[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Beast - Horse) |Next Page (Bird - Chicken)]
We're willing to grant a CD between a bezant and a hawk's bell, although perhaps not Complete Difference of Charge. (Meurisse de Blois, January, 1993, pg. 20)
Neither the period discussions of Per bend bevilled nor an extrapolation from a bend bevilled would support the emblazon shown here; nor can it be accurately blazoned without resorting to barbarisms such as Per bend sinister bevilled fesswise. I'd be willing to accept Per bend (sinister) bevilled, as being one logical step from period evidence --- if drawn in a correct manner, with the middle "zag" palewise. The form shown here is two steps removed from the evidence, which is correspondingly harder to swallow. Given evidence that such bevilled fields were never used with charges, the whole becomes unacceptable. (Radulfr Arnason, August, 1992, pg. 25)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Beast - Horse) |Top of Page |Next Page (Bird - Chicken)]
The College's ban on the international "no" symbol (a bend and bordure gules in combination) only applies when the combination is actually used as a "no" symbol: surmounting the symbol of whatever's being forbidden. The bend-bordure combination is not banned when there is no underlying charge. In this case [Vairy, a bend and a bordure gules], since vair isn't a charge, we find no stylistic problems here [device returned for conflict]. (Chryse Raptes, January, 1993, pg. 32)
[a <charges> and in sinister chief three bendlets] The device is excessivly imbalanced, which is not period heraldic style. A similar device (Penelope of the Quill, Vert, a quill pen bendwise and three bendlets enhanced Or) was returned Jan 92 for the same reason. [See also Keridwen of Caermarthen, same letter, pg. 53 (and below); the lowest bendlet in both cases issues from the center of the chief] (Brendan Hugh Guarin, September, 1992, pg. 37)
[a bend sinister bevilled between in pale a skull and a skull inverted] The bend sinister in the device is not correctly drawn: it does not issue from the sinister chief, as the ordinary should, nor is it correctly bevilled [the two pieces of the bend sinister significantly overlap] (see the LoAR cover letter of 18 Sept 92 for a complete discussion on bevilling). Combined with the inversion of the lower skull, the whole device is unacceptably poor style. (Juan Sanchez Ramirez, September, 1992, pg. 45)
[Three <charges> and three bendlets enhanced] The device is excessively imbalanced, which is not period heraldic style. A similar device (Penelope of the Quill, Vert, a quill pen bendwise and three bendlets enhanced Or) was returned Jan 92 for the same reason. [The submitter] might try putting another set of bendlets in sinister base to balance the design. [The lowest bendlet ussued from center chief] (Keridwen of Caermarthen, September, 1992, pg. 53)
The billet is one of the charges used for armorial display, and thus (per Rule XI.4) may not be charged with more than one tertiary. This is especially true for fieldless badges, where such charged billets look like displays of independent armory. (See also the LoAR of 8 June 86, p.7.) (Tostig Logiosophia, September, 1992, pg. 42)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Beast - Horse) |Top of Page |Next Page (Bird - Chicken)]