that way in period armory to show the
pips. A bear, dolphin, or castle should not be drawn in three dimensions,
but should appear only in its standard, flat heraldic form.
ii. Layer Limit
- Designs may not be excessively layered.
All charges should be placed either
directly on the field or entirely on other charges that lie on the field.
2. Armorial Contrast.
- All armory must have sufficient contrast to allow each element of the
design to be clearly identifiable at a distance.
Each tincture used in Society armory may be
depicted in a variety of shades. Therefore, contrast is not determined by the
lightness or darkness of the tinctures on the submitted emblazon, but by the
traditional heraldic categorization of tinctures as colors and metals. The
colors are azure, gules, purpure, sable, and vert (blue, red, purple, black,
and green). Ermined furs or field treatments on a background of one of these
tinctures are treated as colors for contrast in the Society. The metals are
argent and Or (white or silver, and yellow or gold). Ermined furs or field
treatments on a background of one of those tinctures are treated as metals
for
contrast in the Society. Furs equally divided of light and dark pieces, such
as vair, are classed with other evenly divided elements, such as paly, per
bend, or lozengy.
a. Contrasting
Tinctures
- Good contrast exists between:
i.
A
metal and a color;
ii.
An element equally divided of a color and a metal, and any other
element as long as identifiability is maintained;
iii.
A color and a charge, blazoned as proper, that is predominantly
light;
iv.
A metal and a charge, blazoned as proper, that is predominantly
dark.
b. Contrast
Requirements
-
i.
The field must have good contrast with every charge placed
directly on it and with charges placed overall.
For example,
a
pale vair between two owls Or
might be placed on a field gules, but
not a field ermine because the owls would not have good contrast.
Similarly, a field vert with a fess Or contrasts with a wolf rampant
overall that is argent or ermine, but not a wolf that is gules or sable.
ii.
A charge must have good contrast with any charge placed wholly on
it.
For example, a tree placed on a pale azure
could be Or, argent, or ermine, but could not be pean or proper.
iii.
Elements evenly divided into two parts, per saltire, or quarterly
may use any two tinctures or furs.
For example, a field quarterly could be
composed of azure and gules, argent and Or, Or and ermine, or vert and
vairy gules and argent.
iv.
Elements evenly divided into multiple parts of two different
tinctures must have good contrast between their parts.
For example,
checky argent and gules
is acceptable, but
checky azure and gules
is not.
v.
Elements evenly divided in three tinctures must have good
contrast between two of their parts.
3. Armorial
Identifiability.
- Elements must be used in a design so as to preserve
their individual identifiability.
Identifiable elements may be rendered
unidentifiable by significant reduction in size, marginal contrast, excessive
counterchanging, voiding, or fimbriation, or by being obscured by other
elements of the design. For instance, a complex line of partition could be
difficult to recognize between two parts of the field that do not have good
contrast if most of the line is also covered by charges. A complex divided
field could obscure the identity of charges counterchanged. Voiding and
fimbriation may only be used with simple geometric charges placed in the
center of the design.
4. Obtrusive
Modernity.
- Armory may not use obtrusively modern designs.
"Modern" is defined as anything outside the
period of the Society.
a. Pictorial Design
- Overly pictorial designs may not be registered.
Design elements should not be combined to
create a picture of a scene or landscape. For example, combining a field
divided
per fess wavy azure and Or
with a sun
and three triangles Or, as well as a camel and two palm trees proper to
depict the Nile Valley would not be acceptable.
b. Modern Insignia
- Overt allusions to modern insignia, trademarks, or common designs may
not be registered.
Such references, including parodies, may be
considered obtrusive. Examples include using
a bend
within a bordure gules
to parody the international "No Entry" sign,
variations on the geometric Peace sign, and so forth.
c. Natural Depiction
-- Excessively naturalistic use of otherwise acceptable charges may not
be registered.
