* From Laurel: Ruling Nobles and Permissions to Conflict

The Administrative Handbook, section IV.C.3, states that a permission to conflict with an item registered to a branch with ruling nobles must be signed by them. The wording is not entirely clear on whether this means both members of a ruling couple or whether the signature of just one would be sufficient.

The situation can be seen as analogous to jointly-owned items, where either the primary or secondary owner can give permission to conflict, and also to the way courts are relatively often presided over by just one of the ruling couple. In both these cases, there is the presumption that the one actually voicing their consent is speaking for the pair, and we do not see why that presumption would be less valid in this case. Consequently, a permission signed by one of the pair is valid unless there is clear evidence that the other one would disagree.

* From Laurel: Awards and Species

Recently a Royal couple proposed setting up an award to give to animals which have distinguished themselves within the Society. The proposal included registering a name and badge for the order.

The rules of the College of Arms regulate only the registration process and registerability of names and armory, and neither the Administrative Handbook nor SENA say anything about the intended use of an award or an order. The bestowal of awards is discussed in Chapter VIII of Corpora (and, regarding membership, Section I.D.3) and interpreting that document falls under the authority of the Society Seneschal. Having asked for her opinion, she agrees with our initial impression that although Corpora does not say this explicitly it is clearly written to presume that awards will only be bestowed on humans. This interpretation is also in line with our long-standing policy of refusing to register names and armory to animals.

There are of course other ways to recognise animals that have contributed to the Society in one way or another, and we can see situations where such recognition should be done publicly at court. However, while public thanks are for all who deserve them, formal awards and precedence are reserved for humans.

* From Laurel: Extraordinary Heralds

Since time immemorial, sorry, July 1981, it has been our practice to recognise heralds whose expertise and commitment exceeds the level we look for and who should therefore be included in the ranks of the College of Arms in perpetuity, beyond any individual office they may hold. The work of such people can often be seen in their home kingdom, but there are also cases where the full picture is only visible at the level of the Known World wide College of Arms.

Scolastica la souriete has been active within the College for a long time. Over the years she has written articles, taught classes, and been active in the discussions of the College both in commentary and at Pelican decision meetings. She can reasonably be considered our resident expert on Middle English names.

Alexandra Vazquez de Granada is likewise a long-time member of the College who has taught classes and written articles on various aspects of Society heraldry. She has also been instrumental in organising several Known World Heraldic and Scribal Symposia, including the first of our now traditional series of virtual symposia held around January.

Both of these Heralds are rightfully considered Extraordinary and have a permanent place in the College of Arms.

* From Pelican: Award Name Patterns Following <Descriptive Adjective>+<Heraldic Charge>

Recently, we have received multiple order name patterns following the pattern Order of the <Descriptive Adjective>+<Heraldic Charge>, following SENA Appendix E2b. Submitters and consulting heralds are reminded that in this order name pattern, there are specific limits to the nature of the descriptive adjective. Specifically, per SENA Appendix E2b:

<Descriptive Adjective> does not allow all types of adjective to be added to a heraldic charge to create an order name. The Descriptive Adjective must be a clear visual description of the charge itself, like Double or Crowned or Winged. Adjectives that describe heraldic postures or arrangements of charges are not acceptable without additional supporting evidence.

That is to say, an order name like Order of the Crowned Ibex or Order of the Winged Chalice, or Order of the Crescent Moon are acceptable, while Order of the Hopeful Phoenix or Order of the Great Apple, or Order of the Tiny Leaf are not acceptable.

We hope that these examples provide clarity for submitters and heralds alike.

* From Pelican: On Using the Existing Registration Allowance in Award Names

Recently the question has come up of using the Existing Registration Allowance (ERA) in award names that use a personal name. SENA NPN1C2g – The Existing Registration Allowance (ERA) currently states:

Name phrases from a name registered to an individual or branch may be used in a new non-personal name submission by that individual or branch, even if the name phrase is no longer registerable under the rules.

[…]

The element used may be the entire substantive element, the designator, or part of the substantive element. Only the exact, actual name phrase from the registered form may be used, not variants, patterns, etc., with the exception of submissions of branch heraldic titles and order names.

The rule as currently written implies that a branch would always need permission from the heirs of a deceased member, and that only the unmodified form of the name in question can be used. The latter implication is that one cannot use a name in its genitive form to follow the order name pattern of Award of [Personal Name in possessive form]+[Heraldic Charge], and is inconsistent with other usages of the Existing Registration Allowance.

Therefore, we direct Palimpsest to open a Rules Letter to firstly add some examples to SENA NPN1C2g so that branches/consulting heralds know better when permission is needed and when it is not in this circumstance, and secondly to revise NPN1C2g to better align with other uses of the ERA.

We thank Lillia Crampette for her diligence in highlighting this incongruity.

