Blodeuwedd versus the internet

Court is in session. In the matter of Blodeuwedd, the register hears the evidence — the attestation, the marks, and the forms that stand accused.

At a Glance

• Canonical form: Blodeuwedd
• Original script: —
• Pantheon: Celtic
• Convention: the tradition’s own scholarly transliteration standard
• False forms on record: 0
• Contested forms: none attested
• Series: The Canonical Register, No. 67 of 397

The Charge

That the name Blodeuwedd is routinely written in forms that move, drop, or invent its marks — and that each such form teaches the reader a different, lesser name. The register's task is to separate the honest fallback from the outright false.

The Defense of the Canonical Form

The tradition's record preserves this name in its romanized scholarly form: Blodeuwedd — no older script survives to transcribe, so the canonical content is the exactness of the spelling itself.

No diacritics are required here: the canonical form is the exactness of the spelling itself, the form the tradition’s convention demands.

The Character Witness

The plain form blodeuwedd differs from the canonical Blodeuwedd only by convention of display — case, not content. It is acceptable everywhere: in legacy systems, in plain-text citation, in the DNS itself. What is not acceptable is what follows in the register: respellings that change the letters, not just their case.

Mitigating Circumstances

No alternate form of this name carries documented scholarly support in the lexicon's record. The convention here — the tradition’s standard — produces exactly one defensible transliteration: Blodeuwedd. Forms that differ from it are not contested; they are simply wrong.

The Convention's Own History

Every tradition in this register has its own scholarly transliteration standard, built by its own specialists over decades or centuries, and the register follows each on its own terms: the tradition’s own standard. The principle that unifies them is the one the whole project stands on: a name is evidence, and evidence is not negotiable — not for keyboards, not for convenience, not for anyone.

Registration, Honestly

Three facts govern every domain this project registers. One: IDNA 2008 welcomes the marks — punycode encodes them legally and browsers show them faithfully. Two: welcome is not availability — registrars hold partial inventory, so the ideal form of a name may exist in the protocol yet not in the shop window today. Three: typeability is a separate virtue — a form no one can type on a phone is a form no one will visit, however canonical.

Hence the hierarchy the rulebook enforces: take the most complete form that is both attested and actually registrable, and never accept a wrong mark for the sake of availability. The wrong accent is not a rung on that ladder; it is off the ladder entirely.

The Verdict

So the register finds: Blodeuwedd, canonical; blodeuwedd, equally canonical; the contested forms, recorded with their support; the false forms, ruled against with their violations named. Every line of that finding cites its evidence, and the evidence is open to any reader — the register asks to be checked, not trusted. The temple keeps the canonical form at /sites/blodeuwedd/.

The docket for this ruling: no false forms on the docket; no contested forms attested; the attestation rests on 6 cited sources — Mabinogion, Fourth Branch (Math uab Mathonwy), trans. Sioned Davies (Oxford University Press, 2007), Ifor Williams, ed., Pedeir Keinc y Mabinogi, 2nd ed. (University of Wales Press, 1951), Proinsias Mac Cana, The Mabinogi, 2nd ed. (University of Wales Press, 1992).

The Register Continues

This is one of 397 entries in the Canonical Register — the authoritative reference for every flagship temple. The temple's founding dispatch tells the name's story; its Restoration File details the marks; its Resonance File reads the archetype into the industries. The blog index holds the whole archive, and the Rulebook states the convention this register enforces.

Continue the register — previous entry: Bifrǫst (read it) · next entry: Bragi (read it).

The Canonical Register is written from the same canonical record as the lexicon itself. If a false form is missing from this page, it is because the evidence does not support calling it false — or because we have not seen it yet. Show us, with a citation, and the register will answer.