Excessively natural designs include those
that depict animate objects in unheraldic postures, use several charges in
their natural forms when heraldic equivalents exist, or overuse
proper. Proper
is allowed for natural flora and
fauna when there is a widely understood default coloration for the charge
so
specified. It is not allowed if many people would have to look up the
correct coloration, or if the Linnaean genus and species (or some other
elaborate description) would be required to get it right. An elephant, a
brown bear, or a tree could each be
proper;
a
female American kestrel, a garden rose, or an Arctic fox in winter phase,
could not.
d. Modern Style
- Generally modern style in the depiction of individual elements or the
total design may not be registered.
Artistic techniques and styles developed
after 1600 should not be used in Society armory. Charges may not be used to
create abstract or op-art designs, or be patterned after comic book art,
fantasy art, pointillism etc.
5. Fieldless Style.
- Fieldless armory must form a self-contained design.
A fieldless design must have all its elements
conjoined, like the three feathers issuing from a crown used by the Heir
Apparent to the throne of England. Since there is no field in such a design,
it may not use charges that rely on the edges of the field to define their
shape, such as bordures and orles, nor to cut off their ends, such as
ordinaries or charges throughout.
6. Documented
Exceptions.
- An armorial design element that is adequately documented as
a period practice
may
be deemed acceptable even if
it violates other sections of Part VIII (Compatible Armorial Style).
Such design elements will be accepted only on
a case-by-case basis and only in armory comparable in style and complexity to
the documented period examples. The strength of the case for such an
exception
increases in proportion to: the similarity of the documented examples to the
submitted armory; and the number of independent period examples offered as
evidence.
a. General
Exceptions
- In most cases the documentation for a proposed exceptional
armorial design element should be drawn from several European heraldic
jurisdictions.
The strength of the case for such an
exception increases in proportion to the geographical and chronological
breadth of the supporting period evidence.
b. Regional Style
- Alternatively, a proposed exceptional armorial design element may be
documented as characteristic of a specific regional armorial style.
In such cases the submitted
armory
may
be registered provided that
all
of the following conditions are met. (1) The
submitter explicitly requests an exception to the other sections of Part
VIII (Compatible Armorial Style) on the grounds that the submitted armory
exemplifies a specific regional style. (2) Documentation is adduced to show
that exceptional design element was not uncommon in the regional style in
question. (3) Documentation is adduced to show that
all
elements of the submitted armory can be found
in the regional style in question.
7. Augmentations of
Honor
- An augmentation of honor must be compatible with period armorial
style.
An augmentation is an honor bestowed by the
crown, taking the form of an addition or alteration to the honorees device.
While the right to an augmentation is bestowed by the crown, its form is
subject to the normal registration process. The augmentation must itself
follow the armory rules; if it has the appearance of being independent
armory,
for example a charged escutcheon or canton, then it is independently subject
to the normal rules of armorial conflict. The augmentation may, however, on a
case by case basis break the rules in relation to the original armory. For
example, Sable, on a chief argent a lion passant maintaining, in
augmentation,
an escutcheon gules charged with a cross throughout argent is acceptable even
though it breaks RfS VIII. 1. c. ii. , Layer Limit. Gules, a lion argent, and
in augmentation a canton argent charged with a tower Or is not acceptable, as
the augmentation internally breaks RfS VIII. 2. , Armorial Contrast. Since an
augmentation is an earned honor, it may in some cases violate RfS XI. 3.
Marshaling or RfS XI. 4. Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor. Arms in
their augmented form
are subject to the normal
rules of conflict.
PART IX - OFFENSIVE
ARMORY
Offensive armory may not be registered, as is
required by General Principle 2 of these rules. Armory may be innately
offensive
from its content, or because of its usual associations or the context in which
it is placed, such as the swastika which, although used in period armory, is so
strongly associated with the Third Reich that it offends a large segment of the
population. Armory may be considered offensive even if the submitter did not
intend it to be. This section defines the categories of designs that are
generally considered offensive.
1. Vulgar Armory.
- Pornographic or scatological items or designs will not be registered.
Obscene images, sexually explicit material,
bathroom or toilet humor, etc. are considered inherently offensive by a large
segment of the Society and general population.
