[tirrigh-heralds] [antir-heralds] Style / Conflict check requested

[Britt]

> Greetings unto the college;

Well, hello, Anthony.  Long time, no see.  :)


> Per pale azure and argent, a chevron and overall an eagle displayed counterchanged and in chief a mullet of five points counterchanged.

Owen got this one for you.  You cannot counterchange a complex charge
over an ordinary.  And it's excessively counterchanged as well.
If you can talk him into 'Per pale azure and argent, an eagle between
three mullets counterchanged' it's clear, slotting into one of the few
places one can still get an eagle.  He'd need three secondaries,
though, because one's taken.

> The second one which I *know* meets the style guidelines is:
> Gules vetu ploye argent, on a cross recercely gules, a rose argent, slipped and leaved vert.

That's a cross moline and that rose isn't slipped.  And there's no
gules on the field and it's blazoned incorrectly.  As per Owen:
Argent vetu ploye, a cross moline gules and overall a rose argent
barbed vert, seeded Or.

> This second one was done up for the lady in question by a herald in Cour de Val, but as I am this couple's
> first contact in the SCA (and they are now my Wards), they came to me for assistance.

Good thing they did.
Owen has it half right, by the way.  It'll work with a thicker cross
and the rose entirely upon it.  Shame on you for not taking one look
and realizing there's an argent rose lying partially on an argent
field!  :)  The only way that rose can be overall is if it's one of
the colors - Or doesn't have good contracts with the field, either.

RfS VIII.2.b.i.  The field must have good contrast with every charge
placed directly on it and with charges placed overall.

Fatten up that cross, put the rose entirely on it.  I'm doing a
preliminary check for the potential redesign making the rose a
tertiary charge:
Argent vetu ploye on a cross moline gules a rose argent barbed vert, seeded Or.

Kay Gwenhwyfar of Locksley - January of 1973: Or, centered upon a
Celtic cross patty gules, a rose barbed and seeded argent.
One CD changing the field by X.4.a.i.
One CD for changing the type of cross by X.4.e.
Clear

Séoras of An Alltan - November of 1979 (via the West): Per bend azure
and argent, a cross moline gules, overall a claymore bendwise proper.
One CD changing the field by X.4.a.i.
One CD for removing the overall charge by X.4.c.
One CD for adding a tertiary by X.4.i.
Clear

Petros Monomachos - November of 1998 (via Drachenwald): Per saltire
argent and sable, a cross doubly pommeled gules.
One CD changing the field by X.4.a.i.
One CD for adding a tertiary by X.4.i.
Nothing for type of cross:
     [a cross doubly pommeled elongated palewise vs a cross moline]
[There is] nothing for
     the difference between the two crosses. (Petros Monomachos, 2/97 p. 22)
Clear

Ian Nudd MacPherson - December of 1989 (via Caid): Argent, within a
cross moline disjoint purpure, a thistle proper.
One CD for changing the field by X.4.a.i.
One CD for changing the tincture of the cross by X.4.d.
One CD for changing the type+tincture of the tertiary by X.4.j.i.
No need to get into type issues on the cross.
Clear

But now we have a problem.

     [Argent vêtu ployÃ(c) quarterly sable and gules, a cat passant
guardant sable] This ....
     conflicts with Amber Lang, Vert, on a lozenge argent, a cat
sejant guardant sable. When
     comparing armory using a vêtu field with armory using a lozenge,
the comparison must
     be made in two ways: as if both pieces of armory used a vêtu
field, and as if both pieces
     of armory used a lozenge. If we consider Isabel's armory as the
equivalent blazon Quarterly
     sable and gules, on a lozenge ployÃ(c) througout argent a cat
passant guardant sable, there
     is one CD from Amber's armory for changing the field, but no
difference by RfS X.4.j for
     changing only the posture of the tertiary charge. There is no
difference between a lozenge
     and a lozenge ployÃ(c), nor is there difference between a lozenge
and a lozenge throughout.
     [Isabel Margarita de Sotomayor y PÃ(c)rez de Gerena, 11/02, R-Trimaris]

So charged argent lozenges on azure fields are an issue.  A lozenge
qualifies for X.4.j.ii. so change of type only of tertiary (if this is
a lozenge, the cross is the tertiary) is worth a CD.

Werenher von Ingolstadt - January of 1995 (via Atlantia): Azure, on a
lozenge argent, a bear statant erect sable.
One CD by X.4.j.i. for changing type+tincture of the tertiary.
Nothing for the rose, as it's relegated to quaternary status in this
blazon interpretation.
Conflict.

There's really no way around this, not with the vetu field.  Nothing
you do in the argent part will add any differences, and you can't
charge the vetu.  I checked gules fields and found another potential
conflict.

Sorry about that.

- Teceangl