[ANSTHRLD] Device question (please bare with me)
charlesarmitage at yahoo.com
Thu Apr 21 08:18:03 PDT 2011
I will do that! Thank you much :) going to be doing a little work on my device
while at "work" lol I might have something later to run past you all :) Ld Kylan
Ulfgierrson mka Charles
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than
half of you half as well as you deserve."
From: Joseph Percer <jpercer at gmail.com>
To: "Heralds List, Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc."
<heralds at lists.ansteorra.org>
Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 10:11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [ANSTHRLD] Device question (please bare with me)
I'm glad that you're willing to look at other motifs.
When you do go back to the drawing board, keep the following two
pieces of the Rules for Submissions in mind:
7. Armorial Element Requirements. - Only elements from the preceding
categories that satisfy the following requirements may be registered
a. Identification Requirement - Elements must be recognizable
solely from their appearance.
Any charge, line of partition, or field treatment used in Society
armory must be identifiable, in and of itself, without labels or
excessive explanation. Elements not used in period armory may be
defined and accepted for Society use if they are readily
distinguishable from elements that are already in use. The compass
star, defined in the Society as a mullet of four greater and four
lesser points, is immediately identifiable without confusion with
other mullets or estoiles once its definition is known.
b. Reconstruction Requirement - Elements must be reconstructible
in a recognizable form from a competent blazon.
Any element used in Society armory must be describable in standard
heraldic terms so that a competent heraldic artist can reproduce the
armory solely from the blazon. Elements that cannot be described in
such a way that the depiction of the armory will remain consistent may
not be used, even if they are identifiable design motifs that were
used before 1600. For example, the Tree of Life occurs as a decorative
element in period and is readily identifiable as such, but it may not
be used in armory since it cannot be defined in a manner that
guarantees its consistent depiction.
Other charges can be enflamed (though admittedly I'm not sure about
animals), yes, but you have to take care not to obscure the
identifiability of the charge being enflamed. Thus, if you draw a
flaming falcon, it needs to be recognizable as such. I'd encourage you
to keep running your ideas past the list here, as there are plenty of
people who are well versed in the rules and precedents that should be
able to help spot any problems that arise.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:57 AM, charles armitage
<charlesarmitage at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Wow I'm so thankful for all the insight, it's been quiet enlightening for
> I think I'm pretty much heading back to the drawing board on this one. The
> phoenix is very important to me as an icon, I myself was pretty much reborn
> through trial by fire and feel it really speaks to me; I will review all of
> information and come back with a new picture and design. I don't mind
> my shield; it's something I enjoy anyways :)
> Can a charge be "set a blaze" or on fire?
> If I were to call it a falcon
> I know of other charges that have been on fire but I don't think I've seen an
> animal charge in such a way...
> Ld Kylan Ulfgierrson mka Charles
> "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than
> half of you half as well as you deserve."
> From: Jennifer Smith <jds at randomgang.com>
> To: "Heralds List, Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc."
> <heralds at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 8:06:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [ANSTHRLD] Device question (please bare with me)
> A lot of very good answers and comments have already been made. I'll
> add a few more. :)
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Charles Armitage
> <charlesarmitage at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I would like to first thank anyone taking the time to read this! :)
>> I have been going over my device on facebook lol and it was suggested that I
>>should send this to the heralds for review / enlightenment.
> Thank you for coming to ask! We like to solve problems before they
> become, er, problems. And heraldic education in general is what this
> list is all about.
>> Sable a Phoenix rampant gules armed rising (wings displayed and addorsed)
> Wings can be displayed (spread out to either side, seeing the
> underside of each, as in the American eagle on the quarter), or
> addorsed (back to back, where you see the underside of one and part of
> the upperside of the other). They really can't be both at the same
>> The phoenix would be outlined in gold but not real sure how to say that....
> The word you're looking for is "fimbriated", but as has already been
> pointed out, a phoenix is far too complex of a charge to fimbriate.
> Which drops the gold outlining back to just artistic detail; there's
> nothing that says the outline of a charge has to be black, after all,
> especially with charges that are themselves rather dark. It's not at
> all unusual to outline a black charge in white, for example, so you
> can see the internal detailing.
>> Question one: I'm not sure rampant is needed if I say armed or if rampant can
>>be used to describe a Phoenix.
> Only quadrupeds can be rampant. Birds are displayed, close,
> rising/striking, volant... a few others that are specific to certain
> types of birds (cranes are "in their vigilance", for example). The
> closest posture to what you have there is "rising".
> http://heraldry.sca.org/primer/birds.html is a great webpage to
> double-check bird postures.
>> Question two: normally you see Phoenix rising from ash/flame, can it be just
>>rising, as in flight?
> Always. In medieval heraldic art, a phoenix is defined by its flames;
> without the flames, it's just an eagle. What you have depicted is more
> along the lines of "a [bird of some type] of flames", which isn't a
> heraldic-style design at all, unfortunately. (It does look very cool,
>> Question three: I have looked and do not see many devices with Phoenix on
>>that say armed, meaning to have talons showing, is it possible to? Are there
>>rule against it?
> As the flames cover the lower half of an heraldic phoenix, you're not
> going to be able to see any talons. The term "armed" in blazon would
> be followed by a tincture, as it's used to specify what color the
> arming is. In this case, uh, "[bird] gules armed gules". Technically,
> I believe 'armed' applies to any weapons on a beasty, so thus could
> also apply to its beak, although we more typically use "beaked" to
> specify a color there.
> You have a really neat looking picture that is, however, entirely
> modern in appearance and style. If you want to take a gander at read
> period heraldry, I strongly recommend browsing through the links at
> http://coblaith.net/Heraldry/Armorials/default.html. Coblaith has
> organized that page by region, and gives a sample image or two from
> the book. I believe the vast majority are scanned books over at the
> Bavarian State Library. It's just fantastic to browse through.
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
Joseph M. Percer, AAS, LP
Heralds mailing list
Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Heralds