[ANSTHRLD] Offensive Armoury

[Paul Haines]

I don't think this would really be offensive to heraldic standards.  It may
offend some of our more delicate sensibilities, but there is an example in
Fox-Davies of the "Arms of the Visconti, Dukes of Milan:  Argent, a serpent
azure, devouring a child gules."  I'm not any more (or less) offended at the
thought of an eagle with a baby torn in half than I am of a snake eating a
baby, so I'd say send it up.

In service,
Alden Bordure


----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Manning" <dertruwe at hotmail.com>
To: <heralds at ansteorra.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:05 PM
Subject: [ANSTHRLD] Offensive Armoury


Greetings,

I have a small dilemma on my hands, and I seek help. The local herald and I
(Regional) have one of those clients you tend to hide from. He has submitted
the following device to us, which I for one personally feel is offensive. He
has disccussed this device with a previous regional, and said nothing about
it being offensive. He also states that ripped assunder was a period french
charge.

The blazon reads as follows "a border argent, sanguine, an eagle displayed
argent beaked and membered or, holding in each claw an infant natural ripped
assunder"

The emblazon is a red field with a white eagle (displayed) yellow beak and
feet, an infant (caucasion) severed in two (half in each claw) a border
white.

Is it offensive ?

Is the blazon right ? (except for the "sanguine")

In Service,
Herr Winther der Trüwe
Equinox Herald