[ANSTHRLD] Request conflict check

Crandall crandalltwo-scalists at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 20 17:14:10 PST 2008

I shall pass this information on to the
submitter, thanks. 

--- Britt <tierna.britt at gmail.com> wrote:

> I just realized this came off the list and
> really, many sets of eyes
> and skills should be involved to best serve the
> client.
> Here's the original emblazon:
> Under the possible blazon 'Per bend bendy Or
> and gules and gules, a
> comp[ass star Or charged with a roundel sable'
> I called conflict
> against Kourost Bernard of the East Woods -
> reblazoned in December of
> 2000 (via the West): Sable, a sun Or eclipsed
> sable.
> One CD for changing the field, nothing for the
> forced move to base.
> Latest response:
> >  Part of the blazon should have read
> something
> >  like Three Bendlets Or, Enhanced.
> >
> Sent me to Laurel precedents to see if the
> space at the top was enough
> to remove the alternate blazon option of per
> bend bendy Or and gules
> and gules.
> They're not overly enhanced, which is good.
> Either emblazon is
> acceptable as to the depiction of enhanced
> bendlets.
> You cannot blazon your way out of a conflict.
> It looks like my
> conflict call still stands.  This precedent
> comes closest to
> illustrating the problem with this depiction -
> either of them:
> -------------------
> [Quarterly gules and sable, three bendlets
> argent] Conflict with
> Ysfael ap Briafael, Per bend bendy vert and
> argent and vert. Ysfael's
> device could alternately be blazoned as Vert,
> three bendlets enhanced
> argent, and was originally submitted under that
> blazon. Ysfael's
> registration in the LoAR of December 2000
> stated, "Originally blazoned
> as three bendlets enhanced, the blazon above
> more closely describes
> the emblazon." When considering Ysfael's device
> under the alternate
> blazon of Vert, three bendlets enhanced argent,
> and comparing it to
> Tigernach's submission, there is one CD for
> changing the field, but
> the second CD must come from the change of
> location of the bendlets
> from enhanced.
> Our original inclination was to give a second
> CD for enhancing the
> bendlets under RfS X.4.g. However, evidence
> indicates that, in period,
> armory using three bendlets enhanced was not
> distinct from armory
> using three bendlets in their default location
> on the field. We thus
> should not give difference between these
> designs.
> The Dictionary of British Arms (DBA) volume two
> gives very few coats
> of arms using three bendlets enhanced (on p.
> 117). Most of these coats
> are also found belonging to the same family but
> with the three
> bendlets in their default position (on pp.
> 114-116): the arms of
> Byron, Argent, three bends [enhanced] gules,
> Greeley, Gules, three
> bends [enhanced] Or, and Mawnyse/Mauvesin,
> Gules, three bends
> [enhanced] argent. For one of these families,
> there is scholarship
> which explicitly states that the coat with the
> three bendlets enhanced
> is a later version of the coat with three
> bendlets, rather than a
> distinctly different, cadenced, coat.
> Woodward's A Treatise on
> Heraldry British and Foreign discusses the arms
> of Byron on p. 132,
> stating, "What appears to have been the
> original coat of Biron viz.,
> Argent, three bendlets gules, is now borne with
> the bendlets enhanced
> (Fr. haussés) i.e. placed higher in the shield,
> as in the arms of the
> poet, Lord Byron."
> The difference between three bendlets and three
> bendlets enhanced is
> thus similar to the difference between crosses
> bottony and crosses
> crosslet. We give no difference between these
> crosses because, as
> discussed in the LoAR of August 2002, "It is
> important to recall that
> the cross bottony and the cross crosslet are
> both used to represent
> the same charge throughout our period's
> heraldry. The bottony form is
> found predominantly in earlier artwork, and the
> crosslet form
> predominantly in later artwork." The evidence
> in DBA and Woodward
> suggests that three bendlets and three bendlets
> enhanced are both used
> to represent the same armory throughout our
> period's heraldry. Just as
> the cross crosslet became distinct from the
> cross bottony after our
> period, three bendlets enhanced became distinct
> from three bendlets
> after our period. [Tigernach Mag Samhradháin,
> 11/03, R-Æthelmearc]
> ----------------------
> So the problem still exists.  I've suggested a
> bordure Or, as that
> wouldn't be at all uncommon in such a design in
> period. And I did
> check that option for conflict as well,
> particularly since it pulls
> the design out of X.2. qualification.
> I find 'Gules, three bendlets enhanced and on a
> compass star Or a
> roundel sable' clear of  Catherine de Clare of
> Alconleigh - July of
> 1991 (via the East): Gules, five annulets
> interlaced in bend within a
> bordure Or. One CD for changing the type of
> charges in the primary
> group by X.4.e. and another CD for adding a
> tertiary charge group
> under X.4.i.
> I find 'Gules, three bendlets enhanced and on a
> compass star Or a
> roundel sable' clear of Bran Cuilean mac
> Muirchiu ua Néill - November
> of 1992 (via the Middle): Gules, two wolves
> rampant and on a sun Or, a
> raven migrant to sinister chief sable, a
> bordure Or. There is one CD
> for change of number of charges by X.4.f. and
> another CD for changing
> the type of more than half of them under X.4.e.
> Any and all other information/advice/opinions
> welcomed.
> - Teceangl
> -- 
> Heraldry is designed to be easily reproduced by
> anyone who sees the arms. -
> http://www.s-gabriel.org/docs/clichelist.html

One's sense of honor is the only thing that does not grow old, and the last pleasure, when one is worn out with age, is not, as the poet said, making money, but having the respect of one's fellow men.

More information about the Heralds mailing list