[ANSTHRLD] Conflict Check help
Tim McDaniel
tmcd at panix.com
Wed Jul 21 10:07:40 PDT 2004
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Doug Bell <debell1 at txcyber.com> wrote:
> Domhnall wrote:
> > I'm in need of some assistance. As near as I can tell I can't find
> > any conflicts but I would rather be sure.
> >
> > Sable, within an orle argent, an eagle rising.
If you're not pretty much an expert in blazoning, it's best to give an
English-language description too. That way, we can verify everything.
As Magnus points out,
> you didn't give a ticture for the eagle.
If a tincture is omitted, the *next* tincture applies. For example,
Azure, an armadillo statant within a bordure Or.
means that the armadillo is yellow just like the bordure.
In
Sable, within an orle argent, an eagle rising.
there's no tincture *following* "eagle", so no tincture was
specified.
Arms are (usually) blazoned from the primary charge (the most
important central charge(s)) outward, lowest layer up. Here, the
eagle has to be the primary charge.
A bird rising is in side view (left side visible: it's facing to
dexter), both its wings elevated above its back as if it's about to
take flight and its wings are just starting the downstroke. (It can
also be blazoned "rising wings addorsed". "Addorsed" is from
"dorsal", 'back': "addorsed" means "back to back or having to do with
the back".) An orle is a racing stripe inside the shield, or a
bordure that was washed on hot and shrank in the wash: it's a broad
stripe that follows the edge of the shield but inwards a ways.
So if it's really an eagle rising surrounded by an orle, and they're
both white on a black background,
Sable, an eagle rising within an orle argent.
> Morwynna Branwynt September of 2003 (via Lochac):
> Quarterly azure and sable, a raven rising wings displayed within an
> orle argent.
>
> There was a bird cover letter I also need to find.
Three Laurel Letter of Acceptance and Return cover letters, perhaps?
A precedent on "rising" versus "rising wings displayed" would be good
to have -- that's a pretty substantial visual change. And, luckily,
we have a recent one. Francois draft armory precedents, ARTHROPOD --
Bee, revised 11 June 2004.
... This difference is worth a CD, analogous to the difference
between a bird rising wings displayed and a bird rising wings
addorsed. [Catríona nic Theàrlaigh, 12/02, A-An Tir]
One CD for the field, one CD for the posture of the boids. Clear.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Warning: deepish precedent fu incoming. It was just to try to find
another way to get a CD, or even to clear them by X.2 (substantial
difference of type) and avoid CD counting. And to figure out which
LoAR CL Magnus was talking about.
January 2000, On Owls and Eagles ... OK, that's not applicable.
There's special rules for birds displayed, but neither bird here is.
November 2003: Birds and Substantial Difference. ("Substantial
difference of type" is RfS X.2 difference, completely clearing the
armory. "Significant [type] difference" is RfS X.4.e, just one CD.)
After all the maundering below, it turns out that this doesn't help.
1. The change from one type of bird to the other type of bird must
"not usually [have been] used to indicate any form of cadency"
in period (RfS X.2). The two types of bird must of course also
have been considered different in period, or they would not even
be significantly different (RfS X.4.e).
2. Each bird, in both the new and the old submissions, must be in a
posture which was period for that type of bird.
3. Each bird, in both the new and the old submissions, must be
drawn correctly.
4. The two types of bird must have been drawn in fashions that were
consistently very different from each other throughout period
heraldry.
... Ravens are sometimes found in the rising posture in period, ...
* If a bird is found in a rising posture in period, it is
reasonable to assume that both rising wings addorsed and rising
wings displayed are standard variants of that posture. ...
The attached bird posture document lists "rising" as a period posture
for eagles. So point 2 is OK.
It's point 4 that's the problem.
On examining the types of birds found in period armory, and how
they were used, certain categories of bird type become
apparent. These categories are:
* Swan-shaped birds, including swans, geese, and ducks: waterfowl
with long necks, rounded bills, long heavy bodies, webbed feet.
* Crane-shaped birds, including cranes, herons, and storks: tall
thin birds with long necks, long pointed beaks, medium-weight
bodies, very long legs.
* Poultry-shaped birds, including chickens, quail, partridge, and
peacocks: compact rounded birds with short to medium necks,
short beaks, heavy rounded bodies, medium or short legs, often
with distinctive tails or head details (combs, crests).
* "Regular-shaped" birds, including martlets, ravens and other
corbies, raptors (hawks, eagles, and owls), and doves: birds
with the classic "bird shape". Compact light- or medium-weight
birds with small necks and beaks, short to medium legs, plain
tails.
Not all period birds are found in the categories above.
Unfortunately, ravens and eagles are both listed in the birdy bird
category. So no X.2 difference between them:
* Birds within a category are not substantially different from
each other. They may be (but are not always) significantly
different from each other based on the criteria in RfS X.4.e.
Within the "regular-shaped birds" category, there is significant
difference between an owl (close guardant) and a dove (close),
but not substantial difference. However, in the same category,
there is no difference between a falcon rising and an eagle
rising.
Perhaps the LoAR CL Magnus was thinking about was January 2002,
Ravens and Similar Birds.
A raven is a crow is a rook is a daw is (almost) a Cornish chough ...
How much difference should be given between corbies and other birds?
... The specific question raised this month was that of the
difference between corbies and falcons, when they are both in the
close posture. ... a larger proportion of the falcons in period
armory are depicted in a rising posture, either with wings
addorsed or displayed ... It appears that, at least in the case of
falcons close versus corbies close, there are cases where there is
no visual difference, even though they are in a period posture and
in well-drawn works of heraldic art. Therefore, falcons close are
not entitled to difference from corbies close.
So I think the old precedent that raptors are raptors still stands,
so an eagle gets no CD for type versus a raven.
So none of the cover letter stuff I can find is applicable. Lucky
that we don't need it.
Daniel de Lincolia
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com
More information about the Heralds
mailing list