Copyright © 1995 - Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.
The 1st Tenure of Da'ud Ibn Auda (1st year)
"While there was some discussion regarding whether or not valknuts were thin-line heraldry, by definition they look like this, and it was our feeling that they should not then fall under the ban on thin-line heraldry in the same way that, say, a compass star voided would." (LoAR 8/90 p.9).
[An ordinary "voided humetty"] "Though the voiding here is certainly unusual, it does not seem excessively non-period in style. Given that it can be easily blazoned in standard heraldic terminology in such a way as to guarantee the reproducibility of the emblazon, we felt that we could apply the Rule of Toyota here." (LoAR 10/90 p.9).
[A cross bottony as a tertiary charge] "It was the general consensus of the commenters that the cross is too complex to fimbriate" (LoAR 12/90 p.15).
[A complex device using mascles and a double tressure] "With four types of charges and four tinctures, this is right at the upper limit of the rule of thumb for complexity. Given that most of the charges are then 'voided', the thin-line aspects of this device are enough to push it over the edge into unacceptability." [the device was returned for this reason] (LoAR 1/91 p.21).
"It is not possible to eclipse something 'of the field' on a fieldless badge." (LoAR 2/91 p.16).
[Sable a fess gules fimbriated between a <secondary group> argent] "Conflict with...Sable, a fess gules. There is one CVD for the addition of the secondaries." [this implies that the interior color is the main color of the fess: see related ruling on p.20 of this LoAR] (LoAR 6/91 p.17).
[A triangle inverted and a triangle conjoined, fimbriated] "Prior commentary and earlier Laurel precedents have favored limiting the use of fimbriation to ordinaries at the center of the field." [the device was returned for this reason] (LoAR 6/91 p.19).
[Gules, a latin cross pomelly sable fimbriated and an <overall charge> Or] "Conflict with...Gules, a cross pommetty voided Or. There is a CVD for the addition of the overall charge, but changing the tincture only of what is effectively a tertiary charge (the voided area of the cross) is insufficient for the second." (LoAR 6/91 p.20).
[Rounded trees proper vs. gules leaved vert] "We did not find the difference between a red trunk and a brown trunk to be worth a CVD." (LoAR 12/90 p.14).
[Rounded trees vs. fir trees] "There is only one CVD, for the change to type of the primary charges. X.2 (Sufficient Difference) cannot apply between two types of trees." (LoAR 6/91 p.18).