The Tenure of Wilhelm von Schlüssel
Compiled and edited by Baldwin of EreborContents [A] [B] [C] [D] [E] [F] [G] [H] [I] [K] [L] [M] [N] [O] [P] [Q] [R] [S] [T] [U] [V] [W]
|
Bard's Gate Gyldenholt, Caid 6 February 1983, XVII A.S. |
from Baldwin of Erebor, editor of the Laurel Precedents.
Greetings:
Your copy of the second edition of Precedents III is enclosed. Thank you very much for your order.
I received a total of forty orders from six kingdoms, with most of the copies going to Atenveldt and the Midrealm.
The quality of the printing is not quite up to the standard I had hoped for, for which I apologize. In addition to occasional blurring and streaking, I found several copies with blank or missing pages. Please inspect your copy, and let me know if anything is missing. I checked all the copies myself, and believe I have repaired all the defects, but such operations are wearisome, and hence prone to error. Each copy should have a title page, a disclaimer, twelve pages of introductory material, 104 pages of text, and a four-page reference list.
I have been asked why I chose not to advertise Precedents III in the kingdom newsletters. There were several reasons, the chief of which was timeliness. So long as Laurel King-of-Arms continues to ignore his own rulings and contemn those of his predecessors, College of Arms policy will change from month to month. Advertisement in the newsletters would have delayed Precedents III an additional four to six weeks, making it nine months out of date by the time it became available. I did not feel this was acceptable, and chose instead to advertise through the kingdom, principality, and regional heralds, to whom an heraldic source of this sort would be of greatest use.
I would be interested in knowing your opinion of Precedents III. Is it what you expected? Is there anything you particularly like or dislike about it? Is there anything I could have done to make the text clearer? Have you found any mistakes? Did I overlook anything important? Do you find the volume useful? How do you use it? Should the emphasis of the volume have been more on analysis and less on quotation? Does it make sense to codify the Laurel rulings when they change so frequently? Your comments would assist me greatly in the preparation of any future editions of this volume, as well as of the other two volumes in this series.
Work on the revised editions of Precedents I and II proceeds apace. Precedents II is presently being reviewed, after which I will make the final revisions. The text runs to about fifty pages at present, with an additional ten or so pages of supplementary material. I hope to begin soliciting orders around the first of May.
I have almost finished proofreading the initial text for Precedents I. It will then have to be categorized, edited, annotated, sent out for review, and revised for publication. I hope to begin soliciting orders no later than the first of September.
In answer to a question from Trillium Herald, I have no objection to people making personal copies of Precedents III. All I ask is that you copy the manuscript in its entirety, to ensure that no information is lost.
I pray you believe me to be,
Your servant,
/s/
Baldwin of Erebor
(Derek Foster)
P. 0. Box 11792
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
In June of 1980, I published two companion volumes to Mistress Karina's collection of precedents. These collections were drawn from the Laurel letters of acceptance and rejection, and covered the tenure of Karina of the Far West and the first year of the tenure of Wilhelm von Schlüssel.
Volume one of the Laurel Precedents was compiled in haste. As Mistress Karina said in her cover letter, "It is incomplete, sketchily cross-indexed, and occasionally mis-alphabetized; let me know what else is wrong with it." Some of the quotations were also inaccurate, and others were attributed incorrectly.
My own volumes didn't fare much better. I allowed myself too much liberty in editing quotations, over-categorized the quotations I selected, and sometimes failed to include enough of the original context for the quotations to make sense. I also missed several letters from Mistress Karina's tenure; and the subsequent flow of rulings from the Laurel office has rendered my volume on Master Wilhelm's tenure almost obsolete.
The second edition of Precedents of the SCA College of Arms is an attempt to correct many of the flaws of the first edition. The present volume has been recompiled from the original sources, in hopes of producing a document that is both accurate and useful.
Knowledge of SCA heraldry can be derived from four sources: (1) the Rules for Heraldic Submissions, (2) policy statements made in the Laurel correspondence, (3) explicit comments made on submissions that have been processed, and (4) the submissions themselves.
The Rules for Heraldic Submissions have the advantage of being explicit, but they cannot be comprehensive; one still needs to know how the rules are to be applied. Policy statements are often more directly applicable than the rules, but they, too, require substantiation. Comments made on submissions provide immediate examples, but the reader may have difficulty determining the general principle from a single instance, particularly when the comments are sparse or inaccurate. The submissions themselves are the most accurate gauge of what has been approved, but they are not readily accessible, and they cannot explain why a specific action was taken, particularly in the case of a rejection.
The Laurel Precedents documents are drawn from the second and third of these sources. They are made up of quotations from the formal correspondence of the Laurel Sovereign of Arms. They are a codification, in the words of the persons who made the decisions, of what has been called the "case law" of the SCA College of Arms. The Precedents do not replace the Laurel letters as a source of information, but they can make that information more accessible, by presenting those portions of the Laurel letters that seem best to explain SCA heraldic policy, selected, categorized, and edited.
I have identified several topics, which I have termed issues, under which I have attempted to assemble enough quotes to constitute a general discussion of the topic at hand. ARTISTIC LICENSE, for example, attempts to show what freedoms (and limitations) we have given the herald painter; DIFFERENCE is made up of expositions on points of difference; and SHIELDS ON SHIELDS contains various rulings on apparent augmentations, inescutcheons, and arms of pretense.
Each paragraph in the Laurel Precedents represents a separate quotation. The implied speaker is the Laurel Sovereign of Arms whose letter is being quoted. In the handful of cases where Laurel has quoted someone else directly, I have enclosed the quote in double quotation marks and given the initials of the speaker, in square brackets, at the end of the quotation.
Omissions from the beginning and end of a quotation have been done silently. Anything left out of the middle has been marked with an ellipsis ("..."). Obvious typographical and spelling errors (including errors in capitalization) have been corrected without comment. With a couple of exceptions, all other emendations have been enclosed in [square brackets].
Editorial changes have been made for the following reasons:
No effort has been made to standardize the spelling of words appearing in the Laurel quotations. American and British spellings were freely mixed in the originals, and you may find several different spellings of any given heraldic term (cotise, for example). So long as I could find a citation for a given spelling, I used it. (Those errors for which I couldn't find citations were treated as spelling errors, and each was corrected to what seemed the most appropriate attested form. Papellony, for example, became papelonny.)
Because the machine on which these documents were printed does not include any French accents, I have had to adopt non-accented spellings for some of the heraldic terms. I have usually used the English -y form, if one could be found. Contourné has thus become contourny, semé and semée have both become semy, vêtu has been represented by vetu, and so forth.
American Heritage Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin, second college edition 1982.
Theodore M. Bernstein. The Careful Writer: A Modern Guide to English Usage. Atheneum, 1980.
J. P. Brooke-Little. Boutell's Heraldry. Frederick Warne, revised edition 1973.
J. P. Brooke-Little. An Heraldic Alphabet. Arco Publishing Company, revised edition 1975.
The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. Two volumes. Oxford University Press, 1971.
Charles Norton Elvin. A Dictionary of Heraldry. Heraldry Today, 1969.
Francis J. Grant. A Concise Description of the Several Terms Used, and Containing a Dictionary of Every Designation in the Science. John Grant, 1962.
Mary-Claire van Leunen. A Handbook for Scholars. Alfred A. Knopf, 1979.
William Morris, editor. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Houghton Mifflin, new college edition 1976.
