Precedence on Household Names
Disclaimer: These are those precedence that I have collected that pertain to the creation of household names. I start with some of the most recent and work my way back to the oldest since the most recent are the effective “rule.” This collection of commentary was done to assist me in understanding what types of household names are acceptable for Society registration. The attempt to register Castle Newmarch was begun in August of 2000.
I have researched the use of Castle in household names and have found only two households containing the name Castle in the Armorial. Castle Walls and Castle of the Lost; 1983 and 1988 respectively. I could not find a specific mention in the Precedents to preclude, limit or prohibit future use of the word Castle in household names, unless the name was protected. An example of a protect name thus would be "Davenport Castle", because such a castle was present in historical times in period and that castle still stands today. Assumption of this type of household name then would be considered presumptious.
From the Precedents of Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme (June 1992-October 1993)
Households, as they are generally known in the Society, don't appear to have historical equivalents; they seem to be unique to the SCA. My best definition would be:
"A household is a non-official group of people who like to do things together in a Society context, to the point where they can be treated as a single unit." That definition covers groups of friends, small families, professional guilds (entertainment, brewing, waterbearers, &c), fighting units, and even businesses.
While there were no exact parallels in period to SCA households, there were historical groups that shared one or more functions with the latter. These include the Scots clans (Clan Stewart); ruling dynasties (House of Anjou); professional guilds (Baker's Guild of Augsburg, Worshipful Company of Coopers); military units, including mercenaries (The White Company); and inns (House of the White Hart). Such names as these groups took, then, should be the pattern on which SCA household names are built.
Some house names were taken from the place of origin: House of York, House of Lorraine, House of Valois. Some were taken from a personal epithet of the founder, shared by neither his father nor siblings: House Capet. Some were taken from the founders' surnames -- which, in turn, might be derived originally from a patronymic (Clan MacGregor), a toponymic (Clan Kerr), or an occupation (Clan Stewart). Guild names were straightforward descriptions of their crafts. Mercenary units might be more fanciful, and inn names most fanciful of all; but these still referred to livery or signboards -- in short, to a badge, which was a tangible thing.
House names in period don't seem to have been overly fantastic. For the most part, they come from the same linguistic well as period bynames. In particular, since a period house name was so often simply the surname, byname, or epithet of its founder, any such epithet that is acceptable in a Society personal name should be acceptable as a Society household name. This is the rule of thumb I've formulated for determining the acceptability of household names henceforth. If we would register John X, we should register House X as well. We would not permit John Starwalker, so we should not permit House Starwalker. We would register John of the Red Sickles (wincing, perhaps, but we would), so we should register House of the Red Sickles. (2 July, 1992 Cover Letter (June, 1992 LoAR), pg. 3)
[House Shadowglade] The household name does not appear to follow period exemplars. For one thing, it's nonsense: by definition, a glade is a sunny area. For
another thing, we've no period documentation of shadow- used as a theme in English placenames. While I might have stretched that point for an otherwise-acceptable construction, I can't see period houses using such an oxymoron as this. (Tristan Blackmoor of Darkwoods, August, 1992, pg. 23)
[Egil's Nest] This conflicts with Eagle's Nest, a place among the Killarney Lakes in County Kerry, Ireland. It is cited in a general reference ( The New Century
Cyclopedia of Names, vol.I, p.1379), so it's important enough to protect. (Egill von Stahl, August, 1992, pg. 27)
[House Catmask] Catmask doesn't seem to be a period term; the closest phrase in the OED, cat-face, dates to the 19th Century. Even as a constructed noun, it
doesn't seem a plausible house name; it might conceivably be an inn name, but only if it were a period noun. (House Catmask (Iarngard Ragnarson), August, 1992,
pg. 32)
[Seeker's Keep] Keep is the household designator here. (Seeker's Keep (Aelfric se Droflic), September, 1992, pg. 1)
[Tempest Tower] If Tower is considered the household designator (and therefore transparent with respect to conflict), this conflicts with the Order of the Tempest
...Were we to add a designator (e.g. House Tempest Tower), so that Tower became the substantive element of the name, this would conflict with the Order of the
Towers of Dreiburgen ...The designator is transparent; the addition of the branch name is worth no difference, per the ruling on the Golden Swan of Calontir; the
only countable difference, under the current Rules, is the addition of the adjective Tempest --- which is insufficient, per Rule V.2. (David van den Storm, September,
1992, pg. 38)
[Iron Horde of Cathanar] As in the case of the Company of the Checquered Shield of Western Seas (LoAR of 19 Jan 91), the use of the SCA branch name
implies this is an official group of the Barony of Cathanar. As the submitter doesn't represent Cathanar, he may not style his household in a way that suggests official
sanction. (If he has official sanction from Cathanar, the name should be registered to Cathanar.)
