[ANSTHRLD] requesting submission help

[tmcd at panix.com]

On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Alden Drake <alden_drake at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> A submitter I'm working with would like to register the following:
>
> Quarterly sable and lozengy bendwise argent and azure, a
> double-headed eagle displayed quarterly Or and sable.
>
> "Lozengy bendwise" is the best way I can describe the quarter of the
> field.  It is based on the arms of Wittelsbach, seen in the Small
> Arms of Bayern: http://www.ngw.nl/int/dld/bayern.htm.  It differs
> from "barry bendy" because there is no horizontal line division.
>
> Is this arrangmeent registerable?

In 2/05:

  Sebastian Wolfgang von Bayern. Device. Per fess argent and paly
  bendy argent and azure, on a demi-eagle issuant from the line of
  division sable a mullet Or.

      This device must be returned for using a partial field of
      Bavaria, Lozengy bendwise azure and argent, with the surname von
      Bayern. RfS XI.2 says, "Armory that asserts a strong claim of
      identity in the context of the submitters name is considered
      presumptuous." The field of Bavaria has, in fact, at various
      times been disallowed entirely, much as the field of France is
      disallowed. Since August 1995 it has been permitted, but the
      combination of this field with the locative byname clearly puts
      it over the line, making a claim to be of the House of Bavaria.

      The issue of the upper half of the field was also raised, as it
      resembles the arms of Prussia, Argent, an eagle displayed sable
      crowned Or, making the overall design appear to be a dimidiation
      per fess of Prussia and Bavaria. However, the SCA does not
      recognize marshalling of arms per fess despite hints that this
      may have been done in Germanic heraldry. Nebuly also points out
      that this design resembles a chief of allegiance, but there are
      period examples of vassals bearing such references to their
      lord's arms. Thus, the combination of elements in this
      submission, while evocative, is not itself a bar to
      registration.

I don't suppose your client is Sebastian, moved from AEthelmearc?
Note that it doesn't say that a lozengy bendwise field is ipso facto
unregisterable, and Laurel tries to list all possible causes for
return.  In fact, it was registered without comment in February 1997
by Aonghus MacThorcadail.

Mind you, the conflict space may be a bit larger than you realize:

  Sybille la Chatte. Device. Lozengy sable and ermine.

      Conflict with the dukes of Teck (important non-SCA arms),
      Lozengy bendwise sable and Or. There is one CD for changing the
      tincture of half the field, but no difference is given between
      lozengy and lozengy bendwise by prior precedent: "The field here
      [Lozengy azure and argent] is functionally the same as Bavaria
      [Lozengy bendwise azure and argent]" (LoAR December 1993 (b),
      p.10).

I'd have to see a depiction to see whether the design is
recognizable.  If the second color were red instead of blue, it might
be more recognizable.

(Personally, I consider your submitter's design to be ugly and not
similar to any period style I've seen, but that won't be cause for
return until after my coup d'etat to take over the College of Arms.
Anyway, I won't be the one who has to live with it.)

Danielis Lindecolina
-- 
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com