James Parker. A Glossary of Terms Used in Heraldry. Charles E. Tuttle, 1970.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. G. & C. Merriam Company, 1960.
John Woodward and George Burnett. A Treatise on Heraldry, British and Foreign, with English and French Glossaries. Charles E. Tuttle, 1969.
First edition, June XV (1980).
Second edition, January XVII (1983).
"The College is not bound by anything that it has done or not done in the past. It is bound by its published rules and decisions. If a specific charge or usage has been rejected in the past and there has been nothing since then to change that stance then that charge or usage is still rejected."
Wilhelm von Schlüssel
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
Lewis Carroll
Volume III of Precedents of the SCA College of Arms presented me with a number of editorial problems. Chief among these was the amount of source material to be considered. In his initial three years as Laurel King of Arms, Master Wilhelm von Schlüssel produced as much paper as all three of his predecessors combined. A study of this sort requires that each quotation be considered, not only in its own context, but in the context of all the other quotations as well; so the number of interactions -- and hence, the complexity of the task -- grew exponentially as the number of quotations increased.
The greater part of the problem lay, however, in the quality of the material itself. Master Wilhelm's letters tended to be wordy without being enlightening; his rulings were often ambiguous, sometimes contradictory, and all too frequently contrary to fact. I would caution the user of this volume to be wary of subsequent rulings on a given topic, and not to rely solely on the content of the first quotation he finds.
Precedents III was drawn primarily from comments on submissions. Almost nothing was included from the various editions of the "Rules for Heraldic Submissions," nor did I quote any of the proclamations on purely administrative matters (such as heralds' regalia). In these cases, current policy, as expressed in the separate documents on these subjects, is of far more use to the working herald than any exposition of what has been said before.
The notation [EoE], which follows several of the entries in this volume, indicates a comment made by Mistress Eriod of Eire, Master Wilhelm's consultant on Irish names, whom he quoted directly in a couple of his rulings.
I was fortunate to have had the assistance of a number of people in preparing the revised edition of Precedents III. Lady Adelaide de Beaumont helped me draft editorial policy, and researched the fine points of citation. Master Hrorek Halfdane of Faulconwood reviewed the manuscript in draft, and returned his comments in jig time. Mistress Alison von Markheim suggested a number of cross-references, and made sense of twelve pages of quotations on names. Lord Iathus of Scara rescued Mistress Alison's comments from oblivion. To all of these people go my sincere thanks.
Baldwin of Erebor
There is only one species of aardvark. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
Abased means that the ... division is lowered to base. This is what we used to call "debased," which was incorrect. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 1
"Abased" means lowered to base. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 1
Your [submission] violates the rule against astrological symbols because the cross within an annulet is the astrological symbol of Earth. A true sun cross has the annulet on the cross, so the arms of the cross extend beyond the annulet. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 9.
Runes, like letters, numbers, hieroglyphs, and Chinese characters may not be used as charges in devices. Runes are acceptable for badges. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 3
Musical notes cannot be used in devices, but can be used in badges. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 10
The infinity symbol is out of period and inappropriate for registration as a tinctureless charge. Abstract symbols should not be used as tinctureless badges. Otherwise, you would get people registering the signs of the Zodiac and then denying their use to others. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
A person cannot register a single abstract symbol without a field as a badge. If we allowed such a practice, people would register the symbols they liked and deny their use to others. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
Letters, numbers, runes, and other such abstract symbols may not be used in a device, although they can be used in badges ... This rule was decided by the College to be the rule for SCA usage. Whether or not runes actually were used occasionally in period in European arms is irrelevant. We will not use them. our basis is English heraldry, which did not use them. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 6
From now on, it shall be up to each individual kingdom to decide what achievements shall be used on scrolls. WVS [51] [CL 20 Sep 81], p. 1
If you wish to use supporters, crests, or mottoes, you are free to do so, but the College of Arms will not register them, although an individual kingdom could. I would prefer to see supporters reserved for holders of Patents of Arms. WVS [51] [CL 20 Sep 81], p. 2
[Acorn wreath fructed.] The acorns must be enlarged by a factor of two to three to be in keeping with medieval practice and to remove the similarity to a laurel wreath. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 4Acorns are ripe (i.e. brown) by default. If you want a green acorn you have to so specify. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 7
The Boreas is a cloud with the face of an old man, while the Aeolus is a cloud with the face of a young boy. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 9
Boreas is the North Wind, which has an icy breath. It is therefore argent. This is an Aeolus, i.e., a wind, no direction specified. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 5
Only a real doctor can register a caduceus or a staff of Aesculapius in a device. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 13
Alternate vair is a German variation of vair wherein each vair bell is divided per pale. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 2
He must use a period anchor with straight arms instead of the 1800's anchor he has drawn. WVS [40] [LoAR 20 Apr 81], p. 1
There are many species of angelfish but they all have the same basic outline and this is just a single specified tincture so there is no need for listing the genus and species. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 1
Seven annulets braced is excessive. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 9
Vires are concentric annulets. Thus you have one annulet, two vires, three vires, etc. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 8
[Embowed in annulo.] The [charge] in chief determines the direction of rotation. By default, it points to dexter and so, by default, the [charges] are oriented in a widdershins direction. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 6
The anole is the American chameleon. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 1
The anvil must be a period anvil, which is double-pointed, rather than the modern anvil shown in the drawing. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 4
The medieval anvil was symmetrical, with two horns. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 1
This is the most massively documented appeal I have ever seen. It was well done. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 4
All rejections do have the right of appeal, so long as documentation accompanies the appeal. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 7
The use of archaic terms for canting purposes is acceptable. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 10
You cannot differentiate a newt's arm from any other reptilian arms ... Resubmit ... as a reptile's arm. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 6
Arrows fesswise point to sinister, just [as] arrows palewise point to base. Arrows and arrowheads thus point in the opposite direction from most other charges. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 3
The sword has the arms of the shire on the blade next to the hilt, but that is artistic license. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 10
With regard to small details on animals, such as claws and teeth, these really shouldn't clutter up the blazon unless really necessary. They should either be of the same tincture as the animal, or else colored to stand out in contrast. The standard tincture for such if the animal is Or or argent is gules, unless the field is gules, in which case it is azure. If the animal is colored then the standard tincture for the small details is argent, unless the field is argent, in which case it is or. Rather than clutter up the blazon it is much better to just use the space for notes to the scribe or artist on the picture sheet to detail just how to color the small details. Large details, such as a horse's mane, should be described in the blazon. WVS [12] [CL 18 Mar 80], p. 1
We view what is on the emblazon sheet as the only correct form for the device or badge, subject to artistic license. This is an old custom from the beginning of the College. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
