[ANSTHRLD] Badge
Sara L Friedemann
liana at ellipsis.cx
Tue Apr 6 08:10:44 PDT 2004
Quoth ravenrux at cox.net:
> (Fieldless) On a gunstone, a bezant to sinister.
>
> Will this work?
Anything that is "on a gunstone" (a roundel sable) is equivalent
to just being put on a sable field. From the May 1998 LoAR:
"Skraeling Althing, Barony of. Badge for Order of the Friendship of
the Hare. (Fieldless) On a heart gules, a hare salient contourny argent.
"While blazoned on the LoI as (Fieldless) On a heart gules, a hare
salient contourny argent., since a heart is considered standard shape
for armorial display, the submission is considered as Gules, a hare
salient contourny argent. As such it conflicts with Enid Aurelia of the
Tin Isles Gules, a hare salient to sinister argent within a delf voided
and fracted in cross Or., with one CD for the addition of the delf."
So the proposal is equivalent to "Sable, a bezant [position]", and
should be conflict checked a such.
I'm not sure what "to sinister" means. Are you saying that the bezant
is on the right-hand (looking at the shield) side of the emblazon,
instead of being centered? If so, that's going to look really
unbalanced. In fact, I can't even think of a good way to blazon something
that is merely on the left-hand side of the field, and not in canton
or in base or something. Perhaps "Sable, in sinister fess point a
bezant"?
> I'm not sure how much difference a tertiary in a badge gets.
It's the same as in any piece of armory. Badges are conflict checked
exactly the same as arms and devices.
-Aryanhwy
--
vita sine literis mors est
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/
More information about the Heralds
mailing list