[ANSTHRLD] Repeal of the Modest Proposal?

[Timothy Rayburn]

The right honorable Magnus, spoke words like these :
>Many in the heraldic community remember and rejoiced at the adoption
>of the Modest Proposal by the SCA a few years ago.

<snip>

>Well, it was effectively, if not literally,
>reversed in October of 2001 by a Wreath ruling.
>"In Kieran Hunter's submission, it was ruled that there is presumption
>in a case where the arms have no difference from that of a Scottish Clan
>Chief, and the surname of the submitter matches the Clan Chief's
>surname. While either the name or arms could be registered alone, the
>combination implies a status that the submitter does not possess, and is
>presumptuous. As stated above, one CD will remove the presumption due to
>name and arms combination."

With the humor and respect I must say : No Chicken Little, the sky is not falling.

Wreath is, in fact, only citing a portion of the RfS that has existed for some time.  Specifically XI.2 states :
<quote>
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.
</quote>

The above citation from the long existing RfS clearly supports what Wreath ruled on.  The name alone in Hunter's case would have been fine, the arms with any other name would have been fine.  The combination of name and armory created presumption.

This will not cause great trouble in consulting if we are careful to inquire as to where our clients inspiration for their devices comes from.  As Wreath noted, it has to be exactly the arms from period, and the exact name.  One CD will free us of problems.  The chance that a submitter accidentally re-created the exact arms associated with a Clan (or other surname) from period are infinitely small.  The much more likely is that they are knowingly doing this, without knowing it is against the rules.  If a submitter asks for a particular device design they already have, ask them where they got the idea from.  It's just that simple.

You must also realize we can never 100% guarantee that a device that makes it out of Kingdom will pass.  While we still have a very good history (about 90%) we are not the final arbiter, and can never truly guarantee a device clear of conflicts.

I would take a step back, realize the rule has been on the books for years, and that it is cited so rarely because it isn't a /major/ problem for us in conflict checking.


Timothy of Glastinbury