The number of crenelations on a tower is a matter for the artist, not the blazon. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], pa 4
Delineating a charge is artistic license and need not be blazoned. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 1
The exact minor details of the Assyrian winged bull versus a normal winged bull are matters for the artist, not the blazon. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 2
Snowflakes are now acceptable charges. They must have six-fold symmetry, Id but the exact details are artistic license. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 6
In line with the decision on ordinaries and their diminutives having no points of difference, henceforth we will not use bordurelets. The size of a bordure shall be a matter for the artist. A single bar will be no different from a fess. For the benefit of the scribes, the first diminutive of an ordinary may be used singly and so specified to indicate that a smaller size is wanted, but no points of difference will result. Thus, you can specify one bar in the blazon, and it will be drawn that way, but it will be no different than if it were a fess for the purpose of conflicts. WVS [54] [CL 27 Oct 81], p. 1
Exactly which kind of oak leaf they are is a matter for the artist, not the blazon. Heraldically, a leaf proper is always green unless otherwise indicated, in which case you might as well say vert. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 1
Atop means the [charge] is standing on top of the mount. Upon means the [charge] is charged on the mount. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 1
Augmentations are listed separately. The original arms are unchanged unless, as in this case, they are modified to make room for augmentations. The bearer of the arms still retains the right to display the original arms if desired. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 13
You cannot have charged cantons or quarters, either dexter or sinister, with straight lines of division. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 6
The pall on the bezant looks like a form of augmentation. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 4
The device is rejected because the chief appears to be an augmentation of Brittany. Try moving the chief up off the bend sinister in the usual manner. Chiefs overall were generally only used for augmentations. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7
see also SHIELDS ON SHIELDS
N. was the one spelling that was not used in period. I suggest you use one of the period forms, if you care about authenticity. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 1
The arms of branches must have at least one laurel wreath as a major charge. Nothing else may, including badges and flags of branches. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 14
Quartering ... cannot be used for badges, as impaling is allowed there and that is sufficient. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 17
The College allows one to register a badge for an alternate persona, but the badge is registered under the name of the main persona. No more than one file per person. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 6
Badges need not have fields specified. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 1
From now on I am going to list badges of groups that are not personal households separately, although I still require the name of a representative. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 2
Badges for territorial branches should either obey the rule of tincture or have no specified field. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 3
Fields and tinctures of charges need not all be specified in a badge. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 1
Badges for subsidiary offices are forbidden, especially within the heralds. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 3
From now on all SCA badges must differ by one and a half points from SCA devices and one point from all other categories. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
From now on all badges must obey the rule of tincture. Badges need not have any tinctures specified, but if any are specified then they must obey the rule. I have finally decided to eliminate the acceptance of anything violating the rule of tincture because of all of the rules of heraldry [this] is the one that is most known to the populace, and so it is confusing to the populace to see banners which violate this practice. The primary reason for this change is to be more in keeping with period practice. In our period the rule of tincture was applied to both arms and badges. Although exceptions can be found, they were just that, exceptions to an otherwise adamant rule. Since the rule of tincture is one of the most practical rules we have, being based upon reasons of contrast and visibility, I have decided it is best to honor it in all cases. All previously registered badges are of course unaffected, but no longer constitute preceden[t]. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
A person may not place his or her own badge on an inescutcheon, lozenge or cartouche on his or her device, as that would seem to be a form of marshalling or else an augmentation. A person could place his or her badge upon a roundel and place this on his or her device. This is the proper shape for a badge, after all, and will not be considered a form of marshalling. You could also place the badge on the sail of a ship, or the sleeve of a maunch, or some other non-marshalling usage. In any event the addition cannot cause the device to exceed the limit on complexity. WVS [26] [CL 20 Oct 80], p. 3
The College will not register devices to cats or any other animals ... N. can register a badge to himself for his cat M. if he wants to. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 9
The College will not register a badge without a field that has a division of the field or an ordinary or subordinary that depends on the shape of the field for its own shape. This means you cannot register a fieldless badge with a pale, because if a pale is on a lozenge it is pointed at both ends, while on a heater it is straight at both ends. A badge with a field has the field in the shape of a roundel. A badge without a field is just the charge(s) it contains. If you want just a mullet on a pale for a badge, blazon it as a mullet on a billet. WVS [35] [CL 24 Feb 81], p. 5
Do not use the arms of the Barony as a part of a badge of the Barony. The result is a roundel with a laurel wreath too small to make out. Besides, it looks like an augmentation. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
The infinity symbol is out of period and inappropriate for registration as a tinctureless charge. Abstract symbols should not be used as tinctureless badges. Otherwise, you would get people registering the signs of the Zodiac and then denying their use to others. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
A person cannot register a single abstract symbol without a field as a badge. If we allowed such a practice, people would register the symbols they liked and deny their use to others. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
The badge [containing an oak leaf and a sickle] is too Druidical in nature. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 5
Letters, numbers, runes, and other such abstract symbols may not be used in a device, although they can be used in badges. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 6
You can register a badge under your name for your teddy bear, but do not submit a device for your teddy bear. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 2
see also HOUSEHOLD
The triple-drone bagpipe is out of period. Redraw this with two drones. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 2
Tartans are mostly out of period, and so I have left the coloration of the bagpipe to the scribe. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 2. [The bagpipe was blazoned as "proper."]
The bagwyn is cited in the early 16th century and so is admissible as a charge. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 7
see FLAG
see FESS
A puncheon barrel is elliptical in shape, as opposed to the normal round barrel. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 8
Heraldry does not count beyond ten. Hence, this is barruly instead of barry of fourteen. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 5
A ford is a base barry wavy argent and azure, representing water ... If the ford were placed upon a metal field the colors would be reversed to azure and argent. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 2
Heraldry does not count beyond ten. Hence, this is barruly instead of barry of fourteen. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 5
You cannot have barry wavy of two colors. WVS [65] [LoAR 15 Mar 82], Peg 5
A ford is a base barry wavy argent and azure, representing water ... If the ford were placed upon a metal field the colors would be reversed to azure and argent. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 2
Note that dancetty can only be used on an ordinary that has two sides. You cannot have a chief or a base or a bordure dancetty. WVS [22] [CL 27 Aug 80], p. 1
To use a surname to form a patronymic can indicate bastardy. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 7. [I am not aware of any reputable source that bears out this claim.]
