[ANSTHRLD] Conflict and Blazon Check - Assistance Needed

[Jennifer Smith]

Sigh. Well, in that case, I went to Fish-Other and did the same sort
of search, and found only this potential conflict:

Frosted Hills, Shire of
The following badge associated with this name was registered in
November of 2004 (via the East):
(Fieldless) A sturgeon naiant azure.

There's one CD for the field, but the other will have to come from if
there is a CD between a natural dolphin and a sturgeon or not.  Time
for another precedent dive, but I've got to go get a cake out of the
oven here in a few minutes. :)

IF it turns out to be a conflict, it's may be possible to get a Letter
of Permission to Conflict from that Shire, particularly as it's so far
away geographically.

-Emma


On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:05 PM, doug bell <magnus77840 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sorry, there is no difference between a heraldic and a natural dolphin.This also means the natural dolphin azure may also conflict with
> standard fish.  Back to the conflict checking.
> Magnus
>
> [June 2005 LoAR, A-Atlantia] Atlantia, Kingdom
> of.
> Badge for Order of the Herring. (Fieldless) A herring urinant
> argent.
> This does not conflict with the badge for the Order of the Dolphin
> of Caid,
> Azure, a dolphin embowed uriant to sinister argent.
> There is a CD for
> fieldlessness and another for the difference
> between a heraldic dolphin
> and a herring. Precedent states:
>
> [Per fess engrailed azure and vert, in chief a natural dolphin
> argent] ...
> this conflicts with Anton de Winton, Per chevron
> azure, and Or scaly sable,
> in chief a herring naiant embowed argent.
> There is one CD for changing the
> field. There is no difference for
> changing the type of fish. A natural dolphin is not apparently a
> period heraldic charge, and thus its difference from other
> charges
> must be determined on visual grounds under RfS X.4.e. Comparing
> this
> dolphin with Anton's herring, the outlines of the two charges are
> very similar.
> They both have slightly forked tails (it is impossible
> to tell whether the tail is
> supposed to have horizontal or vertical
> flukes without resorting to internal
> details, and Anton's dolphin
> lacks these). Both creatures have a dorsal fin
> and a forefin. The
> "beak" or "bottle-nose" on a natural dolphin
> helps identify it as a natural dolphin, but is not a sufficient
> outline difference to give a CD
> from a herring.
>
> Note that this ruling does not revoke the many rulings that grant
> no difference between a heraldic and a natural dolphin. Given the
> well established trends owards naturalism in Renaissance art and
> Renaissance heraldic art, it is possible that a natural dolphin might
> have been used as an artist's variant of a heraldic dolphin.
> Without
> evidence for natural dolphins in period heraldry, the natural dolphin
> will conflict both with heraldic dolphins and with standard-outlined
> fish, like herring.
> [Helga Iden dohtir, 04/02, R-Caid]
>
> However, conflict is not transitive and there is a CD between a
> heraldic dolphin
> and a fish such as a herring. The precedent "There's
> a CD between dolphins and
> most kinds of fish. (Alethea of Fair Isle,
> October, 1992, pg. 16)" applies to
> heraldic dolphins, not
> natural dolphins.
>
>  > I am fairly sure there is at least a CD (and possibly X.2 difference)
>> between a natural dolphin (aka bottle-nosed dolphin) and a heraldic
>> dolphin, but that would take a short dig through the precedents to
>> uncover the exact ruling. Fortunately, we don't have to, because there
>> aren't any even close!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/heralds-ansteorra.org
>