ÆTHELMEARC COLLEGE OF HERALDS - commentary archive
Letter of Intent #120
Myfanwy ferch Rhiannon

Feast of St. Modwenna
5 July AS XLIV

Greetings from Myfanwy!
Herein pray find commentary on Æ #120. Because it was a short letter (and because I have a whole bunch of stuff to get done before Pennsic) I went ahead and got the letter done early.
The armory has been conflict-checked through the March ‘09 LoAR.
I remain your servant and the Society’s.

Lady Myfanwy ferch Rhiannon
Ruth Morrisson
myfanwy@nauticom.net

1. Annora Draper -- Per bend vert and argent, a compass star sable.
The docs for both name elements are as cited.
Good name!
possibly clear of: Eleanor Leonard (badge, 7/82 Atlantia) -- (Tinctureless) A mullet of four points distilling a goutte.
There is a CD for field vs. field(less), because permission has been given to conflict if the field is not solid plain tincture; as per the 1/02 LoAR Cover Letter:
From Laurel: "A MULLET OF FOUR POINTS" (or, Our Best-Known
Conflict) Redux
[sic]
This month, Jaida bint Salim, on the Middle LoI, submitted the badge
(Fieldless) A mullet per pale azure and vert [sic]. There were calls of conflict
versus Eleanor Leonard's famous badge, (Tinctureless) A mullet of four
points distilling a goutte
[sic], registered in April 1982. This led us to
reconsider Eleanor Leonard's blanket letter of permission to conflict.
Because a tinctureless badge may be depicted in any tincture or
combination of tinctures on any tincture or combination of tinctures,
this badge occupies a large area of heraldic space and has a
correspondingly large potential for conflict.
Over the years, there have been many requests for permission
to conflict made of and given by Eleanor. In 1991, Eleanor Leonard
presented the College of Arms with a blanket letter of permission
to conflict reserving only the specific ways she intended to use the
badge, so that she would not continue to be bothered by requests
for permission to conflict....
After confirming that Eleanor Leonard continues to stand by her
letter, we are accepting her blanket letter of permission. She wrote
that she places her badge only on the five colors, the two metals, or
non-heraldic fields (plaid, for example), never on a divided field or
fur. She also uses only those seven major heraldic tinctures for the
mullet and goutte, never using a divided tincture or fur.
Therefore, there is permission to conflict for any armory with a
primary charge that is not solidly one of the seven major tinctures
(argent, Or, azure, gules, purpure, sable, and vert). As well, there is
permission to conflict for any fielded [sic] armory (not fieldless) [sic]
where the field is not solidly one of those seven major tinctures.
In other words: for permission to conflict, the primary charge
and/or the field must use a divided tincture, a field treatment, or a fur.
There is not a CD, however, between a compass star and a mullet of four points, by Precedent; this is a quote from François’ second tenure:
[a cross of lozenges vert compared to a compass star gules] sic]
...Quoth Metron Ariston: "By precedent a compass star and a mullet
of four points have no difference and this strikingly resembles a
mullet of four points visually. While there is a clear difference in
tincture of the lozengy cross/mullet, if the sizes and positions are
not very different then this may be a problem." Upon visual
comparison of the emblazons [ [sic], everyone at the meeting agreed
that this is a conflict. RfS X.4.e. states, "A charge not used in period
armory will be considered different in type if its shape in normal
depiction is significantly different" [sic]. Compass stars are not used
in period armory. Therefore, difference can only be derived on visual
grounds, and the visual difference between these two charges is
significantly different. [Safwah al-Zarqah al-Sabbiyah, LoAR 11/2004,
Outlands-R]
There may or may not be a CD for removing the goutte; it warrants a visual inspection to see how significant the goutte is (i.e., whether or not it would be considered a maintained or sustained charge.
possible conflict: Melissande Aefensteorra (6/86 West) -- Chevronelly vert and argent, a mullet of eight points, alternating straight and wavy, sable.
There is a CD for field; there may or may not be one for type, given the number of points, as there is not a CD between a standard mullet of eight points and a compass star, as well as one between suns and compass stars.
conflict: Craig of the Glyn (badge for Wythfed Ffordd House, 9/90 Caid) -- Gyronny gules and Or, a compass star sable.
There is only a single CD, for changing the field.
possible conflict: Sol Tizona (badge, 2/03 Middle) -- (Fieldless) A sun sable transfixed by an arrow inverted argent.
There is a CD for field vs. fieldless. There *may* be a CD for removing the arrow, but there is not a CD between a sun and a compass star.
possibly not clear of: Theo of Mightrinwood (11/79 Atenveldt) -- Purpure, a sun of eight wavy rays sable, fimbriated Or.
There is a CD for changing the field; there is probably not a CD for type, although given that these rays are all way it may warrant a visual comparison. There is probably also not one for the fimbriation.

