[ANSTHRLD] Radei Drchevich appeal

[doug bell]

The main precedent an appeal has to address is this one:
November 2002 LoAR Trimaris
Isabel Margarita de Sotomayor y Pérez de Gerena. Device. Argent vêtu ployé 
quarterly sable and gules, a cat passant guardant sable.
Conflict with William the Silent, Or, a natural panther passant guardant 
sable. There is only one CD for changing the tincture of the field. There is 
no type difference between a cat and a natural panther.
This also conflicts with Amber Lang, Vert, on a lozenge argent, a cat sejant 
guardant sable. When comparing armory using a vêtu field with armory using a 
lozenge, the comparison must be made in two ways: as if both pieces of 
armory used a vêtu field, and as if both pieces of armory used a lozenge. If 
we consider Isabel's armory as the equivalent blazon Quarterly sable and 
gules, on a lozenge ployé througout argent a cat passant guardant sable, 
there is one CD from Amber's armory for changing the field, but no 
difference by RfS X.4.j for changing only the posture of the tertiary 
charge. There is no difference between a lozenge and a lozenge ployé, nor is 
there difference between a lozenge and a lozenge throughout.

This states no objection to a vetu quarterly field and we have registered:
Cedric MacShannachan
The following device associated with this name was registered in May of 1992 
(via the East):  Azure, vetu checky sable and argent, two torcs interlaced 
in fess open to the flanks Or.
Vincent of Winterpeak
The following badge associated with this name was registered in December of 
1982 (via the West):
Per pale vert and sable, vêtu ployé Or, a bordure of the field.

A properly drawn lozenge throughout and a vêtu are visually identical and 
that is the central problem.

You cannot blazon your way out of a conflict.
June 2005 LoAR Margarita de la Carrera. Name and device. Sable, a bear 
sejant erect within an orle within an orle of mullets argent.
Nice name!
Several commenters suggested that this device could be blazoned Argent, on 
an escutcheon sable a bear sejant erect argent and a bordure sable mullety 
argent and, as such, would violate RfS XI.4, which forbids the use of a 
charged inescutcheon. However, as has been noted many times in precedent, it 
is possible to blazon your way out of a style problem, and the blazon 
presented on the Letter of Intent is a legitimate one. In a similar 
situation, returning Argent, an eagle displayed within an orle within an 
orle of lozenges orlewise sable, Laurel wrote, "As this could equally well 
be blazoned (as Papworth has done with similar designs), Sable an 
inescutcheon argent charged with an eagle sable all within a bordure argent 
semy of lozenges sable, it conflicts with Fylkyn (Papworth, p. 687), Sable 
an escutcheon argent within a bordure of the last charged with billets of 
the first" [Brian the Blackhawk, 01/94, R-East]. In that case, the device 
was returned because you cannot blazon your way out of a conflict, but no 
mention was made of problems with presumption under RfS XI.4. Since no 
conflicts were found for this device, we feel that it is registerable using 
the submitted blazon.

So, do these blazons produce the same emblazon?  Are both blazons correct?
"Quarterly gules and argent, on a lozenge throughout sable a mullet of four 
points Or."
"Sable vêtu quarterly gules and argent, a mullet of four points Or."

I will do a search of the LoARs using vêtu and lozenge throughout and see 
what turns up.
That will take a while but may reveal something not in the precedents.

There is also
X.5. Visual Test. - If the tinctures, shapes, or arrangement of the charges 
in a submission create an overwhelming visual resemblance to a piece of 
protected armory, the submission may be held to conflict even if sufficient 
theoretical difference can be counted between them.
A piece of armory is registered and protected, not the verbal description 
used to record that armory. The use of different terminology to describe two 
designs that are visually similar does not affect any potential for conflict 
that may exist. Thus, Or, a fess vert is not different from Vert, a chief 
and a base Or even though one could theoretically count sufficient 
difference between them from these blazons.

Magnus

_________________________________________________________________
Messenger Café — open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served daily. 
Visit now. http://cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_AugHMtagline