[ANSTHRLD] layers and ermine spots

[Coblaith Muimnech]

My impression is that we treat ermined fields as though they are  
"flat" in some respects and as though the spots are semys of charges  
in others.  For example, I would expect "Pean, a chief Or," to be  
treated as field-primary armory.  But I would also expect "Argent, a  
lion pean," to have only a blazonable difference from "Argent, a lion  
sable billety Or", since changing the type of a group of charges on a  
charge is only half enough to give a CD.


Earlier today, Antonia asked for a conflict check on the devices  
pictured at <http://picasaweb.google.com/jimcouch/Heraldry? 
feat=directlink>.

Denyel Lincoln recommended for one of these the blazon:
> Sable ermined Or, a cartouche within an orle counterchanged.


offering this explanation:
> . . .the ermine spots straddle the boundaries of the charges --  
> aggressively so in the case of the orle.  So you can't blazon the  
> tincture of each charge separately -- you have to call it  
> "counterchanged". . .

In December of 1998 Laurel stated, "The only time we permit a charge  
to be counterchanged over another is when they are both ordinaries,"  
<http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/loar/1998/12/lar.html>.  No mention  
was made of an exception for charges in a semy.

So:  Does the proposed device fall afoul of this precedent?  Would  
it, if the semy were of billets or mullets or roundels rather than  
ermine spots?  And what is the actual rule on when an ermine spot is  
a seamless part of the field and when it's a charge?



Coblaith Muimnech