[ANSTHRLD] Quick check if I may

tmcd at panix.com tmcd at panix.com
Wed Aug 20 23:39:17 PDT 2008

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, kevinkeary at aol.com <heralds at lists.ansteorra.org> wrote:
> I'd be surprised if "fieldless, a plate" wasn't clear.

Nit: the standard wording in LoARs would be "(Fieldless) A plate".

> One CD for fieldless, one for "You can't just register a plate all
> by itself."  But I haven't checked.

I find the Solveig precedent in April 2002, upheld in May 2007.

  Solveig Throndardottir. Badge. (Fieldless) A lozenge Or.

    The lozenge was originally blazoned as fesswise, but, as noted in
    the February 2002 LoAR, "Because lozenges could be drawn with
    various proportions in period, including a square set on its
    corner (which can be neither fesswise nor palewise), it does not
    make sense to distinguish different proportions of lozenge in

    We do not register fieldless badges which appear to be independent
    forms of armorial display. Charges such as lozenges, billets, and
    roundels are all both standard heraldic charges and "shield
    shapes" for armorial display. The SCA has never protected armory
    consisting of plain tinctures, except for two examples that are
    particularly famous: the (important non-SCA) arms of Brittany,
    Ermine, and the (important non-SCA) flag of Libya, Vert. If we do
    not protect, and have never protected, the arms Or, we should not
    be concerned about the possible appearance of a display of Or by
    using a single lozenge Or as a fieldless badge. This is parallel
    to our practices concerning inescutcheons of pretense. To quote
    RfS XI.4, Arms of Pretense and Augmentations of Honor, "Similarly,
    an augmentation of honor often, though not necessarily, takes the
    form of an independent coat placed on an escutcheon or
    canton. Generally, therefore, a canton or a single escutcheon may
    only be used if it is both uncharged and of a single tincture."
    This rule demonstrates that an uncharged escutcheon shape in a
    single plain tincture does not appear to be a display of an
    independent coat of arms.

    Therefore, a "shield shape" which is also a standard heraldic
    charge will be acceptable as as a fieldless badge in a plain
    tincture, as long as the tincture is not one of the plain
    tinctures that is protected armory in the SCA. This explicitly
    overturns the precedent "We do not normally register fieldless
    badges consisting only of forms of armorial display, such as
    roundels, lozenges and delfs in plain tinctures, since in use the
    shape does not appear to be a charge, but rather the field itself"
    (LoAR January 1998).

    Note that this does not change our long-standing policy about such
    "shield shape" charges used in fieldless badges if the tincture is
    not plain (thus, divided or with a field treatment), or if the
    charge is itself charged. Such armory will continue to be returned
    for the appearance of an independent form of armorial display.

    Her badge, (Fieldless) On a sun azure a hammer argent, is

But conflict with

    Erryk Blackwolf|7306|B|Per bend sinister sable and gules, a plate.

The May 2007 confirmation has

  Isabeau de Valle. Badge. (Fieldless) On a plate fimbriated gules a
  hare courant sable.

      As noted on the LoI:

           The SCA considers simple-edged roundels to be a medium
           for heraldic display, and does not register badges
           that start "(Fieldless) On a roundel..." ...

      This is sufficient grounds for return. ...

The "simple-edged" part is not in the original ruling but at least was
not contradicted in May 2007, though that's a weak argument.

"(Fieldless) A plate nebuly", maybe?!

Dannet "tasteless^W tacky^W disreputable spooge joke omitted" Lincoln
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com

More information about the Heralds mailing list