2. Offensive Religious
Symbolism.
- Magical or religious symbolism that is excessive or mocks the
beliefs of others will not be registered.
Magical or religious symbolism is not usually
inherently offensive, but offends by context. Both devotees and opponents of
a
particular religion may be offended by an excessive display of the symbols of
that religion, for example, a Calvary cross surrounded by four Paschal Lambs
and surmounted by a crown of thorns and a whip. Similarly, although a Paschal
Lamb is a standard heraldic charge, dismembering the lamb and surmounting it
by a pentacle creates a context that could be offensive.
3. Stereotypical
Designs.
- Allusions to derogatory ethnic, racial, or sexual stereotypes
will not be registered.
Such stereotypes, even if documented from
period sources, are innately offensive. This is true whether the stereotype
is
inherent in the usage or created by context, like placing a Moors head
within
an orle of watermelons.
4. Offensive Political
Symbolism.
- Symbols specifically associated with social or political
movements or events that may be offensive to a particular race, religion, or
ethnic group will not be registered.
Even if used without prejudice in period, such
symbols are offensive by their modern context. Thus, designs suggestive of
the
SS, the Ku-Klux Klan, or similar organizations, may not be used.
PART X - CONFLICTING ARMORY
A piece of armory may not be too similar to other pieces of armory, as
is required by General Principle 3a of these rules.
Period armory frequently distinguished between immediate relatives,
like a father and his son, by making a single change to the
arms in a process called "cadency". The changes made in such
circumstances can be considered the smallest change that period heralds
would recognize. This section defines ways in which submitted armory
must be changed to be sufficiently different from protected armory.
1. Addition of Primary Charges.
- Armory does not conflict with any protected armory that adds or removes the primary charge group.
Most cadency systems did not involve addition or deletion of the
primary charge group, so this automatically creates an independent
design. For example, Argent, two mullets gules does not conflict with Argent, a pale between two mullets gules,
and Vert, a lion rampant Or and a chief indented argent does not conflict with Vert, a chief indented argent.
2. Substantially Different Charges
- Simple armory does not conflict with other simple armory if the type of every primary charge is substantially changed.
These types of changes were normally seen between complete
strangers in blood, and were not usually used to indicate any form of
cadency. For purposes of this rule, simple armory is defined as armory
that has no more than two types of charge directly on the field and has
no overall charges.
The following examples are simple, with at most two types of charge on the field: Argent, a fess sable. Sable, three lions Or.
Vert, two eagles and a maunch argent. Vair, a bordure gules. Per pale gules and argent, a fess between three lozenges
counterchanged. Or, on a chevron between three clarions gules, three garbs argent. Purpure, on a pale dancetty within a bordure
semy-de-lys argent, a millrind sable between two roses gules.
The following examples are all non-simple, with more than two types of
charges on the field, or with one or more overall charges: Argent, a fess between two lions and a lozenge azure. Vert, a chevron between three swords, a bordure Or. Gules, a bend between
two roundels argent, overall a lion Or. Per bend argent and sable, a bend gules between a tree and a cross crosslet
counterchanged. Argent, a dragon sable, overall a bend gules.
Argent, a fess sable does not conflict with Argent, a lion sable. Vert, two eagles and a maunch argent does not
conflict with Vert, three lozenges argent. Azure, a fess between three cups Or does not conflict with Azure, a chevron
between three cups Or. In each case the designs are simple and the type of every primary charge has been substantially changed.
Per chevron gules and argent, three oak trees counterchanged does conflict with Per chevron gules and argent, three fir
trees counterchanged, because the type of charge has not been substantially changed; they both conflict with Per chevron
gules and argent, two mullets and a fir tree counterchanged because not all of the primary charges have been substantially
changed. Vert, two mullets and a clarion argent within a bordure Or conflicts with Vert, three gauntlets argent
within a bordure Or because the first design is not simple, with three different types of charge on the field.
