ANSTHRLD - conflict check an advice please

[Timothy A. McDaniel]

By the way, I like the original design.  Pily [bendwise] is Germanic,
and not done as much in the SCA as in period.  The rose was the single
most common plant in armory.  The tinctures chosen were all common in
period.  It would make a nice device.

> Would there be a second difference if I add a
> belt around the rose either sable or purpure?

This would be registerable.  (There are other registrations of the
motif in this decade.  OK, at least one; I don't remember exactly how
many total.)  It would not fall afoul of the precedent banning, on a
*fieldless* design, charges within a loop of belt.  (That's how
Scottish clan badges are displayed, you see.)  It would clear the
conflict cited.  I suppose there could be new conflicts, but that's
much less likely.

I'd like to give advice, and so I'd like to step back and ask the
purpose of the badge.  The SCA uses "badge" to mean lots of things;
the period term was much more narrow.  Do you intend to use it like a
badge was used in period, to mark your retainers, flunkies, and other
personal possessions?  If so, I would recommend a usual period-style
badge: one object without a background ("fieldless"), or occasionally
two or more joined objects fieldless.  (It's a pity that "a rose en
soleil", a rose with sunbeams eminating, was a badge of the later
Plantagenets and is therefore not registerable (CoA Glossary of Terms,
Table 2, Restricted Charges).  A quatrefoil or trefoil en soleil would
be the closest you could get.  Those would still be pretty, I think.)

If, on the other hand, you have some other purpose in mind, a fielded
"badge" may be appropriate.  For example, if it's a flag for a
fighting household, and if you wanted to follow period style, then you
would certainly have a field in the armory.

I will also note that circular-thing-around-another-thing is generally
modern, for arms and badges, with perhaps the exception of Scots clan
badges (I don't know when that started), and for displays of
membership in an order (e.g., the blue garter around the shield for a
Knight of the Garter).  (By the way, one reason I dislike the required
laurel wreath for groups is that it invites moving away from period
usage, due to the temptation of fitting it in via "a widget within a
laurel wreath".)

You might consider other changes, like upping the number of roses,
changing their colors, et cetera, though those are also more or less
likely to conflict.

Purple was quite rare in period armory, being in around 1% of all arms
(except for Iberia, where it rose to perhaps 8%).


HOWEVER.  Please note that there are differences between
    - SCA-registerable style
    - period style
    - what Daniel de Lincoln likes
Sometimes there are VAST differences.

If you want a badge, and for any reason you want a field, you can have
it (assuming no conflicts or other rules violations).  I simply like
to point out period style notes in case you care and want to follow
it.  You are under no obligation to do so, so long as it's
registerable anyway.

Daniel de Lincolia
-- 
Tim McDaniel is tmcd at jump.net; if that fail,
    tmcd at us.ibm.com is my work account.
"To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting everything
up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka.Korpela at hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.