The baton sinister is reserved to the English royal house. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 3
A comet's tail heraldically is known as its beard. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 2
see also HAIR
Any creature with four limbs can be rampant if the limbs are arranged in that specific artificial position. Wings count as limbs, as do fins. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 6
Heraldry doesn't care what positions a given animal can or cannot [have] in nature. It would be heraldically acceptable to have a seal rampant, even though that is also impossible. An animal sejant erect has the back legs under the body facing in the same direction as the head, even if one must break them to make them do that in nature. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 4
A beast rising means it is rising to its feet, going from sejant to statant. The hind legs are vertical and the front are bent. WVS [55]
All creatures must be in a standard heraldic positiona!! WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 11
The default bell is a church bell. If you want some other kind of bell you must so specify. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
There is very little difference between a bend sinister and a scarpe, as either is variable in size. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 6
A bird rising has its wings displayed by default. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 4
A bird rising by default has its wings inverted. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 2
When two charges are in saltire you first mention the one in bend, and then that in bend sinister. The default position is for the charge in bend to lie on top of the charge in bend sinister. If not you have to say it is surmounted by the other charge. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 3. [Note contradiction in ruling of 21 Dec 81 [59], p. 1]
The use of archaic terms for canting purposes is acceptable. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 10
The field is blazoned completely first, then come the charges. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 2
Objects in bend are bendwise unless otherwise stated. The same holds true for in pale, in fess, in chevron, in pall, in bend sinister, in cross, etc. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
Do not use continental terms if you can blazon it with English terms. WVS [19] [LoAR 5 Jun 80], p. 1
Objects placed as if upon a bordure may be described as in bordure. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 1
A single charge is bendwise, while several charges are in bend. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p; 5
[In compass star.] This means that there are four long [charges] and four short [charges] around the [central charge], as if it was a dismembered compass star. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
If a charge rests wholly on another it is charged upon the other. If it extends onto the field then the lower charge is surmounted by the upper charge. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
Crossed in estoile means the first [charge] is bendwise sinister, the second is bendwise and the third is palewise, placed one upon the other. This is an SCA convention. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 2
By default charges are placed symmetrically around a field division. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 3
[Embowed in annulo.] The [charge] in chief determines the direction of rotation. By default, it points to dexter and so, by default, the [charges] are oriented in a widdershins direction. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 6
The [charges] are too small to be mentioned in the blazon. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 1
The College has ruled that out-of-period names for charges that themselves are in period may be used if those names are the ones the charges are commonly known by. An example of this is the fur, pean. WVS [37] [CL 10 Mar 81], p. 2
Whenever possible avoid using the split-field blazon style. Blazon first the entire field and then the charges. Semys may be considered part of the field for this purpose. WVS [47] [CL 30 Jul 81], p. 5
A charge facing towards the sinister side is "to sinister," while a charge lying in the sinister half of the field is "in sinister." The facing comes after the mention of the charge, but the location comes before it. Thus a drakkar sailing under full sail towards the sinister edge is "a drakkar under full sail to sinister," but a drakkar located in the sinister half of the field but sailing towards the dexter is "in sinister a drakkar under full sail." The same applies to "in chief" versus "to chief" or "in base" versus "to base." WVS [47] [CL 30 Jul 81], p. 5
Gyronny in cross means the gyronny is rotated one-half notch so the gyrons are in cross. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 6
It is an SCA convention that charges placed along a line of division behave like charges placed upon the corresponding ordinary with regards to default positions. Thus two swords on a bend are by default bendwise unless otherwise specified. By SCA convention two swords in bend are by default bendwise unless otherwise specified WVS [56] [CL 30 Nov 81], p. 2
When two charges are in saltire, the dexter charge is mentioned before the sinister charge. Normally, the sinister charge is on top of the dexter charge. When it is not, as in this case, the dexter charge is stated to be surmounting the sinister charge. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 1. [This contradicts the ruling of 19 Nov 79 [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 3]
A pharos is any lighthouse, and is thus not specific enough for use in a blazon. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 1
When two pairs of charges are in cross, one first blazons the pair in pale and then the pair in fess. If the two pairs had been in saltire, you would first blazon the pair in bend and then the pair in bend sinister. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 3
Hereafter, if charges are placed upon an ordinary, then by default they will follow the orientation of the ordinary (a sword placed on a bend will be bendwise by default), but charges placed along a line of partition will retain their normal default orientations. This will allow us to say that two charges placed in [the] 1st and 4th quarters on either side of a cross are in bend, without having to then say they are palewise. WVS [69] [CL 25 May 82], p. 5
see also ARTISTIC LICENSE
The bonacon was considered too offensive by a significant fraction of the College and is therefore not allowed for use in the SCA. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 12
Please remove the writing, as that is not proper usage. It should be a blank book. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 4
Period boots did not have heels. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 5
For the last time, bordures in the SCA are on the field and do have to obey the rule of tincture! WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 5
A bordurelet is an SCA creation which is a diminutive of a bordure, being only one-third as wide as a bordure, but still being the edge of the shield. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 3
The addition of just a bordure is not sufficient because bordures are marks of cadency in Scotland. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
As Lord Virgule says, the addition of a bordure (a single charge) was ruled insufficient difference from Scrope in the famous Scrope vs. Grosvenor case in England. The addition of two different charges is sufficient difference between a Society device and mundane arms. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
Objects placed as if upon a bordure may be described as in bordure. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 1
Note that dancetty can only be used on an ordinary that has two sides. You cannot have a chief or a base or a bordure dancetty. WVS [22] [CL 27 Aug 80], p. 1
You get no difference between a bordure and a bordurelet. We allow the term to aid the artists. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 7
A bordure versus a bordurelet is at most one-half point. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 8
Placing a chief over a bordure is a non-period practice. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 4
Bordurelets themselves are not good style. Please drop the bordurelet. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 4
In line with the decision on ordinaries and their diminutives having no points of difference, henceforth we will not use bordurelets. The size of a bordure shall be a matter for the artist. WVS [54] [CL 27 Oct 81], p. 1
When one border surmounts another, the second is one-half the width of the first, effectively producing a bordure divided into two equal-width pieces. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 4
see BORDURE
The Boreas is a cloud with the face of an old man, while the Aeolus is a cloud with the face of a young boy. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 9
Boreas is the North Wind, which has an icy breath. It is therefore argent. This is an Aeolus, i.e., a wind, no direction specified. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 5
The Borzoi is out of period, having been bred into existence in the 17th century. Try a wolfhound. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 4
N.'s own documentation lists the brideskold as an instrument of punishment that was intended to be degrading. In the SCA we are trying to re-create the Middle Ages as they should have been, without such evils as endemic disease, illiteracy, religious persecution, and sexual discrimination. Through SCA decisions to allow women to fight, to hold office, and to otherwise have an equal role in the SCA, we have affirmed our intention to avoid the subjugation of women practiced in the Middle Ages. Heraldic arms are supposed to be serious, honorable emblems. Therefore, in the SCA we shall not use as charges such offensive items as the brideskold, the chastity belt, the dunking stool, the burning stake, or any other symbol of female degradation. These charges are forbidden under the offensive[ness] clause. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 9. [It should be noted that the brideskold, the dunking stool, and the burning stake are symbols of HUMAN degradation, not necessarily reserved to women.]
[Open penannular brooch.] The default position here is the ring part crescentwise with the pin palewise. A closed broach has the pin fesswise. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 4
Five brownie points. This is classic heraldry at its best. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 2
The exact minor details of the Assyrian winged bull versus a normal winged bull are matters for the artist, not the blazon. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 2
see BRIDESKOLD
see COMPLEXITY
Papillons are butterflies. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 1
In the SCA we use heads caboshed instead of faces. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 6
N. may register his father's device with a label added as one point of difference. WVS [2] [LoAR 16 Jul 76], p. 2
A label is a charge just like any other, and may be so used. In the SCA it is NOT a mark of cadency, as THERE IS NO CADENCY IN THE SCA! WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 11
As we are not using cadency per se it is acceptable to put a label on the mother's arms as well as the father's. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 13
The addition of just a bordure is not sufficient because bordures are marks of cadency in Scotland. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
Normally we do not worry about mundane arms consisting only of fields, but you cannot have a device consisting of one of them plus a mark of cadency. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 13
Our 1-1/2 point rule for difference between SCA devices and mundane arms is based upon the concept of avoiding the appearance of cadency with those mundane arms. Most of the 1-point differences were used as marks of cadency, so we adopted 1-1/2 points of difference as the rule, to ensure that the SCA didn't conflict by cadency with mundane arms. Two forms of differencing were generally not used for cadency. One was removing or replacing the major charge, while leaving the secondary charge in place. The second was adding a new primary charge so the original primary charge(s) became secondary charge(s). In the case of N's arms, the addition of the [charge] demotes the [ordinary] from primary to secondary charge, and thus does not conflict, as this would not have been a form of cadency in period. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 4
Only a real doctor can register a caduceus or a staff of Aesculapius in a device. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 13
The arrow and snake combination ... looks too much like a caduceus, which is restricted. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 5
A can is a type of drinking cup. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 1
The thylacine existed in period and so it can be used, even though it wasn't named until after our period. Since we of course must use the proper but out-of-period name in the blazon, I see no reason that it can't be used as his name, for the sake of canting, so long as it looks like a name and passes the other rules WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 8. [The thylacine is also known as the "Tasmanian wolf."]
