[ANSTHRLD] fimbriated edges and field divisions

[Tim McDaniel]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, John B <anastim at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Question 1:
> I know the general rule of thumb for fimbriation is "regular" edges
> only.

The rule is RfS VIII.3
<http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html#8.3>,

     Voiding and fimbriation may only be used with simple geometric
     charges placed in the center of the design.

The longer precedent is from Bruce, in the November 1992 LoAR Cover
Letter, <http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/loar/1992/11/cvr.html>.  In
part,

     We consider voiding to have the same visual weight as adding a
     tertiary charge -- i.e. Sable, a cross Or voided gules and Sable,
     a cross Or charged with another gules are interchangeable blazons,
     yielding the same emblazon. ...  We can use the equivalence
     between voiding and adding tertiaries to determine when voiding is
     acceptable: if the voided charge can be reblazoned as On a
     [charge], another -- that is, if the inner line and the outer line
     of the voided charge are geometrically similar -- then it's simple
     enough to void.

I call it the "photocopy at 90% and paste over the original" test.

> Wavy is an enhanced type of edge, but far more regular in shape than
> many of the other types.  Can a wavy pile be fimbriated? 
> I could not find any in the OandA database,

There are three, but one is from March 1981, one from <= January 1973,
and one is real-world armory, so they're not good precedent.

There's been some other wavy ordinaries fimbriated since the 1990s, so
I think you can.  I think fimbriation is just not as popular as it
once was, perhaps due to no longer conflict-checking against most
non-SCA armory.

> Question 2: (unrelated to question 1)
> Can a field be divided "per pale" with one half of the field being a
> solid color and the other being bendy of a color and a metal? 

Sure.

> If so how would this be blazoned?  In mundane terms, this client is
> seeking a device divided vertically (per pale) with black on the
> left and blue and white bendiness on the right, although I do not
> think he is particular about which side is which.

If you know what "recursive" means, it's easier to explain.  In a
partition of the field with multiple tincture specifications, each
tincture specification can itself be a parted field.  (Or the tincture
of a charge likewise.)  ("Tincture specification" is my own term only,
by the way.)

A contrived example:
     Per pale paly argent and gules and barry azure and Or
"Per pale" is always followed by two tincture specifications.
"Paly" and "barry" are themselves the start of tincture
specifications.  So it's parsed as
     Per pale (paly argent and gules) and (barry azure and Or)
Or, expressed alternately,
     Per pale PART1 and PART2
where PART1 is the tincture of the dexter half, and PART2 is the
tincture of sinister.
     PART1 = paly argent and gules
     PART2 = barry azure and Or

Exercise for the student: parse and explain "Gyronny lozengy gules and
ermine and vair".

So what you want is
     Per pale sable and bendy azure and argent
if the top strip on the bendy side is azure, or
     Per pale sable and bendy argent and azure
if the contrary.

> Extension to Question 2: Assuming the option described in question 2
> is allowable, can only the black part of the field carry a charge?

"in dexter a left-handed narfing-iron Or".  If the charge is instead
azure or argent, you don't even have to say "in dexter", because it
can't rest on a background that's significantly azure or argent.

Danihel Lindocolina
-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com