[ANSTHRLD] Device resub questions - Lete Bithespring - long email - much copying from LoAR and AG

[Brent.Ryder at compucom.com]

Howdy all,

I am looking into the resubmission of on or the other of Lete Bithespring's device.

Past history:

Laurel Return LoAR 06/97 - Vert, a phoenix and in chief a sun Or.

This submission raised the question whether, in period, a change between a secondary charge and a "peripheral" was or was not used to indicate cadency. This was relevant to the acceptance or return of this submission, since the proposed armory was, under current rules, one CD from Julienne Dubarry (SCA), Vert, a phoenix within an orle Or., as cited in the LoI with one CD for changing the secondary charge from a sun to an orle. Some members of the College felt that the two coats given would be perceived as being more than one degree of cadency from each other, although they felt that each was only one degree from Vert, a phoenix Or.

Current SCA practice is that "a peripheral charge group is, in fact, a group of secondary charges; the phrase simply denotes a special class of secondaries, a class that can never be primaries, and that are automatically separate from any other secondary group in the same armory." Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme, 24 July, 1993 Cover Letter (June, 1993 LoAR).

Period practice shows that charges in both peripheral and non­peripheral positions were used as differencing marks. For divers and varying reasons these marks sufficed to mark difference at the time; but one of the concepts behind the SCA's rules is that a change between things that were used for differencing in period is generally worth one CD.

Heraldic Cadency, by Robert Gayre of Gayre and Nigg, pages 112 ­ 113, says "Next we find Upton, who was born about 1400, and who wrote De Studio, lays down a system which is easily perceived from the following diagram:" [I will give the blazons of the devices since it is easier than reproducing the diagram]: X(1) "Field, a fess; X(2) ­ 1st son of the 1st "Field, a fess and in chief a crescent"; X(3) ­ 2nd son of the first "Field, a fess and in chief a label"; X(4) ­ 1st son of the second "Field, a fess in chief a label and in base a crescent"; X(5) ­ 2nd son of the second "Field, a fess in chief a label a bordure"; X(6) ­ 3rd son of the second "Field, a fess in chief a label a bordure". He notes that the two bordures are in different tinctures.

So, in the instance above, when we get to the third generation, we swap a charge in base, for a bordure. The Boke of St. Albans, by Dame Juliana Berners, second edition, printed in 1496, offers much the same scheme, having brothers swap a label for a bordure. 

However, these are just theoretical texts. Were there actually cases in period where what we currently call a secondary or secondaries were exchanged for what we would consider a peripheral?

A European Armorial, which is an armorial of knights of the Golden Fleece and 15th century Europe from a contemporary manuscript, edited by Rosemary Pinches and Anthony Wood, shows, on page 89 the following French arms in this order: the King of France, "Azure, 3 fleurs­de­lys Or (France Modern), the Dauphin, "Quarterly, France modern, and Or, a dolphin gules", the Duke of Orleans, "France modern and a label argent", the Duke of Anjou, "France modern and a bordure gules" and the Duke of Berry "France modern and a bordure engrailed gules".

Lines of Succession, by Ji í Louda and Michael MacLagan show on Table 3 (England) the arms of the Prince of Wales (Edward, the Black Prince) "Quarterly France ancient and England, a label argent", followed by the arms of three of his brothers who all bear suitably differenced labels. The last brother, Thomas of Woodstock who bears "Quarterly France ancient and England, a bordure argent". 

In the same book, table 110 (Lorraine) shows the arms of Lorraine "Or, on a bend gules three eagles displayed argent". Claude I, who was the second son of René II, Duke of Lorraine, became Duke of Guise and bore Lorraine with a label. He had six sons. The eldest, Francis I, also Duke of Guise, bore Lorraine with a label, while the youngest became Master of Elboeuf, and bore Lorraine with a bordure.

In conclusion, it is obvious that substituting a peripheral for a non­peripheral secondary charge was certainly a period way to change the same base coat to show that two individuals are brothers. We consider that changing from one to the other is equivalent to adding either in terms of visual impact. Therefore, on the grounds period practice, SCA usage and visual impact we are returning this for conflict with Julienne Dubarry because only one CD exists for changing the type of secondary charge



Kingdom Return (AG 3/00) - Vert, on a hurt fimbriated a butterfly Or.

	In a recent return of Gules, a cross Or, overall on a lozenge sable fimbriated an estoile all within a bordure Or, Laurel stated: "This device is returned for violating rule XI.4: Arms of Pretense. The fimbriation makes the lozenge appear to be charged with a bordure." (Elsbeth Anne Roth, LoAR September 1999, p. 9) This roundel may have the identical problem.



The first one might be viable with either a small change or Permission to Conflict if 'Julienne Dubarry', Name and device registered August 93 via Atenveldt, could be contacted and if she then gave the requested and required permission.

The second I am not so sure about. There have been a number of recent ruling on 'pretense' and more to the point 'escutcheons of pretense' so I am not sure if there is a problem with it still or not.

I will be conflict checking it with and without the hurt to see if there is a minor change that could be made in that regard

Any suggestions or comments are welcome.

Let me know so I can finish out this resub that has gotten shuffled and lost too often here locally that the submitter quipped that it might be granted 'posthumously'.

Borek
Bordure