The use of archaic terms for canting purposes is acceptable. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 10
You cannot have charged cantons or quarters, either dexter or sinister, with straight lines of division. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 6
see also SHIELDS ON SHIELDS
Herissony means back arched and spitting, a very catly position. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 3
To save space, a cat is a domestic cat. If you want a mountain lion it is a catamount. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 2
Genus and species need not be given for common animals where there is only one species involved. There is only one species of domestic cat. The same is true of dogs and horses. There are, however, many breeds, and these are what must be specified. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 2
For the benefit of the ordinary, all trees should have the word tree at the end. hence cedar tree instead of just cedar. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 6
The anole is the American chameleon. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 1
If an armiger who has already registered his arms decides to change his arms he need not obtain the approval of the monarch who made him armigerous. The kings give the rank, but the College gives the actual blazon of the arms. WVS [16] [CL 15 May 80], p. 1
A chaplet graminy is made of grass. WVS [2] [LoAR 16 Jul 76], p. 1
Wreaths or chaplets of roses are restricted to royalty. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 8
If a charge rests wholly on another it is charged upon the other. If it extends onto the field then the lower charge is surmounted by the upper charge. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
Chased means voided but with the interior details and lines still showing as well as the outline. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 3
Chased means to void a charge leaving both the outline and the internal lines. Like voiding, you can chase something of a tincture other than the field. If the [charge] was chased or then it would be voided of the field with the gold lines showing. In that case the [underlying charge] would show through. Since it does not the [charge] is a [charge] or, chased sable. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 7
The only cases for internal lines in heraldry are masoned or chased. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 4
The College of Arms has decided not to allow complex voiding or chasing because of the lack of contrast. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7
see BRIDESKOLD
Chausse is a division of the field formed by two lines from dexter chief and sinister chief meeting at the base point. As it is not an even division of the field, it may not be of two metals or two colors. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 1
Chausse-ploye looks like a pile concave throughout, except that the pile portion is the field and the sections to either side are the charges. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 2
Checky, like all divided tinctures, can be of any combinations of colors or metals (even ermine variations). If it is of two colors or two metals then it is treated as a color or metal, respectively, with regard to the rule of tincture. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 7
see LOZENGY
A pile inverted is actually per chevron unless it is a very narrow pile inverted between other charges. If it's wide enough to put a charge on properly, it's generally per chevron. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 5
In the old days of heraldry all chevrons were enhanced. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 11
A chevron voided has the two chevronels connected by bands along the edge of the shield. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 11
A chevronel fracted is like a chevronel rompu but the point section is lowered instead of raised. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 1
The addition of a charged chief counts as one and a half points of difference, one for the chief and one-half for the charges on the chief. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 7
Note that dancetty can only be used on an ordinary that has two sides. You cannot have a chief or a base or a bordure dancetty. WVS [22] [CL 27 Aug 80], p. 1
This is color on color. A chief and a flank are charges, not divisions. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 9
A chief triangular is a continental term of questionable period. Either prove it is in period or switch to per chevron inverted. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 8
A chief triangular is now an accepted charge. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 7
A chief of one indent is out of period. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 10
Placing a chief over a bordure is a non-period practice. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 4
A chief triangular truncated doesn't exist. That's a keystone issuant from chief. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 7
The device is rejected because the chief appears to be an augmentation of Brittany. Try moving the chief up off the bend sinister in the usual manner. Chiefs overall were generally only used for augmentations. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7
You cannot have a chief enhanced. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 9
A chimera has the goat's head emerging from the back of the lion's head. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 6
The modern treble clef is out of period. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 10
see FESS
see TARTAN
The Boreas is a cloud with the face of an old man, while the Aeolus is a cloud with the face of a young boy. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 9
Boreas is the North Wind, which has an icy breath. It is therefore argent. This is an Aeolus, i.e., a wind, no direction specified. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 5
There is no such charge as a thundercloud. WVS [70] [LoAR 24 May 82], p. 8
My sources seem to indicate that the collie is out of period, being bred in the late 17th century. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 15
The only cases for internal lines in heraldry are masoned or chased. Anything else, such as the Doric meander, is diapering and is not listed in the blazon. Changing the meander to silver on white would be proper diapering. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 4. [The charge, which was submitted as a Doric meander, was eventually registered as an Ionic column.]
A comet's tail heraldically is known as its beard. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 2
Compass roses and Mariner's Roses are too complex to be used in the SCA. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 7
He has established that this sort of symbol is in period. By default a compass rose has a fleur-de-lys in chief to point to north. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 3
A compass star has alternating greater and lesser points, with a greater point to chief. To be proper the number of points should be divisible by four. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 6
[In compass star.] This means that there are four long [charges] and four short [charges] around the [central charge], as if it was a dismembered compass star. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
see MOON
This is six layers, which is too much. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 16
In all there are eleven charges crammed onto this device. This is too complicated. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 4
This is a special exception to the rule against complexity and does not constitute a precedent. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 1
This is far too complex and is Victorian. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 5
This device is too busy. It has six charges. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 8
This has six different types of charges and is, therefore, too complex. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 9
You may not charge a sail if the resulting sail conflicts with existing arms. It would imply a relationship to that family. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 6
[Pellinore.] The device is acceptable but the name is not in conjunction with the device. You must either change the word Pellinore or else use a different charge other than the questing beast. The combination of Pellinore and a questing beast is too much of a conflict with King Pellinore. If you want to use a famous name of a mortal you must not only difference from the famous person by the rest of the Society name, but also you must avoid any further reference to the famous person in the device. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 7
This would seem to be the arms of a bastard son (hence the bordure counter-compony) of the Royal House of Gondor. The addition of the Elvish name is just too much. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 8
This conflicts with [blazon]. They are too visually similar. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 7
Normally we do not worry about mundane arms consisting only of fields, but you cannot have a device consisting of one of them plus a mark of cadency. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 13
During the Renaissance, N.'s arms could well have been drawn with a rapier, as that was the sword in use in those days. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 7. [In other words, a "rapier" is considered to be a special case of the heraldic "sword," and one will conflict with the other.]
