[ANSTHRLD] Fw: Re: Question about per chevron rayonee sable and gules.

[Britt]

Private to you because someone on the list might give this a shot.

> >  > >  >  No conflicts, either.  Not even Chabi of Burkhan Khaldun - October of
> >  > >  >  1995 (via Atlantia): Per bend sinister sable and vert, a reremouse
> >  > >  >  argent.
> >  > >  >  Anyone care to tell us why there's no conflict?
> >  > >
> >  > >  hmm.
> >  > >
> >  > >  1 cd for partition line changing and one cd for the tincture changes of the field?
> >
> >  Sort of.  Both armories have argent charges.  But one CD does come
> >  from the field.
>
> Alright, then I give.  Why do they not conflict?

Pull up the RfS and follow along.  http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html
X.4.a.i. gives you one CD for changes to the field.  Here it's changes
of tincture, line of partition, style of partition.
X.4.h. gives a CD for changing 'relative position on the field'.  As
the bat in Chabi's device is centered and the one in the proposal is
in chief, and Chabi's could well have been placed in chief, you get a
second CD for where the charge lies on the field.  Mind, in the
proposal the bat cannot lie in the middle of the field but Laurel has
usually accepted not overlying a complex line of division as still
acceptable for a CD under X.4.h.

- Teceangl