[antir-heralds] CC: Per pale argent and azure...

[chrisact at qwickconnect.net]

Judy Harcus wrote:
> Basil wrote:
>
>   
>>> Changing the tincture, division, number of pieces or style of
>>> partition lines is one CD under X.4.a. which is why it's safe to avoid
>>> non-matching fields when you're guaranteed a CD under another section
>>> of the RfS.
>>>  
>>>    
>>>
>>>       
>> This brings up a question I have. That section of the RfS (X.4.a) 
>> applies to the field. Does a change in the line of "partition" of 
>> ordinaries count as a CD? The RfS doesn't mention the subject, and I 
>> can't find any precedent (though I only used the database program). I 
>> ask because of:
>>
>> # Ysmay du Parc
>>    * The following device associated with this name was registered in 
>> March of 1997 (via Caid):
>>      Argent, a tree proper on a chief embattled sable three 
>> fleurs-de-lys argent.
>>
>> Now, there's a CD for the change to the field (X.4.a.i), and one CD for 
>> the tertiary charge group (X.4.j.ii, as it qualifies). Now, it's my 
>> impression the change from embattled to plain line *for an ordinary* is 
>> worth a CD, but I can't find it in the RfS or precedents. Help, please?
>>  
>>
>>     
> It's under X.4.e - Type Changes
> "Since the edge partition line of a charge is part of its type, the 
> change from a pale wavy to a pale embattled is one clear difference.  
> Changing from a pale wavy to a fess embattled is also one change of 
> type, not a change of type plus a change of edge partition."
>   

Ah ha!

My deepest thanks, m'lady Alicia. :-)


~~Basil Dragonstrike

-- 
Check out my Squidoo page---- http://www.squidoo.com/HEROSystem

Check out my friend's e-shop: t-shirts, books, and more fun stuff!----
http://www.cafepress.com/rowanchisholm

Benevolent Ruler’s Rule #57: If I find that my son has been dressing as a peasant in order to mix with the common folk, I'll send him off to a nice monastery and get to work on a new heir... one with some damn sense this time.