If two SCA arms differ only by color (i.e., the outlines are the same), then they conflict. One reason is that, if both were used as tinctureless seals, they would be identical, which is confusing. The other reason is that we remember shapes very well, but colors only somewhat. Thus, two devices differing only in the colors of the charges would be easily confused. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 4
see also DIFFERENCE
You cannot have the Southern Cross, as constellations are out of period for use as charges. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], pa 7
The use of a constellation as a charge is out of period and not acceptable. However, I would be willing to consider an Ursa Major as a charge if you draw the full constellation of mullets on the proper bear shape as drawn by the ancients in our period. The College could then debate whether this is acceptable usage, as such drawings did exist in our period. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 7
From now on, an animal turned to face sinister is contourny ... Counter-X shall now be used ... when there are two or more animals moving in opposite directions. Please note that an animal's head that is couped and turned to face sinister is now "couped contourny." Charges that are not animals or animal heads (and for purposes of this rule, humans are animals) still use reversed if turned to sinister. WVS [37] [CL 10 Mar 81], p. 3
Charges facing sinister are contourny. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 6
I hereby allow either "contourny" or "to sinister" to represent [the position of a charge] turned to the sinister ... From now on I will take them as they come in. Counter-positions are still reserved for two or more animals going in opposite directions. WVS [41] [CL 12 May 81], p. 4
Normally the fimbriation would not suffice to avoid lack of contrast, but the semy adds enough extra contrast to make it work. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 1
[Gyronny of sixteen vert and azure.] The excessive division of the field into green and blue pieces is a bad idea given the lack of contrast between the two. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 9
You cannot place argent upon ermine, as there is insufficient contrast. Similarly you could not place Or on erminois, nor sable on counter-ermine or pean. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
The College of Arms has decided not to allow complex voiding or chasing because of the lack of contrast. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7
see also PROPER
There is no such thing as a heart proper. That is a conventional charge, and can be borne in any tincture. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 9
It is now legal to use cotices as independent charges. You specify if they are bar cotices or bend cotices or chevron cotices. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 8
You cannot have an endorse or a cotise standing alone. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 10
Flaunches voided and flaunches cotised are both non-period. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 4
see CONTOURNY
It is the consensus of the College and my decision that the counterchange of a submission is no longer registered along with the submission. Counterchanging is now a single point of difference, with the stipulation that no badge, device, or arms can be the counterchange of another badge, device or arms without the written permission of the holder of the latter. Thus when one submits a device now it is no longer necessary to worry about what its counterchange conflicts with, or whether the device itself conflicts with the counterchange of other devices or arms. WVS [16] [CL 15 May 80], p. 2
The counterchanging leaves the lines of the bend intact, thereby leaving the bend as the major charge, so there is only one point of difference. WVS [19] [LoAR 5 Jun 80], p. 4
From now on all SCA badges must differ by one and a half points from SCA devices and one point from all other categories. That one point cannot just be counterchanging. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
Counterchanging is less than a full point in most cases. In the case where there are several tinctures then a complete permutation can be a full point. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
You can specify tinctures for counterchanging other than the tinctures of the field and its ordinaries. In this case the [charges] on the azure half of the field are argent and those on the Or half are vert. The default case is to use the colors of the field and ordinaries, as is the case with the [other charge]. In this case the tinctures are not specified. This is a new SCA convention. It should prove useful. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 3
Counterchanging by a line of division is 1 point of difference. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 13
As this is a badge, it needs only one point of difference from mundane arms and mon, and therefore does not conflict with the Japanese mon which is the counterchange. In mon color doesn't count, just light on dark or dark on light. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 4
Spiders, turtles, crabs, etc., are all tergiant displayed by default. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 2
A crane in its vigilance is statant with its dexter foreleg upraised. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 2
This [charge] is insufficiently unique to warrant its own name in the ordinary. You can call it [special name] in [kingdom] if you like but it can't go into the ordinary that way. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 9
It was standard practice in period European heraldry to create new monsters by combining pieces of common animals. The College of Arms allows the use of those monsters created before 1601 and allows the creation of new monsters in this fashion by Society members. These monsters must be made from pieces of common animals known to Europe in our period. The use of highly unusual or unknown animals is not allowed. Thus one could not make an animal out of a platypus's head, a gnu's body, a coelacanth's tail, and the legs of a penguin. The College has from time to time allowed the registration of new monsters created out of whole cloth that are not blazonable as parts of common animals. These are exceptions treated on a case-by-case basis. The College often assigns a new name to these new monsters rather than listing them as a long combination of various parts of animals (e.g., the Bog Beast). At this time, the College refuses to register as out of period those monsters which were created between the years 1601 and 1966, even if they are completely in keeping with and compatible with period usage. The College does not allow them either under their actual name or as a list of parts of animals. Thus, if you create a new monster out of pieces of animals that has never been thought of before, it is acceptable, but if it turns out that somebody else thought of it in 1758, then it is not allowed. WVS [37] [CL 10 Mar 81], p. 2
Henceforth there will be a moratorium on the normal registration of out-of-period monsters and of made-up monsters. Instead, we will allow people to petition the College of Arms for acceptance of a particular monster, on a case-by-case basis. Such proposed monsters may be made up or out of period monsters. The question will be whether the monster is in keeping with period practice and whether the College feels it would be a good idea to allow its use in the SCA. Once approved, the monster is available for use by anybody in the SCA. All monsters already registered now are still available for general use. WVS [41] [CL 12 May 81], p. 5
You cannot give special names to simple charges like a roundel engrailed. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 2
An increscent moon is an increscent with a face and is in period as it was used in statuary in our period. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 2
I prefer crescent inverted to crescent pendant. WVS 140], pa 5
Vesper has convinced me that a crescent pendant is a proper period version of a crescent inverted and so I allow it. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 6
see ACHIEVEMENT
Crined applies to all hair parts, not just the mane. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 2
Your [submission] violates the rule against astrological symbols because the cross within an annulet is the astrological symbol of Earth. A true sun cross has the annulet on the cross, so the arms of the cross extend beyond the annulet. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 9
A Bowen cross is a Bowen knot rotated 45 degrees to be in cross, with the loops straightened into straight lines and right angle bends. It looks like five mascles conjoined in cross. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 3
Formy and paty are the same thing. WVS [25] [LoAR 16 Sep 80], p. 4
A Cross of Calatrava gules is the symbol of the Spanish Order of Calatrava, an order of knighthood. A Cross of Calatrava vert is the symbol of the Order of Alcantara, another Spanish order of knighthood. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 8. [The submission was rejected for containing one of these charges.]
A cross sarcelled means its ends are split back towards the center (see Copinger's Heraldry Simplified, plate 69, $183, p. 66). WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 1
It is better to call these mullets [of four points] than star-crosses, because that way they are grouped with mullets in the Ordinary rather than crosses. We already have another use for star-cross, anyway. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 5
A Latin saltire is a Latin cross bendwise. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 1
A tau cross has concave arms. A cross couped in chief has straight arms and thus looks like the capital letter T. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 4
[Cross annuletted.] Annuletted [sic] means each arm of the cross ends in an annulet. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 3. [The forms given in the heraldry books are annulated and annuletty.]
A straight tau cross looks like a capital T. A normal tau cross has formy arms. WVS [65] [LoAR 15 Mar 82], p. 4
In the SCA, a Cross of Jerusalem is a cross potent between four crosses couped. WVS [70] [LoAR 24 May 82], p. 1. [This is the mundane usage as well.]
The patriarchal cross (often blazoned as a Cross Lorraine or an Archiepiscopal Cross) was usually used in ecclesiastical heraldry, but there are instances of its use in normal heraldry. WVS [70] [LoAR 24 May 82], p. 2
Crowns are reserved for Kingdoms, Principalities, Dukes, Duchesses, Counts, Countesses, Viscounts and Viscountesses. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 3
The badge is OK, but it cannot be a badge for use by a household, as only Duke N. has the right to display the crowns. His household members do not have this right. Therefore, I have registered this as a personal badge. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 5
A can is a type of drinking cup. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 1
A cygnet is a baby swan. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 4
Dancetty is indented of three points. Since you have six it is just indented. Your large indents are actually the correct way to draw indented, instead of the modern fine-scale sawtooth form. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
Dancetty is not a line of division at all, but is a treatment of an ordinary. Indented is the line of division. If you want three points call it indented of three points. [Indented] means to indent the chief part of an ordinary and to counter-indent the base part, yielding a series of conjoined lozenges. An ordinary [dancetty] is indented on both sides unless otherwise specified, yielding a sawtooth line effect. The small scale indenting is out of period and I would rather not see it, although I will not reject a device for using it. Note that dancetty can only be used on an ordinary that has two sides. You cannot have a chief or a base or a bordure dancetty. WVS [22] [CL 27 Aug 80], p. 1. [N.B. The definitions of "indented" and "dancetty" were interchanged in the original quotation. This error was corrected in a subsequent letter. and the above text has been amended appropriately.]