3. Required Charges Transparent.
- Two pieces of official Society armory that share required charges may consider their Difference of Primary Charges as if the
required charges were not there.
This is to avoid penalizing the slight increase in complexity caused when official armory includes required charges like the
laurel wreath or crown. As an example, Gules, a hammer within a laurel wreath and on a chief Or three fleurs-de-lys gules
would not conflict with Gules, a mullet within a laurel wreath and on a chief Or three fleurs-de-lys gules. Required
charges always count normally for difference themselves, this rule only ignores the complexity they add to a design. This
provision may not be applied when comparing official Society armory with any other armory.
4. Significant Armorial Differences.
- Two pieces of armory will not be considered to conflict if two clear visual differences exist between them.
a. Field Difference
- Significantly changing the tinctures, direction of partition lines, style of partition lines, or number of
pieces in a partition of the field is one clear difference.
In general, if the tincture of at least half the field is changed, the fields will be considered different.
Per chevron azure and gules has one clear difference from Per chevron azure and sable. Per pale azure
and Or has one clear difference from Per bend azure and Or and from Per pale embattled azure and Or.
Bendy argent and sable has one clear difference from Per bend argent and sable. Barry gules and
argent has one clear difference from Barry and per pale gules and argent. There is a clear difference for
reversing the tinctures of a field evenly divided into two parts, per saltire, or quarterly, but not for
reversing the tinctures of a field divided in any other way; Per pale nebuly ermine and gules has one clear difference
from Per pale nebuly gules and ermine, but Paly ermine and gules has no clear difference from Paly gules
and ermine. Field treatments are considered an aspect of tincture, so Per fess gules and argent has one clear
difference from Per fess gules and argent masoned sable. Per fess dovetailed gules and argent has no clear
difference from Per fess embattled gules and argent because the difference between dovetailed and embattled lines
is not significant. It suffices to change significantly the style of at least half of the partition lines, so Quarterly
per fess wavy argent and sable has one clear difference from Quarterly argent and sable; Paly and per fess
argent and sable has no clear difference from Paly and per fess indented argent and sable, however. Gyronny Or
and sable has no clear difference from Gyronny of twelve Or and sable because the difference between eight and
twelve pieces is not significant.
i. Charged Fields
- If charges other than an uncharged peripheral ordinary are present, at most one clear difference may be counted for
changes to the field.
For the purposes of this rule the peripheral ordinaries are the chief, the bordure, the base (including the point pointed),
the quarter, the canton, the gyron, the orle, the double tressure, and flaunches. There is just one clear difference
between Per chevron ermine and azure, a pale gules and Per bend wavy Or and vert, a pale gules.
ii. Field-Primary Armory
- If neither of two pieces of armory being compared has charges, or if each has the same uncharged peripheral ordinary,
they may derive greater difference from changes to the field. Such armory will be called field-primary armory.
For the purposes of this rule the peripheral ordinaries are the chief, the bordure, the base (including the point pointed),
the quarter, the canton, the gyron, the orle, the double tressure, and flaunches.
(a) Substantial Change of Partition
- If two pieces of field-primary armory have substantially different partitions, they are considered sufficiently
different and do not conflict, irrespective of any other similarities between them.
Any divided field is substantially different from any plain field: Per pale azure and vert is substantially
different fromAzure. Any two of the following partitions are substantially different from each other
except the pairs per fess and barry, per bend and bendy, per pale and
paly, per bend sinister and bendy sinister, andper chevron and chevronelly:
per fess, per bend, per pale, per bend sinister, per saltire, per chevron,
quarterly, checky, lozengy, gyronny(of any number of pieces), barry, bendy,
paly, bendy sinister, and chevronelly. Checky is substantially different from all other
grid-like partitions (i. e., those formed by two sets of parallel lines, like lozengy and barry-bendy
); these other grid-like partitions are not substantially different from one another. Barry and per pale
argent and vert is substantially different from Checky argent and vert, but it has only a clear difference
from Bendy and per pale argent and vert. Per chevron Or and gules is not substantially different from
Chevronelly Or and gules, nor is Per pale wavy purpure and argent substantially different from Paly
wavy argent and purpure, though in each case there is a clear difference between the fields.