* From Pelican: On the Use of the Award Name Pattern Order of + [Abstract Quality]

We have recently seen several submissions using the order name pattern Order of + [Abstract Quality]. We wish to remind submitters that abstract qualities in this case are more akin to virtues rather than abstract entities. Abstract virtues are nouns such as hope, love, freedom, justice, etc., versus concepts like “the past”, “the future”, or “eternity”.

* From Pelican: Culturally Mixed Names and Existing Registration Allowance

As proposed on Palimpsest’s April 30th Rules Letter, SENA PN2C2d is revised to clarify how an Existing Registration Allowance (ERA) name element is treated in culturally mixed names. The revised wording will be available at https://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#PN2C2c within a few days.

* From Wreath: Augmentations and Wills

A submission this month has led us to clarify how augmentations work when included in heraldic wills. An augmentation can only be transferred if the heir has the right to an augmentation, but as the heir they may grant permission to conflict or release the augmentation without transferring it. The same is true of any armory with a restricted charge; the submitter must be entitled to display the restricted charge in order to accept a transfer via heraldic will. We direct Palimpsest to open a Rules Letter to clarify this in the Administrative Handbook IV.G, Heraldic Wills.

* From Wreath: Charges Overlying Divisions

A submission this month caused us to consider the wording in SENA Appendix I1, which says:

In armory with a divided field, […] where one or more charges overlie the line of division, those charges are the primary charge group and the other ones are in a secondary charge group.

This is not how we treat charges overlying a line of division in practice. For example, in a hypothetical Per pale gules and sable, two lions combattant maintaining between them a sword argent, the sword is clearly not the primary charge. Similarly, in Per pale argent and sable, two mullets and in base a weaver’s shuttle counterchanged, the mullets are primary and the shuttle is secondary.

We direct Palimpsest to open a Rules Letter proposing changes to this wording to align with current practice.

* From Wreath: Letters, Symbols, and Words Revisited

On the February 2025 Cover Letter, we asked for feedback about how we treat letters, symbols, and words for purposes of conflict. After consideration of the large volume of commentary on this item, we will not be making any changes to how we treat these charges for the purposes of conflict at this time. Thank you to everyone who commented.

* From Wreath: Reserved Motifs for the Orders of Defense and the Mark

As proposed on the April 30 Laurel LoPaD, two new reserved motifs are accepted.

For the Order of Defense, A white livery collar. Effective immediately, this motif is protected from presumption as a reserved motif which can only be used in armory by members of the Order of the Defense.

For the Order of the Mark, Two white vambraces or bracers. Effective immediately, this motif is protected from presumption as a reserved motif which can only be used in armory by members of the Order of the Mark.

We will note, for clarity, that the protection of the Order of the Mark’s motif will only apply to designs that have exactly two white vambraces or bracers, not one, or more than two. This protection will apply for white vambraces or bracers themselves, and white vambraces or bracers on cubit arms, no matter the tincture of the arm itself. This protection will not apply to full armored arms or full humanoid figures unless the vambraces or bracers are the only part of the figure colored white.

* From Wreath: Unity of Posture

A submission from the February 2025 LoAR was pended to discuss potential changes to SENA A3D2c, Unity of Posture and Orientation. The submission included a raven with its head in profile and an owl guardant in the same charge group. This design brought into conflict two principles of SCA armorial design. Making either the raven guardant or the owl’s head in profile would reduce the identifiability of the charges, potentially enough to push the two birds into violation of SENA A3D1b, Sword and Dagger. Having the heads in different positions violates SENA A3D2c, Unity of Posture and Orientation. On weighing these two principles against each other we feel we must come down on the side of identifiability, as identification is one of the main reasons heraldry exists.

To that end, we are ruling that:

• If the animate charges in the same charge group are of identical types, they should be in identical postures, or an arrangement that includes posture, such as combattant or passant counter-passant.
• If the animate charges in a charge group are not of identical types, they may be in different postures as long as those postures have less than a DC between them.

We direct Palimpsest to prepare a Rules Letter proposing this addition to SENA A3D2c.

* Society Pages

On 23 August 2025 at Purgatorio Coronation Sighfridh and Sof’ia, King and Queen of the West, gave an Augmentation of Arms to Moira O’Connor, former Sable Swan Herald and former Vesper Principal Herald.

At the same event King Sighfridh and Queen Sof’ia gave to Teagan Ulfsdotter, Sable Swan Herald for the Principality of Cynagua, the Order of the Leaf of Merit (armigerous service award) and the Scarf of the Ash Leaf with a Grant of Arms (grant level fighting award).

On 26 July 2025 at the Barony of Twin Moons Middle Eastern Feast Duncan the Sinister, Atenveldt Principal Herald, conferred with the consent of Sutton and Celeste, King and Queen of Atenveldt, on Lady Helena de Argentoune the rank of Herald Extraordinary in recognition of her long and tireless service to the Kingdom and to the Society College of Arms.