[ANSTHRLD] Conflict Check: Argent, a chi-ro sable and on a chief gules TWO lions passant argent.

[Tim McDaniel]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, John Atkinson <johnmatkinson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Bob Wade <logiosophia at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Does anyone see a new conflict when changing the number of lions
>> from one to two under SENA?  I don't, but then I missed the cited
>> conflict below.  "Richaredus Catta. Device. Argent, a chi-ro sable
>> and on a chief gules a lion passant argent.This device is returned
>> for conflict with the device of John the Brewer, Argent, a
>> blackletter initial 'B' between two birch leaves sable, on a chief
>> gules a lion passant guardant argent. There is one CD for removing
>> the secondary birch leaves. Precedent says:We do not grant
>> difference between single letters, even when they are in different
>> alphabets; we therefore cannot grant difference between a chi-rho
>> and a feogh rune. [Constantina von Ravenna, R-West, May 2008
>> LoAR]Likewise, there is no difference granted between a 'B' and a
>> chi-rho." (LoAR Apr 2014, R-Ansteorra)
>> http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2012/04/12-04lar.html
>
> Stupid Question: Since when is a "Chi-rho" a single letter?  I
> thought it was an explicitly formed from the combination of the two
> Greek letters Chi and Rho.
>
> I could be wrong.  But probably not.  "Single abstract symbol" I
> could buy.

Good thing you can buy it, because Laurel's trying to sell it.
The precedent quotation should have started a few lines up and maybe
gone back in time.  The Artus ruling from 2/03:

   Artus Quintus. Device change. Argent, a chi-rho gules.

     A chi-rho is functionally a single abstract symbol. Although most
     two-letter combinations would not be so considered, the chi-rho
     has, through long use in religious symbolism, achieved an
     independent identity as a single abstract symbol. "Current
     precedent disallows the registration of solitary abstract symbols"
     (July 2000 LoAR, reaffirmed in August 2001).

And the full text from 5/08:

   Constantina von Ravenna. Device change. Azure, a chi-rho between in
   fess two crosses formy Or.

     This device conflicts with the device of Gareth de Bailli, _Azure,
     a Saxon feogh rune between two bars Or._ There's a CD for type of
     secondary charges, but no difference for their placement: the
     placement of Gareth's bars is forced by the nature of the
     charges. The chi-rho has been previously ruled to be a single
     abstract symbol, such that it may not be used as the sole charge
     in an armory (Artus Quintus, February 2003); this makes it the
     heraldic equivalent of a single letter or rune. We do not grant
     difference between single letters, even when they are in different
     alphabets; we therefore cannot grant difference between a chi-rho
     and a feogh rune.

Daniel Lincoln
-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com