(b) Complete Change of Tincture
- If the fields of two pieces of field-primary armory have no tinctures in common, they are considered completely
different and do not conflict, irrespective of any other similarities between them.
The ermine furs and their variants are considered to be different tinctures, so Per bend ermine and azure is
completely different fromPer bend erminois and gules and from Per bend argent ermined gules and sable.
The addition of a field treatment is also a change of tincture, so Per fess argent and gules is completely
different from Per fess argent masoned gules and sable.
(c) Other Field-Primary Armory
- In any case, independent changes to the tincture, direction of partition lines, style of partition lines, or number
of pieces in the partition may be counted separately when comparing two pieces of field-primary armory.
There are two clear differences between Per chevron argent and azure and Per pale nebuly argent and azure.
iii. Fieldless Difference
- A piece of fieldless armory automatically has one clear difference from any other armory, fielded or fieldless.
Tinctureless armory and Japanese mon are considered to be fieldless for this purpose.
b. Addition of Charges on the Field
- Adding or removing any group of charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges, is one clear difference.
Each charge group may be counted separately, so Argent, a pale gules has two clear changes from Argent, a pale
between two owls all within a bordure gules.
c. Addition of Charges Overall
- Adding or removing a group of charges placed overall is one clear difference.
Or, a lion rampant purpure would have one clear difference from Or, a lion rampant purpure and overall a fess
sable.
d. Tincture Changes
- Changing the tinctures or division of any group of charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges or charges
overall, is one clear difference.
Changing the tincture of at least half of the charges in a group is one clear difference.
Or, in pale three bulls heads gules differs from Or, in pale a bulls head gules between two more sable
, but not from Or, in pale a bulls head sable between two more gules. Separate differences may be counted for
changing the tincture of different groups of charges, so Vert, a pale between four mullets Or, all within a bordure argent
would have three clear differences from Vert, a pale ermine between four mullets argent, all within a bordure checky argent
and gules.
As with the field, only one change can be counted for all tincture
changes to the same group of charges. Tinctureless armory may not count
difference for tincture of charges; the Fieldless Difference will count
for one change and the second change must come from a category that
does not involve tincture.
e. Type Changes
- Significantly changing the type of any group of charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges or charges
overall, is one clear difference.
Changing
the type of at least half of the charges in a group is one clear
difference. Types of charges considered to be separate in period, for
example a lion and an heraldic tyger, will be considered different. A
charge not used in period armory will be considered different in type
if its shape in normal depiction is significantly different. This means
a lion would not be clearly different from a puma. Separate differences
may be obtained from changing the types of charges in different charge
groups. Changing Vert, a pale between two lions argent and a chief Or to Vert, a fess between two horses argent and a chief
Or produces two separate differences. Since the edge partition line of a charge is part of its type, the change from a
pale wavy to a pale embattled is one clear difference. Changing from a pale wavy to a fess embattled
is also one change of type, not a change of type plus a change of edge partition.
f. Number Changes
- Significantly changing the number of charges in any group placed directly on the field or overall is one clear difference.
One, two, and three are significantly different from any number, four is significantly different from six or
more, and five is significantly different from eight or more. Six and higher numbers, including sem of charges, are not
significantly different from each other.
g. Arrangement Changes - Changing the relative positions of
charges in any group placed directly on the field or overall is one
clear difference, provided that change is not caused by other changes
to the design.
Changes to other parts of the design frequently cause changes to the arrangement of charge groups, so changing
fromArgent, a fess between two unicorns within an orle purpure to Argent, a pale between two unicorns within an orle
purpure requires that the unicorns move from in pale to in fess. Changing from Argent, three unicorns
purpure toArgent, four unicorns purpurewill also cause some change in arrangement. These changes do not provide
independent difference. Changes that are made on their own, like changing fromthree mullets in fess to three mullets in
pale , or from six mullets on an uncharged field to five mullets in cross, are clear differences.
h. Posture Changes
- Significantly changing the posture or individual orientation of charges in any group placed directly on the field, including
strewn charges or charges overall, is one clear difference.