Death's heads or skulls are not proper, but argent. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 1
Debased is no longer used as it means mirror imaged and is an abatement. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
Abased means that the ... division is lowered to base. This is what we used to call "debased," which was incorrect. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 1
A snake ... with its tail looped over its body is debruised. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
Do not use debruised for placing one object upon another, as debruised is used in describing serpents. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4. [The term debruised is roughly synonymous with surmounted; its application to serpents is a special case.]
Delineating a charge is artistic license and need not be blazoned. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 1
see GARGOYLE
see ARTISTIC LICENSE
From now on groups that are not personal households can register devices. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 2
The College will not register devices to cats or any other animals ... N. can register a badge to himself for his cat M. if he wants to. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 9
You can register a badge under your name for your teddy bear, but do not submit a device for your teddy bear. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 2
I have decided to allow groups with royal charters to register a device. If they receive an Award of Arms, their device shall become their arms. An Award of Arms shall be considered a Royal Charter, as shall an Augmentation of Arms. A Royal Charter consists of a document signed by the Ring and Queen and witnessed by the Principal Herald stating that the group is recognized and chartered by the Crown. WVS [66] [CL 21 Apr 82], p. 5
Octahedral diamond crystals were not in period. Like all transparent charges, a diamond crystal is argent. You cannot put it on argent. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 9
The only cases for internal lines in heraldry are masoned or chased. Anything else, such as the Doric meander, is diapering and is not listed in the blazon. Changing the meander to silver on white would be proper diapering. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 4. [The charge, which was submitted as a Doric meander, was eventually registered as an Ionic column.]
Papelonny of one tincture is a form of diapering. Papelonny of two tinctures is an allowed fur. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 9
When you take off one charge and replace it with another you only get one point of difference, even if you change the type of charge, the color, and the position. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 15
The differences between a winged unicorn and a horned pegasus are the beard and the cloven hooves, very tiny differences indeed. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 9
To the medieval herald more than six of anything is many, and so there is no difference heraldically between seven charges and semy of those charges. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 4
Complete difference of charge between two submissions is sufficient difference, even if the field, the tinctures of the charges, the number and positions are the same. In order for there to be complete difference the charges must look totally different. A lozenge is completely different from a horse. A unicorn is not. WVS [16] [CL 15 May 80], p. 1
It is the consensus of the College and my decision that the counterchange of a submission is no longer registered along with the submission. Counterchanging is now a single point of difference, with the stipulation that no badge, device, or arms can be the counterchange of another badge, device or arms without the written permission of the holder of the latter. Thus when one submits a device now it is no longer necessary to worry about what its counterchange conflicts with, or whether the device itself conflicts with the counterchange of other devices or arms. WVS [16] [CL 15 May 80], p. 2
In the case of mundane coats of arms consisting of a single-tinctured field and a single-tinctured ordinary, only one full point of difference is needed, as each combination is held by many families and so you cannot be said to be a cadet branch of any one family. The addition of a single secondary charge is not a full point of difference. The addition of several secondary charges, or the addition of a single major charge overall (which visually changes the ordinary from the primary charge to a secondary charge) is a full point and is sufficient. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
The addition of just a bordure is not sufficient because bordures are marks of cadency in Scotland. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
This does not conflict with [mundane arms] because nobody in our period would have indicated a cadet branch of the family by adding a major charge behind the main charge of the primary family's arms. In such a situation where it clearly is not a cadet branch, one full point is sufficient. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
As Lord Virgule says, the addition of a bordure (a single charge) was ruled insufficient difference from Scrope in the famous Scrope vs. Grosvenor case in England. The addition of two different charges is sufficient difference between a Society device and mundane arms. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 5
The addition of a charged chief counts as one and a half points of difference, one for the chief and one-half for the charges on the chief. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 7
A single bar and a fess are not really visually different. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 10
The counterchanging leaves the lines of the bend intact, thereby leaving the bend as the major charge, so there is only one point of difference. WVS [19] [LoAR 5 Jun 80], p. 4
From now on all SCA badges must differ by one and a half points from SCA devices and one point from all other categories. That one point cannot just be counterchanging. All SCA devices must differ from all other SCA devices by two full points, and from all other categories by one and a half points. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
Counterchanging is less than a full point in most cases. In the case where there are several tinctures then a complete permutation can be a full point. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
In the SCA we do not follow the medieval practice of always showing charges advancing. If a person wishes to register a charge retreating he or she may. A lion rampant is one point of difference from a lion counter-rampant. We view what is on the emblazon sheet as the only correct form for the device or badge, subject to artistic license. This is an old custom from the beginning of the College. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
Adding a number of identical charges counts as a single point of difference. You need one and a half. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 5
Rotation is not a point of difference. WVS [25] [LoAR 16 Sep 80], p. 4
In the case where one has mundane arms which [are] not the arms of a royal house [and] which consist of a simple field plus a simple ordinary, the addition of a major overall charge ... is sufficient difference. The overall charge must be drawn large enough to make it the primary visual charge. The relegation of the ordinary to secondary status will constitute the extra half point needed. These simple combinations of field plus ordinary are usually held by many mundane families and this multiplicity allows us to be a little more lenient. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 6
Differences in lines of division are one-half point. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 8
All breeds of the species Equus equus are horses, as far as heraldry is concerned. The difference of breed comes in the coloration. Minor bodily differences are matters for the artist. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 6
The difference between an ordinary and its subordinary [diminutive] is one-half point. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 1
There [are] ZERO point(s) of difference for having a fieldless badge versus having a field. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 8
Counterchanging by a line of division is 1 point of difference. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 13
In line with the decision on ordinaries and their diminutives having no points of difference, henceforth we will not use bordurelets. The size of a bordure shall be a matter for the artist. A single bar will be no different from a fess. For the benefit of the scribes, the first diminutive of an ordinary may be used singly and so specified to indicate that a smaller size is wanted, but no points of difference will result. Thus, you can specify one bar in the blazon, and it will be drawn that way, but it will be no different than if it were a fess for the purpose of conflicts. WVS [54] [CL 27 Oct 81], p. 1
As this is a badge, it needs only one point of difference from mundane arms and non, and therefore does not conflict with the Japanese mon which is the counterchange. In mon color doesn't count, just light on dark or dark on light. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 4
With regard to the "complete difference of charge" clause, I have been convinced that we should allow it to be invoked in the case of a device of several charges because otherwise it is impossible to check all of the conflicts. Therefore, if a badge or a device differs from another by having all of its charges be completely different, then it does not conflict. Thus Argent, three lozenges azure does not conflict with Argent, three swords azure, but it would conflict with Argent, three mascles azure, as a lozenge and a mascle are not completely different, although they are different. When multiple charges are involved, the standard of "completely different" will be tougher than in the case of a by single charge. In particular. if there are a lot of charges in an unusual arrangement, then it may not be possible to achieve complete difference, and so two full points would be required. An example would be nine bezants in cross within eight swords in annulo. This would be blazoned as a cross of bezants within an annulet of swords. If you then had another SCA device which had nine lozenges in cross within eight dolphins naiant in annulo, the arrangements are so visually striking that the two would immediately be confused, even though the charges are different. This is a case where complete difference could not be achieved. WVS [64] [CL 18 Mar 82], p. 2
