Nice 16th century Anglo-Irish name!

Cerrices wif is a constructed Old English byname intended to indicate that the submitter is the wife of someone named Cerric. We have no evidence of Old English bynames of this type. However, the proposed construction here follows the pattern of other Old English relationship bynames such as Ælfrices modor and Ælfrices sunu, using the genitive form of the husband's name plus wíf, the Old English word for "wife" or "female person." In addition, we have evidence of "wife of" bynames in Old English charters written in Latin, such as a charter from 1001 C.E. that refers to Ælfleda uxor Brithnothi. Based on this evidence, Cerrices wif or Cerrices wíf (with a diacritical mark on the i) is a plausible Old English byname.

This name combines a Gaelic saint's name with an Old English byname, an acceptable lingual mix under Appendix C.

A mistle thrush is the lingua Societatis (English) form of missel thrush, a gray-period English term for a type of thrush. As the bird was known in period, it is a plausible heraldic charge and thus a plausible basis for a heraldic title.

Nice 16th century English name!

There is a step from period practice for the use of paw prints.

There is a step from period practice for the use of a paw print.

Submitted as Tegzes Kató, the underlying documentation for the given name shows it as Kato, without a diacritical marking. We have made this correction for registration.

Questions were raised in commentary about the spelling of the byname Tegzes. After the close of commentary, Kolosvari Arpadne Julia documented the spelling Tegzes to the 15th and 16th centuries.

Nice 16th century Hungarian name!

This badge is returned for use of multiple overall charges. In the May 2013 return of Taran MacTaral's device, Vert, a tree blasted Or within and conjoined to a decrescent, overall five lozenges ployé in bend sinister argent, it was ruled: "This device is returned for not being reliably blazonable, a violation of SENA A1C and A3F5, both of which require an emblazon to be describable in heraldic terms. As we have no evidence of multiple overall charges in period armory, this design is difficult to describe. Three of the lozenges are entirely on the field, one partially overlaps the tree, and one partially overlaps the crescent. This is non-period style in general." This submission has a similar issue, with the added complication that they overlap one another in addition to the leaf.

This badge is also returned for overlapping distinct charges in an unblazonable way. In the May 2018 return of Elizabeth Lincoln's device, Per chevron purpure and azure, a "branch" fructed of peaches Or, it was ruled: "This device is returned for redraw. The main charge is blazoned as a branch, but is not substantial enough to be considered more than a slip. The main visual focus of the charge is the fructing, two large peaches that could easily be the central charge were they not arranged in a way that blurs the distinction between in fess and in bend, and had they not overlapped in silhouette."

Upon resubmission, the submitter should either use a single banana or otherwise document bunches or hands of bananas as a distinctly recognizable arrangement in period.