[ANSTHRLD] Upside-down charges

[Teceangl]

> Waaaaay back when, I remember Gwenllian saying that charges on their back,
> upside down, are not registered.  Is this still true?

Most inimate objects may be inverted.
Most animate ones cannot.
There are exceptions.
Here are the relevant Laurel precedents:

 [a bend sinister between a cat dormant bendwise sinister contourny and a cat
dormant inverted bendwise sinister] The inversion of the lower cat is reason
for return per the following precedent: "By precedent we do not register
inverted animals unless they are part of an arrangement in annulo. [Eirikr
{TH}orvaldson, 10/00]" [Saxsa Corduan, 10/01, R-Meridies]


 [Argent, a fess wavy between two tankards and a longship inverted azure.] "We
do not allow inverted animate charges in SCA heraldry except when in recognized orientation, such as in annulo" (LoAR February 1999, p. 10). The situation with constructed items is more complex. Some constructed items, such as arrows and
swords, are found in a variety of orientations in SCA and real-world armory.
These charges generally have simple outlines, which enhances their
identifiability in unusual orientations. However, not all constructed items are
found in a wide variety of orientations. Ships are consistently depicted with
the keel to base in heraldry. When inverted, a ship loses its identifiability
to an unacceptable degree. [Hals Styrkarsson, 01/02, R-Middle]


 [Argent chausse vert, a frog tergiant inverted sable. ] This device uses a
frog in the tergiant inverted posture. The SCA has general precedents against
registering inverted animate charges unless they are part of a radially
symmetrical group such as in annulo. These precedents are on the grounds that
such inverted animals are generally not readily identifiable, and they are not
found in period heraldry. However, the SCA also has a registration tradition
of allowing animals which are usually found in a tergiant posture to be
registered in the tergiant inverted posture. We were asked by the submitting
kingdom to rule on the acceptability of the tergiant inverted posture when
considering this submission.

There is very little period evidence for tergiant inverted animals in heraldry.
No evidence was presented by the College. We were only able to find two
instances of period or near-period tergiant inverted animals after the Wreath
meeting, both of which used scorpions. There is a tergiant inverted scorpion as
the crest of Sir William Sharington/Sherrington c. 1547 in Bedingfield and
Gwynn-Jones' Heraldry, p. 104. This crest is a very unusual depiction of the
Sherrington scorpion crest/badge: in the town of Lacock (where the Sherrington
family was granted the old abbey as a home by Henry VIII), there are period
displays of their armory in the Abbey/Sherrington home and in the town church,
and the scorpion seems always to be in the default tergiant posture. Guillim's
Display of Heraldrie second edition p.215 gives the arms of Cole, Argent, a
cheueron, Gules, betweene three scorpions reversed, sable. The emblazon shows
the scorpions in what the SCA would call the tergiant inverted posture. The
second edition, published in 1632, is not in our period, but is in our grey
area. The combination of a perhaps-erroneous emblazon of a crest with a
slightly post-period emblazon of armory is not clear evidence of period
practices for scorpions, and is certainly not compelling evidence for a
general period use of the posture tergiant inverted.

A significant number of commenters felt that inverting a tergiant charge
which is commonly found as tergiant (such as a tergiant scorpion or a frog)
does not hamper the identifiability of the charge so much as to render it
unidentifiable, and they felt that it should be acceptable. The frog in this
submission certainly retains its identifiability very clearly in the inverted
posture. As a result, inverting a tergiant charge is acceptable as long as it
does not otherwise violate any basic heraldic principles, including the
requirement for identifiability. Because of the lack of period evidence for o
tergiant inverted charges, the posture will be considered a clear step from
period practice (also known informally as a "weirdness") for any charge that
cannot be found in this posture in period.  We explicitly decline to rule at
this time on whether scorpions tergiant inverted should be considered a
"weirdness".  [George Anne, 05/02, A-AEthelmearc]


So yes for inanimates unless they're ships, no for animates unless they're
part of an arrangement in annulo or tergiant.

- Teceangl
--
       Migosh, you can't sleep now!  There's HERALDRY afoot!