ANSTHRLD - "Simple" Armory

[Timothy A. McDaniel]

Griffin>> "Or, a lion passant regardant, all within a bordure sable."
Johann> "Or, a lion passant regardant and a bordure sable"?

The two blazons are equivalent with each other and with
    Or, a lion passant regardant within a bordure sable.
    Or, a lion passant regardant, a bordure sable.

> No prob.  Sorry to trouble you.  For some reason, I was picturing an
> extremely thin lion that was physically within the bounds of the
> bordure instead of being in the middle of the field where it
> belonged.  Silly me.  ;-)

Since one charge (the lion) was not given a tincture immediately
following it, it takes the next tincture mentioned, which is sable.
That would be a black lion on a black bordure, which is up there with
the proverbial polar bear in a blizzard in terms of visibility.

Unless stated otherwise, charges mentioned in a blazon are directly on
the field.  The way you get "stated otherwise" is with the words "on",
"overall", or "charged with".  (In a few cases, by position too: "a
chief azure semy-de-lys Or".)  The only way this lion could crawl onto
this bordure would be via

    Or, on a bordure sable, a lion passant regardant [tincture].
    Or, a bordure sable charged with a lion passant regardant
        [tincture].

But in any such case, the charge on the field is mentioned first.
(The "[tincture]" is because of the sable-on-sable problem that would
otherwise arise as aforesaid.)  The SCA uses "on" instead of "charged
with" unless the blazon would get awkward.

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.