ANSTHRLD - Question

Timothy A. McDaniel tmcd at jump.net
Sat Mar 10 18:44:11 PST 2001


Cyniric / "Richard Culver" <rbculver at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to have demi-roundels issuant from chief and base?

I have no examples from period of that.  I have dim memories of period
examples of a few demi-things issuant from base, and perhaps of
demi-suns issuant from chief.  This motif would probably be
registerable if it were identifiable in the design in question.
I would not recommend it at all, on period style grounds.

> Gules, two demi-roundels sable fimbriated argent issuant from both
> chief and base, overall on a roundel argent a Norse sun cross gules.

("Norse" is a proper noun, or rather adjective, so it's capitalized.)

RfS VIII.3: "Voiding and fimbriation may only be used with simple
geometric charges placed in the center of the design.".

Bruce prec.: "Ermine fimbriation is disallowed (LoAR of 3 Aug 86,
p.17), as are overall charges surmounting fimbriated ordinaries (9
March 86, p.12).  (Cerridwen nic Alister, October, 1992, pg. 26)"

Alisoun prec."The use of the charge overall here, overlying a base
does appear to be non-period style, the more so since the ford is not
drawn properly but rather as a "base wavy azure charged with four
barrulets wavy argent."  (LoAR 28 Nov 87, p. 10)"

Overall charges are rather rare in period, and usually they're
bend(let)s anyway.  I know of no examples of a charge overlying a
peripheral charge, except for some cases of a chief overlying a
bordure if explicitly blazoned, or a canton overlying other charges.
I would like to see period evidence, though without a precedent to
cite I wouldn't advocate a kingdom return.

There's also RfS VIII.4: "Obtrusive Modernity - Armory may not use
obtrusively modern designs. ... d.  Modern Style - Generally modern
style in the depiction of individual elements or the total design may
not be registered.  ...  Charges may not be used to create abstract or
op-art designs, or be patterned after comic book art, fantasy art,
pointillism etc."  That sort of thing can be a judgment call for
Laurel, and has been cause for return or not.

In Da'ud 2.2: "[Sable, on a cross argent surmounted by a chevronel and
another inverted braced counterchanged three lozenges in fess gules]
There was some feeling that the overall design is modern rather than
medieval.  While those attending the Laurel meeting tended to agree,
we did not feel that the design was sufficiently modern to be returned
under VIII.4. or VIII.4.d. (Da'ud ibn Auda, LoAR June 1995, p. 8)"

But later, "[On an annulet within an ivy vine in orle Or, three foxes
courant contourny in orle] The overall effect of the design of this
device is not period heraldic style but rather a more modern style of
art.  While any individual element -- the ivy vine in orle, the
annulet (which in the design here reminded many of the commenters of
nothing so much as a life preserver), the rotational symmetry of the
charges on the annulet, the modern balance -- may not have been
sufficient cause for return in and of itself, the combination works to
create a design which is neither period nor heraldic. (Da'ud ibn Auda,
LoAR August 1995, p. 21)"

I think that (aside from the fimbriation instaboing) this geometric
style is too far from period style, but it would be a judgment call
for Laurel.

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.



More information about the Heralds mailing list