2. Rígnach inghean uí Chonaill -- Per pale vert and azure, a chevron argent between three Thor’s hammers Or.
I’m not finding this name in OSCAR; however, it *is* listed in the online O&A, when I did a name pattern search for it [URL: http://oanda.sca.org:80/oanda_np.cgi?p=R%EDgnach&b=narrow&c=case-insensitive&l=25&s=name+only&d=modern&g=
enabled&a=disabled]; the arms that are now being released were also registered at this time. Note, BTW, that the old armory was not listed in the online O&A when I did a search under “Field-Per pale-vert and azure” (it *can* be found under both “Chevron-1- Uncharged-Plain line-Argent” and “Hammer-2”).
The chevron should be larger and come up higher on the field, even if it makes the hammers smaller as a result. Also, is there some reason for the somewhat excessive amount of diapering on the hammers?
I’m not sure why the arms are being changed, especially so slightly. The complexity count is only six, but the arms being released had a complexity count of five.
clear of: Tomás mac Donnchaidh (12/06 An Tir) -- Per pale vert and azure, a chevron ermine between three roundels in chevron and an arrow inverted Or.
There is a CD for changing the tincture of the chevron, and one for changes to the type(s) of secondaries.
probably clear of: Alleyn of Kent (4/96 West) -- Gules, a chevron argent between two reremice and a mallet Or.
There is a CD for changing the field; there is probably one for changing at least half the type of secondary charges.
clear of: Eric of Bhakail (4/96 East) -- Azure, a chevron throughout between three mallets fesswise Or.
There is a CD for changing half the field, and one for the tincture of the chevron; there may also be at least one for orientation of the secondaries (if not for type as well).
clear of: Magdelena von Freiberg (1/09 An Tir) -- Per chevron azure and sable, a chevron argent between two bezants and a tree blasted and eradicated Or.
There is a CD for changing the field, and one for the type of secondaries.

3. Ulrich von Baden -- Or, on a fess sable between two bars gules a bar argent.
The name can be found in the online O&A by doing a name pattern search [URL: http://oanda.sca.org:80/oanda_np.cgi?p=Ulrich+von+Baden&b=narrow&c=case-insensitive&l=100&s=name+only&d=modern&g=enabled&a=disabled].
Only the documentation from the Rene of Anjou cite actually gives specific proof of the use of a bar on a fess; the other documentation *does* provide proof of the use of ordinaries charged with other ordinaries.
I would have made the central fess larger; as is, this is somewhat odd looking (the bar is approximately the same size as both the cotises and the amount of remaining space on the fess, as well as the spaces between the fess and the cotises) -- or was this done deliberately?
The LoI says the old armory is to be retained; I presume this means as a badge?
Possible reblazon: Or, on a fess sable cotised gules a bar argent.
Possible reblazon: Or, a fess argent fimbriated sable cotised gules.
possibly clear of: Vélaug M{y´}rkjartansdóttir (3/05 Trimaris) -- Or semy of oak leaves vert, on a fess sable an owl argent.
There is at least one CD for type and tincture of secondaries; because this is simple armory, the may also be a CD for changing only the type of tertiary.
CD(s) -- type and tincture of secondaries

4. Verederosa Dal Sol -- (badge) (Fieldless) On a rose vert a sun Or.
The name can be found in the online O&A by doing a name pattern search [URL: http://oanda.sca.org:80/oanda_np.cgi?p=Verederosa&b=narrow&c=case-insensitive&l=100&s=name+only&d=modern&g=enabled&a=disabled].
I’m a bit uncertain about the ten-ray sun, especially when lined up against the petals and .barbing on the rose, but it doesn’t appear to overly hamper the identifiability of either charge.
clear of: Roger of York (badge, 5/00 Ansteorra) -- (Fieldless) A rose vert.
There is a CD for fieldless vs. fieldless, and one for adding the tertiary charge.
clear of: Oriana Valentina Corbizzi (badge, 1/91 Ansteorra) -- (Fieldless) A six petalled [sic] rose purpure barbed charged with a snowflake Or.
There is a CD for fieldless vs. fieldless, and one for the tincture of the rose; but there may not be one for type (i.e., between a 5- and- 6-petaled rose), and there may not be a significant enough change to the tertiary -- only type -- given their relative shapes.
probably clear of: Eógan Cú Chaille (badge, 1/97 Caid) -- (Fieldless) On a shamrock vert, a compass star Or.
There is a CD for fieldless vs. fieldless; there should be a CD (although not X.2) between a shamrock and a rose; there is a Precedent from François’ first tenure which states:
[shamrock vs. cinquefoil] [sic] The only difference is for the change in
type of the primary charge, which is worth a CD. There is not substantial
difference between a shamrock (a type of trefoil) [sic] and a cinquefoil,
analogous to the following precedent: [A trillium flower vs. a rose] There
is a CD for type of flower, but not the substantial difference required by Rule
X.2. (Gwyneth MacAulay, October, 1992, pg. 29).
[sic] [Caitlin of Drogheda,
11/01, R-Trimaris] [sic]
clear of: Catheryn Cameron Stewart Morgan (badge, 8/00 Caid) -- (Fieldless) On an eight-petaled flower alternating petals argent and azure barbed vert, a mullet of eight points Or.
There is a CD for fieldless vs. fieldless, and at least one for tincture (and possibly also type) of the flower; but there is nothing for the type of tertiary.

Bibliography:
http://oanda.sca.org

http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents.html

http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/loar/

other URLs as cited