[ANSTHRLD] per pal question

Coblaith Muimnech Coblaith at sbcglobal.net
Mon Jul 20 13:35:35 PDT 2009

Hedwig wrote:
> Can you do something per pal embattled?

and later clarified she meant "per pall".

There are several items in the Ordinary that have fields divided per  
pall with complex lines <http://oanda.sca.org:80/oanda_desc.cgi? 
p=FIELD%20DIV%2e%2dPER%20PALL>, one of which (the device of Ceidrych  
the Innocent ap Gryffydd, registered in 1990) is embattled.  The most  
recent is the device of Þorbjorn Karlsson, which has a field per pall  
rayonny and was registered in 2004.   I didn't find anything about  
complex lines in per pall divisions in the precedents issued since  
<http://heraldry.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/precedents.html>, so it's  
probably still permitted.

> If you can can you do just the top third embattled?

You can combine complex and plain lines in some divisions--"quarterly  
per pale embattled", for example, is seen in both period and S.C.A.  
heraldry.  But I'm not sure whether it's permissible with a per pall  
division, or how you'd blazon it if it is.

I had thought you might use a per pale field division and a chief  
triangular embattled to the same effect, but the chief triangular  
embattled is disallowed by precedent <http://heraldry.sca.org/ 

If having the triangular section embattled is of primary importance,  
you might use a per chevron embattled field divsion, then divide the  
lower half of the field per pale, as in "Per chevron embattled gules  
and per pale sable and argent."  But that would, of course, not give  
you a field divided into thirds.  The upper portion would be about  
half, the lower two one quarter each.

Coblaith Muimnech
<mailto:Coblaith at sbcglobal.net>

More information about the Heralds mailing list