[ANSTHRLD] Conflict Check

[doug bell]

A correct and excellent observation and it required a letter of permission to conflict 
between a lion-dragon and a cockatrice.



	
	
	
	

[June 1989 LoAR, A-Caid] Thurstan de Barri. Device. Quarterly vert and argent, a winged lion-dragon 
sejant to sinister Or. He has permission to conflict with the badge of Brann Morgan Dunmore of 
Galloway ("A cockatrice erect to sinister Or drawing a sword from a scabbard proper."). 
This would be improved if the head of the lion did not lie entirely on the argent portion 
of the field, making it more difficult to identify. 

A change in orientation is usually enough for a CD to clear
the badge with Mooneschadowe.

I doubt Laurel will overturn such a precedent unless new
evidence has surfaced that these monsters were not
considered different in period.

So I concur. It looks clear.

Magnus

> 
> Possible conflcts are:
> 
> 
>    - Mooneschadowe, Shire
> of<http://oanda.sca.org/oanda_name.cgi?p=Mooneschadowe%2c%20Shire%20of>
>       - The following badge associated with this name was registered in July
>       of 1991 (via
> Ansteorra)<http://oanda.sca.org/oanda_date.cgi?y1=1991&m1=July&y2=1991&m2=July&kX=checked>
>       :
>       (Fieldless <http://oanda.sca.org/glossary.cgi?p=fieldless>) A
> lion<http://oanda.sca.org/glossary.cgi?p=lion>-dragon
>       statant contourny
> <http://oanda.sca.org/glossary.cgi?p=contourny>
> Or<http://oanda.sca.org/glossary.cgi?p=Or>
>       .
> 
>            1 CD for fieldless vs Per fess gules/sable.
>            I suspect that Laurel would hold a lion-dragon in conflict with a
> Cockatrice,
>            and if that is the case, the question becomes whether contourny
> is enough to clear the conflict.
> 
> 
>        I was able to find the following precedent from Jaelle's tenure as
> Laurel:
> 
> 
> **
> 
> [a *dragon* vs a *cockatrice*] We do not normally give a difference for
> changing the head only of a beast or monster. However, since they were
> considered different monsters in period, and since the head is not obscured
> in any way, we are willing to grant it the necessary CD to make it clear of
> these possible conflicts. (Wolfger von Lausfenburg, 11/97 p. 10)
> 
> So - unless Laurel chooses to overturn that precedent, the device should be
> clear.
> 
> Hopefully someone will come along behind me and check my work?
> 
> 
> Yours,
> 
> 
> Jayme
> _______________________________________________
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/heralds-ansteorra.org