[antir-heralds] Conflict Question

[Britt]

> Is a maintained or sustained charge considered a primary or secondary charge?  Is there a point of difference for a different maintained or sustained charge?

http://heraldry.sca.org/

The definitions of terms is in the Glossary of Terms, linked under
Rules in the right sidebar.  You'll find Maintained Charge and
Sustained Charge in there.
The Rules for submission, also linked under Rules in the right
sidebar, explains what is registerable and what is not. Section X
defines conflict.  Rules X.2. and X.4.e. explains charge difference
for type.

Laurel precedents are linked under Library on the right sidebar.
Precedents are rulings in specific cases which are too detailed to
have been covered by the RfS - such as does a unicorn and a horse get
difference. Laid out much like the Ordinary index
(http:/oanda.sca.org/ordinary/index.html - the ONLY place you should
look up armory for conflict checking purposes), you can usually find
what you're looking for by using the Contents. Some compilations also
have Indexes (find the link to those in the intro text) which help you
find things too specific for the Contents (such as an ounce, which
would be under Beast - Cat).  Since they all also have single html
files you can string search them, however I recommend this only as a
last resort because so many things have multiple names or spellings,
and typos also exist in the LoARs where the precedents were initially
published (notorious examples are flory/fleury, that ALL canines are
under Dog and ALL felines are under Cat and there are multiple terms
for both those types of charge, and the existence, or not, of accents
in estencellè/estencelly and semè/semy).


Those are the basic tools that all heralds need in order to conflict
check.  Not just conflict check well or successfully, but at all.  Any
less is kind of like trying to drive with no accelerator pedal or
steering wheel.  you might succeed, but if you do, it's probably a
fluke. :)
At this time I'm reminding EVERYONE that I give public and private
lessons and never consider anyone who's trying to learn, or their
questions, stupid. No one who tries is anything but laudable and we
all learned this stuff from scratch. So anyone may email me anytime
with specific questions or for general instruction. I'm here, I'm
eager to teach, and I'm sort of good at this. :)

> My client wants the following badge:  Azure a bear sejant erect contourny argent maintaining an oak branch proper.

Excellent blazon.
For maintained charges, which do not count for difference, I present
the following Laurel precedent found under the tenure of Francois la
Flamme, Collected Armory Precedents, CHARGE -- Maintained and
Sustained:

Since the July 1992 LoAR, the term maintaining has been used for
grasped or held items which are too small to be worth difference.
Sustaining and supporting have been used for a grasped or held item
which is of comparable visual weight to the item holding it, and thus
worth difference. In cases where other blazon words are used for the
act of holding an item, the blazon is ambiguous about whether the held
item is significant or not. It is true that the term maintaining
literally derives from a Latin phrase for holding in a hand, and thus
is not ideal for blazoning an item which is held in the mouth, or by
the tail, of an animal. However, it seems preferable to remove the
blazon ambiguity and use the word maintaining in these cases. [Godwin
Alfricson, 08/01, A-Ansteorra]

So you're not taking my word for it. Laurel said. :)

> Does this conflict with:
> a.. Curteis Svartsælingr
>   a.. The following badge associated with this name was registered in June of 1997 (via Trimaris):
>   Sable, a bear sejant erect contourny sustaining a double-bitted axe Or.
> I know there's a CD for changing the tincture from sable to azure, but not sure if there is another for changing the axe to an oak branch.

Pull up the Rules for Submission (RfS).  I'll wait...
Got it?  Right, follow along.

X.1. doesn't apply as there's a primary charge group in both armories.
X.2. doesn't apply because there's a bear in the primary charge group
of both armories.
X.3. doesn't apply because it's not branch arms.
X.4. is where we get to start.

X.4.a. says, "Significantly changing the tinctures, direction of
partition lines, style of partition lines, or number of pieces in a
partition of the field is one clear difference."
So there is one CD for changing the field from sable to azure (the
registered armory is what we consider 'changed' when counting CDs).

X.4.d. says, "Changing the tinctures or division of any group of
charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges or
charges overall, is one clear difference."  The bear in the registered
armory is Or and that means there's a CD.

X.4.f. says you get a CD for changing number, and that, "One, two, and
three are significantly different from any number..."  It means, of
course, from any _other_ number. As per the precedent, a sustained
charge is of comparable visual weight and worth difference. Further
examination of Laurel precedents explains that a sustained charge is
in the same charge group as the charge sustaining (or being sustained
by) it, so you get a CD by X.4.f. for changing the number of charges
in the primary charge group.

Two CDs are needed (X.4.'s first sentence is, "Two pieces of armory
will not be considered to conflict if two clear visual differences
exist between them.") and you have three, so it's clear.