Changing the posture of at least half of the charges in a group is one clear difference. Changing a sword fesswise
to a sword palewise, or from a lion rampant to a lion passant, is one clear difference. Multiple changes to
the posture or orientation of the same charges may not be counted separately, so a lion passant bendwise is one clear
difference from a lion couchant to sinister. Changes of posture or orientation of separate charge groups may each be
counted. A change of posture must affect the orientation of the charge, or significantly change its appearance. Changes in the
position of the head, for instance, are not significant, nor is the change from statant to passant, which essentially moves
only one leg. Changing from passant to couchant, however, visually removes the legs from the bottom of the charge and is
considered significant.
i. Addition of Charges on Charges
- Adding or removing any group of charges placed entirely on other charges is one clear difference.
For example, charging a pale with three martlets, or charging a bordure with eight martlets, provides one clear difference.
j. Changes to Charges on Charges
- Changes to a group of charges placed entirely on other charges may create one clear difference.
No more than one clear difference can be obtained from changes to the same group of charges on other charges.
i.
Making two or more visually significant changes to the same group of charges placed entirely on other charges is one clear
difference.
Changes of type, number, tincture, posture, or independent changes of arrangement may each count as one of the two changes.
Generally such changes must affect the whole group of charges to be considered visually significant, since the size of these
elements and their visual impact are considerably diminished. For example, Sable, two mullets and a fleam argent and on a
chief Or three mullets gules would not have a clear difference from Sable, two mullets and a fleam argent and on a
chief Or a mullet between two lozenges vert.
ii.
For armory that has no more than two types of charge directly on the field and has no overall charges, substantially changing
the type of all of a group of charges placed entirely on an ordinary or other suitable charge is one clear difference. Only
the new submission is required to meet these conditions in order to benefit from this clause. A charge is suitable for the
purposes of this rule if (a) it is simple enough in outline to be voided, and (b) it is correctly drawn with
an interior substantial enough to display easily recognizable charges.
Sable, on a pale argent three lozenges sable has one clear difference from Sable, on a pale argent three ravens
sable. Or, on a heart vert a pheon argent has one clear difference from Or, on a heart vert a cross moline
argent. Argent, on a fess azure between two pine trees vert a spear argent has one clear difference from
Argent, on a fess azure between two pine trees vert a rose argent. Or, on a chevron between two millrinds and
a lion passant gardant sable three escallops argent does not have a clear difference from Or, on a chevron between
two millrinds and a lion passant gardant sable three crosses crosslet argent because there are more than two types of
charges directly on the field. Gules, a lion rampant, overall a bend argent semy-de-lis sable does not have a clear
difference from Gules, a lion rampant, overall a bend argent billetty sable because there is an overall charge.
Gules, on a pale Or a crescent between two fleurs-de-lis gules has a clear difference from Gules, on a pale Or
three mullets gules. However, it does not have a clear difference from Gules, on a pale Or three crescents gules,
because the type of all of the tertiary charges has not been changed.
Argent, a lion rampant gules charged with a cross crosslet Or does not have a clear difference from Argent, a lion
rampant gules charged with a heart Or because the lion is too complex in outline to be voided. Gules, on a mullet of
six points Or a cross crosslet sable does not have a clear difference from Gules, on a mullet of six points Or a
pellet because the interior of a correctly drawn mullet of six points is too small.
As a new submission, Argent, a lion rampant and on a chief gules three fleurs-de-lis argent does not conflict with
Argent, a lion rampant between three mullets and on a chief gules three crosses crosslet argent, even though the latter
does not meet the conditions of this rule. The new armory has only two types of charges directly on the field, so there is one
clear difference for substantially changing the type of the tertiary charges; the second is for removing the mullets (see RfS
X.4.b). If, however, the second armory were new and the first already registered, the second armory would conflict with the
first; as there are more than two types of charges directly on the field, there would be just one clear difference for adding
the mullets.
