RULES FOR SUBMISSIONS
of the
College of Arms
of the
Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.
March 28, 2004, Updated April 2, 2008

Quick Links: I - II - III - IV - V - VI - VII - VIII - IX - X - XI
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. - GENERAL PRINCIPLES

1. Compatibility

2. Offense

3. Inappropriate Claims

II. - COMPATIBLE NAME CONTENT

1. Documented Names

2. Constructed Names

3. Invented Names

4. Legal Names

5. Registered Names

III. - COMPATIBLE NAMING STYLE AND GRAMMAR

1. Name Grammar and Syntax

2. Name Style

IV. - OFFENSIVE NAMES

1. Vulgar Names

2. Offensive Religious Terminology

3. Stereotypical Names

4. Offensive Political Terminology

V. - NAME CONFLICT

1. Personal Names

2. Non-Personal Names

VI. - PRESUMPTUOUS NAMES

1. Names Claiming Rank

2. Names Claiming Powers

3. Names Claiming Specific Relationships

4. Other Presumptuous Names

VII. - COMPATIBLE ARMORIAL CONTENT

1. Period Charges

2. Period Armorial Elements

3. Period Artifacts

4. Period Flora and Fauna

5. Compatible Monsters

6. Compatible Armorial Elements

7. Armorial Element Requirements

8. Registered Armorial Elements

VIII. - COMPATIBLE ARMORIAL STYLE

1. Armorial Simplicity

2. Armorial Contrast

3. Armorial Identifiability

4. Obtrusive Modernity

5. Fieldless Style

6. Documented Exceptions

7. Augmentations of Honor

IX. - OFFENSIVE ARMORY

1. Vulgar Armory

2. Offensive Religious Symbolism

3. Stereotypical Designs

4. Offensive Political Symbolism

X. - CONFLICTING ARMORY

1. Addition of Primary Charges

2. Difference of Primary Charges

3. Required Charges Transparent

4. Significant Armorial Differences

5. Visual Test

XI. - PRESUMPTUOUS ARMORY

1. Reserved Charges

2. Charge and Name Combination

3. Marshalling

4. Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor

PART I - GENERAL PRINCIPLES

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.

a. Compatible Content - All submissions shall be period in content.
Each element of a submission shall be compatible with period usage. See Part II, Compatible Name Content, and Part VII, Compatible Armorial Content.

b. Compatible Style - All submissions shall be period in style.
All elements of a submission shall be used in a manner that is stylistically compatible with period usage. See Part III, Compatible Naming Style, and Part VIII, Compatible Armorial Style.

c. Documented Exceptions - A submission that is adequately documented as a period practice may be deemed acceptable even if it violates the stylistic requirements set forth in Parts III (Compatible Naming Style)or VIII ( Compatible Armorial Style) of these rules.

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 Great's 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 Cadogan and Kadogan would be permitted, even if only one of these forms had been found in period sources. Qadogan would not be permitted in a Welsh name, 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 in tSaeir 'son of the craftsman', 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 Williams, or John Williamson, each of which means "son of William." 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, Donnchadh 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 Domhnaill ), 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 Muhammad is common in Arabic, the juxtaposition of it with reference to other religions, like Muhammad the Pope, 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 Korkyll 'son of Thorcull is equivalent to nyk Korkyll 'daughter of the son of Torcull', 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, those which have been ruled not compatible, and those generally found to be a step from period practice. Armory that is one step from period practice is registerable; armory that is two steps from period practice is not registerable.

1. Period Charges. - Ordinaries and other charges used in period armory may be registered.

No charge that is documented as having been used in period European heraldry, including as an element of a crest or badge, will be considered a step from period practice.

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. If an element of period art not used as a heraldic charge in period is determined to be registerable, it will be considered a step from period practice.

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.

The use of artifacts that, though not found in period armory, follow a pattern of charges found in period armory, will not be considered a step from period practice. For instance, there are so many examples of tools used by European craftsmen being used as charges in period armory, that any tool documented as in use in Europe prior to 1600 is generally acceptable without being a step from period practice. Artifacts that do not follow a pattern of charges found in period armory, such as an aeolipile, will be considered a step from period practice.

4. Period Flora and Fauna. - Flora and fauna that were known in the period and domain of the Society may be registered in armory.

Flora and fauna documented as having been used as charges in period heraldry, including crests and badges, will not be considered a step from period practice. This includes New World and sub-Saharan African flora and fauna.

The use of flora and fauna native to Europe, including coastal waters, that cannot otherwise be documented as heraldic charges will not be considered a step from period practice. While some flora (such as roses and lilies) and fauna (such as lions and dogs) are much more common than others, there is still a wide practice of using a variety of flora and fauna in period armory.

The use of flora and fauna native to the New World, Africa, Asia, and other non-European locales will be registerable if it is reasonable to believe that Europeans knew them in period. Their use will be considered a step from period practice, unless they were used as charges in period heraldry, including crests and badges, in which case their use is not a weirdness.

Consider a turkey and a manatee: they are both New World fauna, but the turkey is documented as part of a crest in period armory. The use of a turkey, therefore, is not a step from period practice. The use of a manatee as a charge, pending evidence that it was used in period armory, is a step from period practice.

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 fox parallel to the sea lion and sea horse. Adding wings to a non-winged creature is another common period method of creating heraldic monsters. Monsters described in period sources or created in a manner that follow period practice will not be considered a step from period practice.

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.

6.a. Compatible Charges - Charges that have not been documented to period may be ruled SCA-compatible; the use of an SCA-compatible charge is a step from period practice.

A ruling that a charge is SCA-compatible can change with new evidence. Charges that were in the past ruled a step from period practice may later be ruled unregisterable. Charges that were in the past ruled SCA-compatible because they were rare in period, or that have since been documented as period heraldic charges, are not a step from period practice. Examples of charges that are a step from period practice include compass stars, lightning bolts, pawprints, and valknuts.

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.

Maintained by Codex Herald (Master Maol Mhichil mac Ghiolla Pheadair, OP, ODH)

This page was last updated on Monday, April 7th, 2008 @ 10:36 pm CDT
Copyright © 1995 - 2011 Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.