ANSTHRLD - Guardian(s) of the Queens Hope

[Timothy A. McDaniel]

Ansteorran Kingdom Star Principal Herald <HERALD at ansteorra.org> wrote:
> I spoke with HrM Allyson last night and she wishes to 
> register a name and badge for the 'Guardian of the 
> Queen's Hope'.
> 
> I have told her that this name is not period.

(If memory serves, I mentioned that to you at the time and you
said that the then-Queen didn't care ... isn't it *great* to be
Star and/or consulting herald for someone who can order you
around and ignore you more freely than most people ignore
heralds?  Almost makes you want to take a hot bath with a razor
blade ...)

> The proposed device is a tudor rose gules and crossed 
> cup hilt foils either in front of or behing the rose.

There are three possibilities for what you mean by "tudor rose".
- "Rose", that is, a heraldic rose.
- "Double rose", a rose charged with a smaller one.  (That is,
  big rose on the back, a small rose on top of it centered.)
  Less common, but still period.
- "Tudor rose", a rose that is half red and half white.  Laurel
  forbids its registration, because it was unique to the royal
  house of England after the Tudors.  Since you specified
  "gules", this can't be the case.

  On the other hand, a double rose sable and Or, while a bit
  cliched Ansteorrically, ...

We would not ordinarily blazon such a detail as "cup-hilt foil",
or if we do, I suspect that Laurel would reblazon it to "foil",
"rapier", or "sword".  The best blazon in period terms is
"sword", and since SCA-heraldically swords is swords is swords,
we are perfectly free to draw it as cup-hilted foils, or maybe a
later Crown likes schlagers better, or whatever.

What tinctures are the swords?  "Proper" for swords is "argent,
hilted Or".  I think the tinctures should depend on the rose --
get good contrast so as to make them more visible.

> My guess is that there are several conflicts for this
> arrangement.

Possibly -- crossed swords are not exactly uncommon in this
Society of ours.

For people suggesting variants:
- if you specify a "main gauche" or a different type of sword,
  there's a "sword/dagger" precedent of long standing that two
  charges shall not be in the same design if they look different
  yet have no CD.
- if you specify a charge of another type, there's another long-
  standing precedent: "slot machine", three types of charges in
  the same charge group.  A rose + foil + cloak, say, would be
  returned.
- if you specify a charge separated from the group, there's a
  third long-standing precedent: fieldless badges have to have
  all their charges conjoined.
- I should mention, while I'm here, a fourth: if there's an
  overall charge on a fieldless badge, as on the original design,
  the area of intersection has to be small, and pretty much one
  of the charges has to be long and skinny.  Foil + rose works.
  Lion + rose, say, doesn't.

Daniel de Lincolia
-- 
Tim McDaniel is tmcd at jump.net; if that fail,
    tmcd at us.ibm.com is my work account.
"To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting everything
up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka.Korpela at hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.