5. Visual Test.
- If the tinctures, shapes, or arrangement of the charges in a
submission create an overwhelming visual resemblance to a piece of
protected armory, the submission may be held to conflict even if
sufficient theoretical difference can be counted between them.
A piece of armory is registered and protected, not the verbal
description used to record that armory. The use of different
terminology
to describe two designs that are visually similar does not affect any
potential for conflict that may exist. Thus, Or, a fess vert
is not different from Vert, a chief and a base Or even
though one could theoretically count sufficient difference between
them from these blazons. Unusual cases may occur where contrast is weak
and unusual arrangements of charges are employed, and in
such circumstances the cumulative similarities between two pieces of
armory may outweigh any specific differences. As an example,
the cumulative effect of the similarities between Vert, ermined Or, on a mullet argent a lion rampant azure within a bordure
embattled ermine and Vert, ermined Or, on an estoile argent a lion rampant azure within a bordure embattled erminois
creates a strong possibility of confusion.
PART XI - PRESUMPTUOUS
Armory may not claim status or powers the submitter does not possess, as is required by General Principle 3b of these
rules. This section defines categories of presumptuous armorial claims.
1. Reserved Charges.
- Armory that contains elements reserved to or required of certain
ranks, positions, or territorial entities, inside or outside the
Society, is considered presumptuous. Symbols reserved or required
solely inside the Society may only be registered to those entitled
to the status associated with those symbols.
Examples of such elements include the field Azure, semy-de-lys Or,
which is restricted to French royalty; a laurel wreath,
required for official Society branches; the knights annulet of chain,
etc. Lists of these charges can be found in the glossary.
Some elements, like the French royal field, are always restricted.
Others are limited to specific segments of the Society. For example,
individuals may not place laurel wreaths on their armory, while only
those who are royal peers may use the insignia of those ranks.
2. Charge and Name Combination.
- Armory that asserts a strong claim of identity in the context of the submitters name is considered presumptuous.
Some otherwise permissible names and armorial elements cannot be used together because joining the two creates too strong an
association with famous individuals from myth, literature, or history. For example, while Rhiannon
can be used as a given name,
and horses can be used as charges, the two cannot be used together as
it suggests the Rhiannon of Welsh myth. Similarly, charges that
merely allude to a specific name on their own may become presumptuous
if several such charges are used.
3. Marshalling.
- Armory that appears to marshall independent arms is considered presumptuous.
Period marshalling combined two or more separate designs to indicate
descent from noble parents and claim to
inheritance. Since members of the Society are all required to earn
their status on their own merits, apparent claims to inherited status
are presumptuous. Divisions commonly used for marshalling, such as
quarterly or per pale, may only be used in contexts that ensure
marshalling is not suggested.
a.Such fields may be used with identical charges over the
entire field, or with complex lines of partition or charges overall
that were not used for marshalling in period heraldry.
b.
Such fields may only be used when no single portion of the field may appear to be an independent piece of armory.
No section of the field may contain an ordinary that terminates at
the edge of that section, or more than one
charge unless those charges are part of a group over the whole field.
Charged sections must all contain charges of the same type to avoid the
appearance of being different from each other.
4. Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor
-Armory that uses charges in such a way as to appear to be arms of pretense or an unearned augmentation of honor is
considered presumptuous.
Period and modern heraldic practice asserts a claim to land or property by surmounting an individuals usual armory with a
display of armory associated with that claim. Such arms of pretense are
placed on an escutcheon. 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. For example,
Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an escutcheon sable charged with a roundel argent
has the appearance of being arms of pretense or an augmentation.
Or, in saltire five escutcheons sable each charged with three roundels argent
does not have this appearance, as it has multiple escutcheons, as so is acceptable. The
exception to the restrictions of this rule is when the submitter is entitled to an
augmentation as described in RfS VIII. 7. Augmentations of Honor.