Normally, we'd delete the problematic part of the name, and register this as simply the Iron Horde, but that would then introduce conflicts. Specifically, it would
conflict with the Iron Guard, a Rumanian fascist organization founded in 1924. Paramilitary and strongly anti-Semite, it played a major role in Rumanian history prior
to and during World War II (including the assassination of one Premier and the installation of another). Since it's cited in several general references ( The New
Century Cyclopedia of Names, vol.II, p.2135; 1991 Encyclopedia Britannica, vol.7, p.388), the Iron Guard is important enough to protect. (And in any case, I
doubt the submitter would like a household name so close to a group whose atrocities offended even the Nazi Gestapo.) (Mengü of Cathanar, September, 1992, pg.
46)
[House Castor Bellator] The household name is Latin for "warrior beaver". This doesn't follow our current guidelines for household names: we wouldn't register
John the Warrior Beaver, so we shouldn't register this. It is barely possible that House of the Warrior Beaver might be a late-period English inn name --- but
such a name wouldn't be in Latin. (Eadwyn Inhold., September, 1992, pg. 48)
[Maison des Animaux] The name is intrusively modern, strongly evoking the film Animal House (of which the name is an exact translation). Translation into another
tongue can bring a name clear, per Rule V.4.b --- but only if the pronunciation is significantly altered. The difference between Animal and Animaux is too small to
be considered significant; and the household designator (House, Maison) is transparent, and counts for no difference. As for the "fame" of the conflict, if a sizable
fraction of the populace (of which the College of Arms may be considered a representative sample) recognizes Animal House as a movie title, it's probably
necessary to protect it from conflict --- not so much for its own sake, as to keep the modern movie reference from intruding on our medieval re-creation. (Jacqueline
de Lyons, September, 1992, pg. 49)
[Domus Artium Utilium, meaning House of the Useful Arts] This isn't an unreasonable name for, e.g., a school; it follows the pattern of the Academia
Secretorum Naturae, founded at Naples in 1560 (1911 E.Brit., vol.I, p.99). (Domus Artium Utilium (Una Wynifreed Berry), March, 1993, pg. 15)
From the Precedents of Da'ud ibn Auda (July 1991-June 1992)
"Personal households may not incorporate the name of an SCA branch in their name." (LoAR 7/91 p.22).
[Latin Household name, meant to mean "Dead Historian's Society"] "In addition to the name being, even in Latin, an obtrusively modern take-off of a movie title
and not Period in style, the grammar is incorrect...(All this leaving aside the question, of course, as to whether the household's members are all dead.)" (LoAR 9/91
p.15).
[House <Place>] "<Place> is a real place in the middle ages and should not be registered to a single individual in the SCA." [It is unclear if this means we are protecting every mundane place, or whether <Place> was considered famous enough to protect, and the ruling did not mention the fact] (LoAR 2/92 p.20).
From the Precedents of Alisoun MacCoul of Elphan (September 1986 - June 1990)
Names - Household
[House (name of a town)] The town ... is an actual period town, one of no small size even in Domesday times. [Household name returned] (LoAR Aug 88, p. 20)
Effective immediately, the registration of a household name will not carry protection against infringement by others who may, through use of the name in their
personal names, claim to be members of the household. Household names will continue to be protected against infringement by the names of official groups, orders,
heraldic titles, other household names, etc. For example, the name of House Smith would not prevent registration of the name Peter Smith, but would prevent
registration of House Green Smith, the Order of the Iron Smith and the title of Poor Smith Herald. (CL 20 May 89, p. 6)
The new rules have dropped the specification of conflict where no presumption is involved, a step that made sense when the household name no longer affect[s] use
of personal names. (LoAR 26 Nov 89, p. 25)
From the Precedents of Baldwin of Erebor (August 1984-August 1986)
Names -- household (guild, etc.)
["Privy council of [territory]."] It appears from the definition in the OED that a privy council is not necessarily a state entity; individuals may have such councils as
well. Nor do I find it inconsistent with past practice for Frypan de Tuckerbag to register a badge for the Lutenists' Guild of the Barony of the Great Pismire, if he is
the guildmaster; so the designation "of Branch-name" is not reserved. But the privy council of an SCA branch would by rights be a governmental entity of that
branch, and it is inappropriate for such a body to be regarded as the property of an individual. [BoE, 24 Nov 84, p.1]
The designation "Cult of N." is not appropriate for registration with the College of Arms. [BoE, 3 Feb 85, p.19] [N. was the submitter's SCA given name.]
I feel the amount of work involved in maintaining a system of household name/surname conflict exceeds any probable benefit. (In the argot of today's business
community, it is not "cost effective.") It will increase the amount of work expected of the Principal Heralds, many of whom feel the present workload is excessive. It's
time we got off the side-issues and back into the business of studying and practicing heraldry. It is therefore my judgement that "of X" should not, and therefore does
not, conflict with the registered household name "X". [BoE, cvr ltr, 22 Feb 86, p.3]
The policy of the College of Arms is that secondary names (household names and alternate personae) may be registered only in conjunction with a badge. [BoE, 18
May 86, p.8]