Copyright © 1995 - Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.
The 1st Tenure of Da'ud Ibn Auda (1st year)
[A turreted bridge vs. a tower triple-towered and vs. a castle triple-towered] "Given evidence that no difference was granted in period between towers and castles and the very strong visual resemblance of this bridge to a castle, no ...CVD could be granted." (LoAR 9/90 p.13).
"Walls appear to be throughout, masoned, and embattled by default." (LoAR 10/90 p.10).
[A tower corked at the top] "The cork in the tower is really not period style, and is by itself sufficient grounds for return." (LoAR 1/91 p.27).
"[There is a CVD for] the arrangement of the charges (in saltire vs. three, two and one)." (LoAR 7/90 p.11).
[A compass star and a flower in bend vs. a single flower] "There are two CVDs: one for addition of the compass star, and a second for moving the flower to sinister base (the rationale being that this move is not forced this way by the addition of the compass star; were the two charges in fess or in pale, which would be the normal placement of two charges alone on the field, this would not be the case)." (LoAR 8/90 p.12).
[Per bend sinister argent and gules, a gules charge in dexter chief] "It was our feeling that since the gules <charge> could not overlie the gules portion of the field, that its position would be intuitively obvious and therefore did not need to be specifically blazoned." (LoAR 8/90 p.12).
[A cross, vs. a cross in chief between two gores] "There is a CVD for moving the cross to chief and another for the addition of the gores." [implying the move to chief isn't forced by adding the gores] (LoAR 9/90 p.1).
[Two swords in pile, hilts crossed, vs. two swords in saltire] "There is another [CVD] for the arrangement of the swords (in pile vs. in saltire)." (LoAR 9/90 p.4).
[Wreath of violets in orle, blazoned as an orle of violets] "This was returned before in part because the orle of flowers was too similar to the restricted wreath of roses. This issue has not been addressed in the resubmission, and so this must be returned once again for this reason. It was suggested that if the submitter would clearly separate the individual flowers in orle, that this would probably remove the problem." (LoAR 9/90 p.13).
[<field> in base a <charge>, vs. the same <charge> used as a crest (cited from Fairbairn's Crests)] "There is one CVD, for fielded vs. fieldless, but nothing can be granted against a fieldless badge (which is what we have treated crests as) for position on the field." (LoAR 9/90 p.13).
[A bend sinister between two sets of three <charges> two and one] "While the specification of this particular arrangement of the secondaries is not a particularly good style, given that the submitter feels strongly about this specific arrangement of the charges, it was felt that the good will engendered by complying with his wishes would outweigh the negative effects of this one weirdness in the device." (LoAR 10/90 p.6).
[Per bend sinister counter-ermine and bendy sinister Or and sable, in dexter chief three roses Or] "It was felt that versus...Azure, three roses Or, there was a CVD for the change to the field and a second for the position of the roses on the field. Though the roses would have had poor contrast with part of the field in the standard two and one arrangement, perhaps even returnably so in the SCA, the change of placement to dexter chief is not necessarily forced by the change to the field." (LoAR 12/90 p.6).
[A unicorn argent and a dragon Or combattant] "Conflict with...a dragon rampant...Or...there is only one CVD for the addition of the unicorn." [This implies that adding a second charge to result in two combattant beasts/monsters is only one CVD as opposed to change in number + change in arrangement/half change in type/ etc.] (LoAR 1/91 p.20).
[An arrow bendwise sable] "Versus... four arrows fretted sable...There is one CVD for the number of arrows and a second for the arrangement (one bendwise vs. two bendwise and two bendwise sinister. Had the arrows on the [conflicting] badge all been bendwise, this would not have been the case)." (LoAR 2/91 p.3).
"Though the [charges] were blazoned in the LoI as three and two, this should be the normal distribution of five objects around a bend or bendwise objects(s)." (LoAR 2/91 p.14).
[Per pale gules and Or a morningstar and a flanged mace in saltire sable...] "The morningstar loses its identifiability against the low-contrast portion of the field. Were the two charges in saltire identical, this would be less problematic, but as it stands the eye expects both charges to be maces." [the device was returned for this reason only] (LoAR 2/91 p.18).
[Annulets of five mullets conjoined] "The clusters of stars (besides reminding everyone of nothing so much as a five-star general's insignia) are not period style and are intrusively modern." (LoAR 2/91 p.22).
[Four swords fretted] "Conflict with...four arrows fretted...There is one CVD, for changing the arrows to swords." (LoAR 3/91 p.7).
[Three piles in point and an overall charge, vs. 3 piles] "Addition of the overall charge is only one CVD" [This implies no difference between piles and piles in point] (LoAR 4/91 p.13).
[On a gyrrony field, quatrefoils in annulo vs. crusilly counterchanged] "There is a CVD for the type of charge and a CVD for their arrangement on the field. [The crusilly] is definitely a seme, with crosses overlying the lines of division and cut off by the edge of the shield." (LoAR 5/91 p.7).
[Four swords fretted] "Conflict with...four arrows fretted...There is one CVD, for changing the arrows to swords." (LoAR 3/91 p.7).
[Sable, in bend sinister an axe inverted reversed and an axe both bendwise sinister Or between two scarpes, overall a laurel wreath vert, for an augmentation, in chief three mullets argent] "Yes, this augmentation makes their arms much more complex. There are few augmentations (or for that matter arms to which augmentations could be added) which do not make the underlying arms much more complex. This augmentation did not seem to go beyond the bounds of allowable complexity for an augmentation." (LoAR 12/90 p.8).
"While the [augmentation has] a tendency to unbalance the device somewhat, it is Laurel's feeling that we need to loosen the application of our standards a little with regard to augmentations, which by their very nature will add complexity to and not infrequently serve to unbalance a device." (LoAR 2/91 p.9).
[A double-bitted axe lying on a per pale counterchanged field] "There was some discussion regarding whether the axe fell under the ban on a long skinny charge counterchanged along its long axis. It was the consensus of the meeting...that the axe was clearly identifiable as an axe even though the haft was counterchanged." (LoAR 8/90 p.8).