[antir-heralds] photo/style check please.

[James D Sena]

chrisact at qwickconnect.net wrote:
> Britt wrote:
>   
>> On 11/5/07, mark johnson <templardude2001 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Greetings unto the College of Heralds from Thomas, Hazel Leaf. I would like to ask your help with the attached  artwork. The attached is a photo of my clients proposed device. I would like to let you know the bordure does not apply, it is only there for wall hanging purposes.
>>>
>>>   My own questions are involving the "rising sun/Gyronny"
>>>   Using "gyronny" the artwork would have to change, but would it be more stylisticaly correct?
>>>     
>>>       
>> I put the image up here:
>> http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Alienplayer/Heraldry/hhdevice.jpg
>>
>> There aren't enough gyrons to make that gyronny.  You effectively have
>> a gules section of the field with a sable charge and a few argent bits
>> that aren't going to help with the color-on-color thing.
>> You could have it gyronny from the line of division, assuring that red
>> was against the lower half.  Not good style, but for a Norseman now
>> really bad, either.
>>
>> - Teceangl
>>     
>
> RfS, VIII.4.a:
> "Pictorial Design - Overly pictorial designs may not be registered.
> "Design elements should not be combined to create a picture of a scene 
> or landscape. For example, combining a field divided per fess wavy azure 
> and Or with a sun and three triangles Or, as well as a camel and two 
> palm trees proper to depict the Nile Valley would not be acceptable."
>
> IMO, an obvious attempt to depict a ship against a rising/setting sun 
> violates this part of the Rules for Submissions. Changing to an actual 
> "gyronny from the line of division" would also set off my "no-can-do 
> meter," but might be acceptable to Laurel. Gyrrony with a torteau (a 
> roundel gules), which is the closest I could blazon the picture, is 
> against the rules. Viz. this precedent:
> [/Gyronny argent and gules, on a plate .../] ... just as we do not allow 
> a compony bordure to share a tincture with the field, the consensus was 
> to not allow a roundel to share a tincture with a gyronny field, as the 
> number of divisions is not high enough to ensure identifiability. 
> [*Sarah MacGregor*, 08/00, R-Meridies]
> LoAR Date: August 1, 2000
>
> Further, you cannot have two gyrons that are *not* opposite to each 
> other be the same tincture, because *you must have an even number of 
> gyrons* in a gyronny (except gyronny of three). Thus, the two gyrons 
> touching the line of division (for per fess, per pale, per bend 
> [sinister] etc.), must be different tinctures. Thus, the other half of 
> the field must be some tincture other than *either* of those used in the 
> gyronny. There's a precedent:
> [returning /Per fess gyronny gules and Or issuant from the line of 
> division and Or/]  The use of a gyronny half of a field which shares a 
> tincture with the other half of the field, so that in this case an Or 
> gyron is next to the Or half of the field, makes creates a severe 
> identifiability problem; it is extremely difficult to figure out just 
> what the field division/s is/are.  RfS VII.7.a. requires that "Elements 
> must be recognizable solely from their appearance."  To do so here 
> requires more time and effort than is consistent with the general 
> principles of armorial identifiability.  (Stefan Remnaia Palatka, 4/96 
> p. 19)
> LoAR Date: April 1, 1996
>
> The only way around this I can think of is gyronny of 3 tinctures, and 
> I'm not sure if the SCA allows that---other than the four items that are 
> gyronny of three 
> (http://oanda.sca.org/cgi-bin/oanda_bp.cgi?p=gyronny+of+three), I can 
> find no examples of gyronny in three tinctures.
>
> Oh, and regarding sable on a gyronny containing gules? This precedent 
> applies:
> [/Gyronny sable and argent, a wolf statant purpure.../] Even though the 
> field is evenly divided of a color and metal, most of the identifying 
> parts of the wolf are on sable areas of the field, making the wolf 
> unidentifiable. [*Wulfgar Neumann*, 01/01, R-Outlands]
> LoAR Date: January 1, 2001
>
> I think the whole idea is very, very questionable. YMMV.
>
>
> ~~Basil Dragonstrike
>
>   
  I had more of an issue with the similarity of the top half to the 
Imperial Japanese Navy Ensign (The "Rising Sun" flag).  It immediately 
brought that to mind and that sets off my personal alarms as it were. 


Brendan Tymberhavene