Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [sig] Re: Name Submission

Expand Messages
  • T Duran
    ... I can at least explain the theory behind why they call this a conflict. Basically, in period heraldy in England and France, what you would see a lot is
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 7, 2007
      --- "Rosie (aka Nawojka)" <Rosie_0801@...> wrote:
      > > I'm told it conflicts with this:
      > > Vert, on a fess argent two saltorels throughout,
      > > each surmounted with
      > > a Celtic cross, all sable

      On 11/8/07, Sfandra <seonaid13@...> wrote:
      > Because they're both Green, and they both have a white
      > Fess. You only get 1 Difference for the number and
      > color of the Tertiaries (here, 2 black saltorels w/
      > celtic crosses -and let me say how "busy" that is-
      > versus your one purple lekawica).

      I can at least explain the theory behind why they call this a
      conflict. Basically, in period heraldy in England and France, what
      you would see a lot is stuff like this:

      -- John Sterling bears "Vert, a fess argent."
      -- His eldest son William inherits that when he becomes the senior Sterling.
      -- His younger sons Henry and Robert (if they earn the right to their
      own coat of arms) can't use "Vert, a fess argent" because William's
      already using it. But they're proud of being Sterlings and want to
      show that they're part of the clan, so Henry takes the family coat and
      puts a couple of green dots on the fess, while Robert puts a red star
      on it. Anybody who sees the white fess on green will know they're
      dealing with a Sterling, and the little extra widgets let them know
      which branch of the family. The technical term is "cadency".

      So in your case, your device looks like you're claiming to be related
      to the person with the saltorels (I guess. If you squint.). That's
      the theory, anyway. It's based on the core English/French practice.
      The Germans, on the other hand... Instead of fiddling with tertiaries,
      all the branches of the family would use the same coat of arms, and
      swap around their helmet crests instead. But since the CoA doesn't
      register helmet crests, we're stuck with the English/French rules.

      It's often possible to get around conflicts like this by asking the
      other person for permission to conflict, but that won't help you with
      Suriname. :^( The only thing that would help there, I think, is
      someone doing a survey of period cadency and proving how period
      heralds used fimbriation, one way or the other.

      And yes, more people researching period heraldry in other countries
      would be FANTASTIC.

      --Kazimira
    • L.M. Kies
      ... A Tertiary Charge is any charge placed completely on another charge. In this case, your lekawica is completely on the fess, so it is a tertiary
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 7, 2007
        >Can someone more knowlegable than I explain why there is a problem
        >here? My rejected device is: Vert. On a fess argent a lekawica purpure.
        >
        >I'm told it conflicts with this:
        >Vert, on a fess argent two saltorels throughout, each surmounted with
        >a Celtic cross, all sable
        >
        >The first one is supposed to be a "single Clear difference for the
        >changes to the tertiaries." I don't really know what that means, but
        >it doesn't sound like one difference to me, but two. I mean, if the
        >charge is different, and it's a different colour, that's two degrees
        >worth of difference isn't it?

        A "Tertiary Charge" is any charge placed completely on another charge. In this case, your lekawica is completely on the fess, so it is a "tertiary charge". The two saltorels with Celtic crosses are, likewise, "tertiary charges". Unfortunately, changing a "tertiary charge", no matter how drastically, only counts as one CD. Sometimes that is a good thing. In this case, it is not.

        >The flag of Suriname: Vert, on a fess gules fimbriated argent a
        >mullet Or (since a fess gules fimbriated argent is the equivelent
        >of 'on a fess argent a fess gules')
        >
        >And having looked up a flag of
        >Suriname, I can't see how it looks anything like my (not)device.

        Well, maybe this will help.

        Your device is green with a decorated stripe across it.
        Field=green. Primary charge=white bar. Tertiary charge=purple book-thing.

        Suriname flag is green with a decorated stripe across it.
        Field=green. Primary charge=red bar with white edges. Tertiary charge=gold star. This is apparently the same as:
        Field=green. Primary charge=white bar. Tertiary charge=red bar. Tertiary charge=gold star.

        I'm not sure I would agree that a red bar with a white edge is the same as a red bar lying on a white stripe (although looking at the actual flag of Suriname there is more white on it than a mere "white edge", but anyway), since that was their decision, the only difference between your device and the flag is the "Tertiary Charge", again only worth 1 CD. You might try to argue that you've changed two "Tertiary Charges" by 1.) removing the "red bar" and 2.) changing the gold star for a purple book thing, but I'm afraid that there's this thing called a "Charge Group" and since both the red bar and the gold star are on the same white fess, they are in the same "Tertiary Charge Group", so, again, no matter what you do to them together or separately, it only counts as one CD. Unfortunately.

        I hope this makes a little more sense, now.

        At your service,

        Sofya



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Rosie (aka Nawojka)
        It was rejected at Kingdom level. The really annoying part is the herald who helped with most of my submission at barony level, including finding the polish
        Message 3 of 7 , Nov 7, 2007
          It was rejected at Kingdom level. The really annoying part is the
          herald who helped with most of my submission at barony level,
          including finding the polish document, has now been promoted to
          Kingdom level herald. So there's not really anyone to complain (very
          nicely and reasonably) to.

          > So, SCAdian heraldry 101: the CoA says that unless
          > your device is Super Simple, you need 2 clear changes
          > from anyone else's devise.
          >
          > Example of Super Simple: Green w/ a Gold Rampant Lion
          > versus Red with a Gold Rampant Lion. 1 Difference in
          > the color of background, because very few people would
          > mistake Green for Red.

          Aha! Clearly my definition of "simple" is completely wrong. My idea
          of simple is more about how tricky something will be to embroider.
          Under my definition, my (not)device is really simple and your rampant
          lion example isn't. Heheheh.

          Anyway, the person I'm conflicting with has given me permission to do
          so, and I think the flag of Suriname is arguable. They wouldn't be
          mistaken at a distance, and I don't think they'd care anyway! Or do
          you think I should be well behaved and change it. I don't want to. I
          think it's pretty :)

          Rosie
        • Rosie (aka Nawojka)
          It s based on the core English/French practice. ... From the bit I ve read about Polish heraldry, they go to even less trouble then the Germans. A coat of arms
          Message 4 of 7 , Nov 7, 2007
            It's based on the core English/French practice.
            > The Germans, on the other hand... Instead of fiddling with tertiaries,
            > all the branches of the family would use the same coat of arms, and
            > swap around their helmet crests instead. But since the CoA doesn't
            > register helmet crests, we're stuck with the English/French rules.
            > --Kazimira
            >

            From the bit I've read about Polish heraldry, they go to even less
            trouble then the Germans. A coat of arms belonged to an entire clan,
            not an individual person. Rather like how modern persons think
            it's "their" coat of arms because they share the surname. Interesting
            stuff huh?
            Rosie
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.