[ANSTHRLD] A question for the more experienced heralds, please

[Britt]

> I think that a pile still has to be checked as "per chevron inverted".
> Even that way, mind you, they're still clear (type and number of
> secondaries alone is enough, without even discussing their tinctures).

A pile, chausse, and per chevron inverted throughout are the ones with
no difference.

[Lozengy argent and sable, on a pile vert a willow tree eradicated Or]
It is also clear of ..., Vert, chausse chequy argent and sable, a fox
dormant argent; because it has a chausse field we do have to compare
the two as if they both have chausse fields and as if they both have
piles. In the former case they are clear by RfS X.2. In the latter
case they are clear with a CD for the field (lozengy argent and sable
versus checky argent and sable) and a second CD for substantially
changing the type of the tertiary charge. [Lefled Willoughby, 07/01,
A-Atenveldt]

Per chevron goes up against a pile inverted:

[Per chevron throughout Or and gules, two standing balances and a lion
rampant counterchanged.] Conflict with ... Or, on a pile inverted
cotised gules, a Bengal tiger rampant argent, marked sable. Helmut's
device could as easily be blazoned Or, on a pile inverted between two
standing balances gules a lion rampant Or. Therefore there is no [CD
for] change in tincture only of the tertiary charges. After
consideration we also decided that because a pile should be drawn as
throughout, or nearly so, the cotises count as two charges. Therefore
there is only a single CD for the change in type of the secondary
charges. [Helmut Kruger, 09/99, R-Atlantia]
---------------------------
[Barry vert and Or, on a pile sable a thunderbolt Or] This does not
conflict with Huldah von Jal, Per bend sinister sable and gules, a
thunderbolt Or. While we consider piles to conflict with chaussé
fields, a field with a pile is not reblazonable as having chaussé
field, as there is an artistic distinction that we enforce (namely
that the pile does not issue from the corners of the chief).
Therefore, the devices are clear by X.2.

Note that had Roiberd's device been Barry vert and Or, on a pile
inverted sable a thunderbolt Or it would have been in conflict with
Huldah because Roiberd's device would have had the equally valid
blazon Per chevron barry vert and Or and sable, a thunderbolt Or so
there would have been only a single CD for the change in the field.
[Roiberd Mor Barra, 11/00, A-Drachenwald]

> > Doesn't look like it's related to me.
>
> The motif of "Argent, a pile gules and overall a chevron
> counterchanged, and fru-fru" is quite visually distinctive, regardless
> of the point count.  If I submit something in purple with gold crosses
> of Calatrava, you're probably not going to assume that I've never left
> An Tir.

I'm helping Zenobia and Bruce with their handout for KWHS and as such
have been in and out of Siebmacher so often in the last week it feels
like I own a time-share in there.  There are several
pile-and-chevron-counterchanged armories in there, so many that it's
about as blase as the fess between two chevronels to me anymore.  A
bodacious period design that just happens to have ended up on an SCA
kingdom's arms.
An Tirians don't assume any black rampant lion is An Tirian, you know.
 :)  People should look at lots of period heraldry, it gives much
perspective on repetetive design motifs.

And as Lions Blood I returned something for conflict with Calontir
once.  It was quite amusing.

- Teceangl