[ANSTHRLD] If Whole when Part? A CD Question

[Britt]

> Don't have a clue how to search these questions for precedents:

Tec teach!  :)

>   If two beasts (e.g. Cat and Dog) are a CD apart, are their parts (e.g. Head or Leg) a CD apart as well?  Always, Never, or on a Case by Case basis?
>
>   Is the same true with birds? Monsters?

I've been using the new site for my searches:
http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents.html

Laurel precedents are categorized, for the most part, like the
Ordinary index, so you can find the relevant precedents under 'Leg and
Jambe' and 'Head'.  Just use the contents.  In a pinch, many
precedents also have an index at the end so if your category isn't in
the contents, try the index.

Remember that more recent precedents supercede older ones, so start at
the top and work your way back down tenures until you find what you're
looking for.

Now, what you're asking is actually a very old question, so the more
recent precedents aren't likely to cover it. It's been codified for
years that if two types of critter are different types by X.4.e., so
are their parts, and if not, not.  But telling you this reduces the
answer to 'Teceangl says...' and that plus $4 will get you a tall
latte at Starbucks, but as Laurel has said, very succinctly and well:
---------------------------
The documentation for the submitted byname appears to be an
unattributed quote from an unknown commenter.  Such documentation is
completely unacceptable.  Without a way to trace the origin of the
information, it is nearly impossible to access its relevance to the
matter in question.  Furthermore, "because X says so" is not now and
has never been adequate documentation in support of a
name--documentation, including statements from experts, must be backed
with solid citations (which experts are generally able to provide).
This was not done here. [Áine na mBrionn, 11/05, R-Middle]
---------------------------
Yes, it's a name precedent, but equally valid for matters of armory as well.
So in case anyone's ever wondered why I post so much stuff in response
to simple questions, it's because 'Teceangl says' should not, ever, be
considered acceptable upon which to base one's decisions.  Therefore,
Teceangl says that Laurel says...  :)

Let's look at heads.

... no difference between a lynx's head and a cat's head. [Cristal
Fleur de la Mer, 02/03, R-Caid]

      [Tec note: That matches the fact that no two whole cats are
different, either.]

The head of a minotaur is a bull's head and cannot be distinguished as
a minotaur without the remainder of the creature. (LoAR 25 Jan 87, p.
18)

There was a strong feeling that adequate difference in type exists
between a walrus head and a buck's head to apply section X.2 of the
new rules and carry this clear. (LoAR 28 May 1990, p. 2)

"The commentary was very nearly unanimous that there is not a CVD
between a bison's head and a bull's head." (LoAR 8/91 p.14).

[Three cranes' heads couped and conjoined at the beaks] "Conflict
with... sable three swan's heads... there is one CD for the
arrangement of the primaries, but nothing for the change to type."
(LoAR 5/92 p.24).

"The differences between a buck's skull and a buck's head cabossed are
nearly non-existent." (LoAR 9/90 p.15).

[A ram's head cabossed vs. an ox head cabossed] There's ...a CD for
the type of head. (Indeed, we'd say that Rule X.2 applies between an
ox head and a ram's head. This is well clear.) (Riordan Robert
MacGregor., December, 1992, pg. 5)

[A tyger's head erased] Possible conflict was cited against [A wolf's
head erased within a bordure rayonny]. There's a CD for the bordure;
the question was raised on any difference between a wolf's head and a
tyger's head. Rule X.4.e specifically grants a difference between a
lion and a [heraldic] tyger; but even assuming the same between a wolf
and a tyger, that doesn't necessarily require difference between their
heads. (By analogy, we grant difference between a dragon and an eagle
-- but none between a dragon's foot and an eagle's foot.) The heraldic
tyger is described as "having ...the maned neck of a horse, and the
head of a wolf, but the upper jaw develops into a frontal horn"
(Franklyn & Tanner 334); there's no way that the heads could be deemed
Substantially Different, but I can see granting a CD for the frontal
horn and the mane. (Laeghaire O Laverty, August, 1993, pg. 5)

There's a CD (at least) between a horse's head and a unicorn's head.
(Richard Cheval, October, 1992, pg. 7)

[Three bear's heads erased] Rule X.2 applies between most types of
beast head, just as it does between most types of beast. This is clear
of such armories as [three buck's heads erased]. (Damon the Grim,
October, 1992, pg. 1)

      [Tec note: This is the big one and still stands.  Later rulings
have been based both
      on whether the whole critters get difference and whether the
heads alone are visually distinct.]

And now legs:

...we grant difference between a dragon and an eagle -- but none
between a dragon's foot and an eagle's foot. (Laeghaire O Laverty,
August, 1993, pg. 5)

"There is no difference between a bear's paw and a bear's jambe."
(LoAR 1/91 p.25).

[Three hawk's legs couped contourny] "Conflict with... three eagle's
legs erased.. There is one CVD for [a different change - implying that
no difference between a bird's leg and a bird's leg contourny.]" (LoAR
9/91 p.16).

[Per chevron azure and barry wavy argent and vert, two tiger's jambes
in chevron couped argent, marked sable.] Conflict with Stanton
(Papworth, p. 963), Sable, two lion's gambs in chevron argent. There
is one CD for the field, but the sable markings on the jambes here are
insufficient for another. (Fearghus O'Shannon, 10/94 p. 13)

[an eagle's foot vs an dragon's jamb inverted] Both emblazons showed
approximately the same amount of claw and leg, and they looked quite
similar in type. [No difference was given.] (Duncan Greifenklau, 10/96
p. 11)

We give no difference between an eagle's jamb and a dragon's jamb.
[However] the default for a dragon's jamb is claws up and the default
for an eagle's jamb is claw's down.... (Barony of One Thousand Eyes,
4/98 p. 19)

[Cornish chough's leg erased proper] This is clear of conflict with a
badge of ... (Fieldless) A raven's foot couped sable, armed and banded
gules. There is one CD for fieldlessness and another for the type
difference between a bird's leg and a bird's foot. This is also clear
of conflict with ... Per fess lozengy argent and sable and argent, a
bird's leg a-la-quise sable. There is one CD for changing the
orientation of the leg and another CD for fieldlessness. There is no
CD for changing the tincture: the red portion of the leg, while
significant enough to blazon, is less than half the charge. [Leona of
Remington, 02/02, A-Ansteorra]


So not as straightforward.  Same type usually means conflict.  A
lion's jambe versus a bear's jambe?  No specific ruling has been
recorded.  Again you're going both on period practice and visual
similarity.  I would bet on a CD between a lion's jambe and a wolf's
jambe.  I would bet on X.2. substiatial difference between an eagle's
leg, a horse's leg and a lion's jambe.  I have no proof of any of
these, however.  I'm simply applying logic.

- Teceangl