[A chevron inverted debased] The chevron inverted is definitely debased, so much that the fact must be blazoned; but no evidence has been presented chevrons (inverted or not) were blazoned or drawn "debased" in period. (Charles of the Painted Glen, November, 1992, pg. 15)
There are no period examples of inserting charges within the interlacing of braced chevrons; usually, such interlacing was done so tightly as to leave no room for charges between the gaps. While we might permit charges in the gaps between braced chevrons in a Society design, the other problems in this design combine to warrant return for non-period style. (Gwendolyn æt Faegerlea, May, 1993, pg. 14)
The chevron écimé [with a blunted top] does not appear to be a period charge. The single registration in the SCA of the term was in 1973 (Eiolf Eriksson); and that wasn't even a correct blazon for the device (which has been reblazoned elsewhere in this LoAR). The current submission would thus be the defining instance of the charge, and we need to see evidence of its use in period before allowing its registration. We will defer any discussion of its difference versus an ordinary chevron until its validity as a period charge has been demonstrated. (Vladimir Heraldsson, October, 1993, pg. 15)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Charge Group) |Top of Page |Next Page (Chief)]