[ANSTHRLD] Revised Conflict Check Request

[tmcd at panix.com]

Considering
    Per fess sable and Or, on an open book Or a mullet of five greater
    and five lesser points sable, a demi-sun issuant from base gules.
versus William Gallowglas's
    Sable, in chief on a plate a satyr dancing and playing a flute
    proper, issuant from base a demi-sun Or.
I'd like to point out that Johann was correct in at least three CDs,
though I'll be a touch more precise in my wording:
- change of type of half or more of a group entirely on the field (the
  primary charge group: book versus plate)
- change of type and tincture of the tertiary charge group
  (mullet sable versus ... whatever a satyr proper is (half Caucasian,
  half brown, I suppose), it's not all sable)
- change of tincture of half or more of the field

I don't think "in chief a widget and issuant from base a demi-wadget"
is a "standard arrangement" (per Charge Group in the CoA Gossary of
Terms), so I suspect that Johann is also right that the demi-suns are
secondary charges and so Johann's fourth CD is also correct:
- change of tincture of a (different) group of charges entirely on the
  field (demi-sun versus demi-sun)
Still, odder rulings have been made, so I would do a precedent dive
before declaring it definitively.  But since three unredoubted CDs are
already known, I wouldn't bother.

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Jim Trigg <blaise at scadian.net> wrote:
> On Wed, December 29, 2004 12:39 pm, Brent Ryder said:
> > [Johann wrote:]
> >>Even though the book is forced to be "in chief" to avoid contrast
> >>problems, negating the CD for positional change,
> >
> > Just a nit pic here, the book is not 'forced to be "in Chief" ',
> > it is placed there. If it were smaller and put 'in chief', 'in
> > Canton', 'in Quarter', etc, then I would say it was 'forced' on
> > this field division.

More nitpicks:
- "nitpick" or "to nit-pick", but either way, it has a 'k'
- "in [ordinary]" is not Capitalized.

> It is indeed 'forced to be "in chief"' as it cannot be in the
> central position that a primary charge normally would occupy due to
> contrast.

To be utterly picky, the book is not forced to be "in chief", since
quotation marks usually indicate exact wording, and it could be in
dexter chief or in sinister chief.  But that's utterly picky.  It's
forced towards the chief or forced to chief.

The important text from RfS X.4.g is "provided that change is not
caused by other changes to the design.  Changes to other parts of the
design frequently cause changes to the arrangement of charge groups,
..."  It doesn't matter whether something is forced TO a location --
just that it's forced OUT OF a location.  The book cannot be in the
center point because it is Or and so is the base half of the field.

But Blaise is right that
> However, in this case it means that the book is in the same position
> on the field as the plate so a CD for change of position isn't a
> consideration.
so the whole point is moot.

> > As it is, I assume (not having seen the emblazon) it is in the
> > proper place on the upper half of the per fess field.
>
> That is not the proper place for a primary charge unless there is a
> forced move involved.

What do you mean, Blaise?  I don't see how, in
    Per fess Or and argent, in chief a lion gules.
the lion is in an "improper place" for a primary charge.
It's certainly a primary charge.  It's certainly an unforced move.
It's certainly a valid blazon.

The only way to avoid having a primary charge for certain is to have
no charges, or to have the only charges directly on the field be
peripheral ordinaries.  ("For certain" is me fudging the case of, say
"Sable, in canton a cross couped argent".  I'd do a precedent dive
before saying for certain, but I suspect that it would nevertheless be
primary.)

Daniel de Lincolia
-- 
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com