[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Charge - Restricted and Reserved) |Next Page (Chevron)]
[Per bend sinister, an willow tree and an llama's head vs. Per bend sinister, an ash tree and a spearhead] In each device, the two charges form a single group of primaries. Changes are counted against the entire group: One cannot count a CD for a change to half a group, and another CD for the same category of change to the other half of the same group. Because both devices contain a tree, Rule X.2 does not apply; there is a single CD, for changing the types of charges of a single group. (Edward of Willowwood, July, 1992, pg. 22)
[A <bird> debruised by a fess] Under our current definition of primary charges, Rule X.1 brings this clear of [A fess]. (Gregory of Loch Swan, September, 1992, pg. 32)
[Azure goutty d'eau in chief a cloud] This conflicts with [Azure, goutty de eau]. This conflict call engendered much discussion in the commentary, centering on whether the cloud was a peripheral secondary charge (thereby making this a conflict with [above]) or a primary charge (thereby clearing the conflict per Rule X.1). One might argue either way: Had this been, e.g., Azure, in chief a cloud argent, the cloud would probably be the primary; had this been, e.g., Argent goutty d'eau, a chief nebuly argent, it would definitely be a conflict. In this case, the gouts are the primary charge group, and the cloud a secondary charge. Approach it by approximations: Comparing Azure, a gout argent vs. Azure, a gout and in chief a cloud argent, there would certainly be a conflict; likewise Azure, three gouts argent vs. Azure, three gouts and in chief a cloud argent, and Azure, six gouts argent vs. Azure, six gouts and in chief a cloud argent. In none of these hypothetical cases could Rule X.1 be invoked for adding the cloud in chief; the gouts are the primary charges. Increasing the number of gouts even further (to goutty, the present submission) does not change this. This is a conflict ...with a single CD for adding the secondary charge in chief. (Jon of the Mists, September, 1992, pp. 39-40)
[A drawn bow fesswise, nocked of a double-bitted axe, and sustained by two bears combattant] The device has a single group of charges, of three different types, in violation of Rule VIII.1.a. This must be returned (Big Bear of Haven, September, 1992, pg. 48)
[A castle, in chief three barrulets wavy azure surmounted by two escallops] The charges in chief were blazoned in the LOI as on a chief [wavy] barry wavy argent and azure, two escallops gules. However, the use of the field as one of the tinctures of the chief renders this as barrulets in chief rather than a chief barry. That this was the submitter's intent is shown by the emblazon, which had the escallops overlying the edge of the "chief" ...The correct blazon is with a primary castle, and a single group of charges in chief; and therefore, this conflicts with [Argent, a castle gules]. (Randulf von Gelnhausen, September, 1992, pg. 49)
[A serpent and a bordure vs. A serpent debruised by a fess] By current definitions, in each case the serpent is the primary charge; there is thus a single CD, per Rule X.4.e, for changing the type of secondary charge. (Konall Rogersson, October, 1992, pg. 23)
[Party of six pieces, three bells] This was blazoned on the LOI as [Per fess, on a pale counterchanged between two bells, a bell]. That would be the normal modern blazon, but not the period blazon. In period, this was considered a field division, not a counterchanged pale ...this [is] a conflict with [Gules, three bells]. [For full discussion, see under FIELD DIVISION -- General] (Laeghaire ua'Laverty, October, 1992, pg. 25)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Charge - Restricted and Reserved) |Top of Page |Next Page (Chevron)]
[A lion's head azure jessant-de-lys vert vs. leopard's head jessant-de-lys gules] After much thought, we decided that the leopard's head jessant-de-lys was common enough in period armory to be considered a single charge, in the same way a penner and inkhorn would be. It could equally well be considered a single group of conjoined charges. Either way, there's a single CD, for the tincture of the primary charge group. (Ginevra Cecilia da Firenze, October, 1992, pg. 25)
I'd suggested in the [August, 1992] LoAR that we might consider the line of division to divide the group into "halves", regardless of the numbers involved. The College in general disapproved of my proposal, saying it would encourage poor style; and after reading the arguments, I'm inclined to agree. (Ríognhach MacLeod, October, 1992, pg. 34)
[A decrescent within an arch stooped between three mullets] As drawn here, the decrescent is the primary charge, just as it would be were it encircled by a wreath or an annulet. (Luanmaise nic Ailithir, November, 1992, pg. 12)
[In chief a boar's head and in base a bow and a sword in saltire] The use of a single group of three dissimilar charges is not permitted, per Rule VIII.1.a. The exact arrangement of the three charges within the group (whether 2&1, a sheaf, or whatever) does not change this (Colin Douglas of Greysmarch, November, 1992, pg. 14)
[A key bendwise sinisiter between two Welsh corgies] As drawn, the key and the corgies are separate groups of charges. Therefore, this doesn't conflict with [three wolves] or with [three wolves in pale]. (Rosalynde y Corgwyn, January, 1993, pg. 21)
[Per chevron azure and argent, all mullety counterchanged] This is clear of [Azure, six mullets argent, three, two and one. Semy charges, by definition, are evenly strewn across the field. When the field is divided in half by a field partition (such as Per chevron), then half the semy charges are on each half of the field --- again, by definition. We thus count a CD for the tincture of the field, and a CD for the tincture of half the primary charge group. (Ariane la Fileuse, July, 1993, pg. 4)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Charge - Restricted and Reserved) |Top of Page |Next Page (Chevron)]