Semy is a treatment of the field ... This means that an SCA device which consists of a field, semy of something, plus one or more charges is automatically sufficiently different by the complete-difference-of-charge rule from a mundane arms consisting of just that field semy of something. This is equivalent to saying that we do not worry about conflicts between mundane arms consisting only of a field or a field semy and an SCA submission which adds a major charge to that field or field semy. An exception is ... France Ancien (Azure, semy-de-lis Or), which may not be used as a field in the SCA. Inasmuch as only unusual cases will allow an SCA member to register a device consisting of only a field or only a field semy, I feel the complete-difference rule should not apply for conflicts between these and other SCA devices. If somebody added a major charge to the arms of Raymond the Mild (Bendy pily Sable and Or), I would say that is only one point and another is needed (such as changing the sable to azure) because, as Master Raymond's arms are so distinctive and unusual, there would be a visual conflict with any device that added just a charge. The same is true for an SCA device consisting solely of a field semy. one must change one of the colors of the field or semy or the type of semy as well as add a charge. WVS [66] [CL 21 Apr 82], p. 3
Making semy a treatment of the field means that now, if you go from Azure, a cross Or to Vert, bezanty, a cross Or, then you have only one point of difference, because that is all you can ever have for difference of the field. Adding the semy does change the outline, which will help when considering the case of conflict through identical outlines. WVS [66] [CL 21 Apr 82], p. 3
Our 1-1/2 point rule for difference between SCA devices and mundane arms is based upon the concept of avoiding the appearance of cadency with those mundane arms. Most of the 1-point differences were used as marks of cadency, so we adopted 1-1/2 points of difference as the rule, to ensure that the SCA didn't conflict by cadency with mundane arms. Two forms of differencing were generally not used for cadency. One was removing or replacing the major charge, while leaving the secondary charge in place. The second was adding a new primary charge so the original primary charge(s) became secondary charge(s). In the case of N's arms, the addition of the [charge] demotes the [ordinary] from primary to secondary charge, and thus does not conflict, as this would not have been a form of cadency in period. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 4
see also CONFLICT
The device is a form of dimidiation by quartering. No [marshalling] is allowed. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 14
This is very lovely, but it looks like dimidiation, which we do not allow. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 16
The difference between an ordinary and its subordinary [diminutive] is one-half point. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 1
In line with the decision on ordinaries and their diminutives having no points of difference, henceforth we will not use bordurelets. The size of a bordure shall be a matter for the artist. A single bar will be no different from a fess. For the benefit of the scribes, the first diminutive of an ordinary may be used singly and so specified to indicate that a smaller size is wanted, but no points of difference will result. Thus, you can specify one bar in the blazon, and it drawn that way, but it will be no different than if it were the purpose of conflicts. WVS [54] [CL 27 Oct 81], p. 1
You cannot have a mountain proper, as dirt comes in many colors. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 9
Displayed applies only to winged creatures. The above method [tergiant erect, heads to dexter, limbs spread in saltire] describes the equivalent position for four-legged creatures who are spread out with their backs to the viewer. If the legs are vertical or horizontal they would be spread in pale or in fess. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 2
Since the references disagree and we have used displayed in the past in the SCA, I have decided to continue the use of the term for all animals. By default an animal displayed is affronty with all limbs extended radially outwards, with the head turned to dexter. If you want its head looking outwards it is gardant. If you want its head facing sinister it is regardant. If its back is to the viewer it is tergiant. The main axis of the body is by default palewise. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 1. [Regardant means "looking back over the shoulder." An animal affronty cannot be regardant.]
Displayed has the head facing to dexter. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
This is the most massively documented appeal I have ever seen. It was well done. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 4
All rejections do have the right of appeal, so long as documentation accompanies the appeal. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 7
I need the language, translation, and/or source for the name. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 10
As a reward for their excellent documentation on [charge], I am granting a specific exception to the rule to N. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 2
This was held for documentation of the [charge]. The documentation not having been sent, the device is rejected. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 7
Send the documentation on N. to me. Don't just claim to have it. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 11
Genus and species need not be given for common animals where there is only one species involved. There is only one species of domestic cat. The same is true of dogs and horses. There are, however, many breeds, and these are what must be specified. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 2
[Ornamental Chinese Fu dog's head.] These are from the statues of Fu dog heads on a gate in Peking and are therefore highly stylized. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 4
The difference between a rose and a dogwood blossom is basically five instead of four petals, plus barbs. There is thus not enough difference. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 7
The default form of a dolmen is a trilithon, unless otherwise specified. A trilithon is a dolmen composed of one horizontal stone resting on two upright ones. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 2
The word "bottle-nosed" means that this is a natural and not a heraldic dolphin. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 5
Dovetailed is in fact out of period but has been accepted for use in the SCA as it is compatible with period usage. WVS [22] [CL 27 Aug 80], p. 1
I have bowed to research and objections and have ruled that "dovetailed" as a line of division is out of period and may no longer be used. WVS [41] [CL 12 May 81], p. 4
With our new ruling on allowing out-of-period usages that are compatible with period practice, I hereby allow dovetailed for SCA use. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 6
A Chinese dragon is a wingless dragon. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 10
A Dun dragon is a made up charge, looking rather [like] a dinosaur with two horns. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 1
[Ounce-dragon.] This monster is the front half of an ounce (snow leopard) and the back half of a dragon. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 2
The Chinese dragon cannot have five toes, as that is for Imperial use. Try four toes. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 7
Another word for dragon is wyrm. WVS [52] [LoAR 15 Sep 81], p. 1
Dragon's tails are drawn differently by different artists and so cannot be used as a charge. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 8
We must have genus, species, and breed for the dragonfly, as dragonflies come in all colors. Choose one that is in period. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 11
A duck proper is sable. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 9
see BRIDESKOLD
A wyvern's head is an eagle's head with ears. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 6
A phoenix is an eagle rising from flames. The flames need not be specified because if they weren't there it would be an eagle instead of a phoenix. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 2
Only triple-headed eagles are restricted. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 1
An ellipsoid is not a period charge. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 10
[Embowed counter-embowed.] This is the opposite curvature from haurient. This looks like a question mark while haurient looks like a capital C with the head at the top turned to dexter. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 4
[Counter-erect embowed.] The [charge] is in the shape of a capital C. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 5
[Embowed in annulo.] The [charge] in chief determines the direction of rotation. By default, it points to dexter and so, by default, the [charges] are oriented in a widdershins direction. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 6
The white rose en soleil was the royal badge of Richard II and Edward IV and may not be used. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 10
You cannot have an endorse or a cotise standing alone. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 10
Charges, monsters, and usages created between the years 1601 and 1966 may not be used under any name or description, as they are out of period. An enfield by any other name is still unacceptable. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 10
An enfield is out of period. Blazoning it by parts does not change this fact. I have put the question of out-of-period monsters to the College, but at this time the rule still holds. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 8
Based upon the opinion of the College of Arms, the enfield is hereby ruled compatible with period usage and is thus allowable for SCA use. An enfield proper has a red fox's head and forequarters, a grey wolf's back half, and yellow hawk's talons for the front forelegs. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 2
see FLAG
You cannot place argent upon ermine, as there is insufficient contrast. Similarly you could not place Or on erminois, nor sable on counter-ermine or pean. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
Ermine spots are called musketours [sic] when used as charges. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 8. [Parker lists French hermine, moucheture, and mouchator as occasional variants of the more common English term ermine spot.]
Ermine is a white field with black spots. It is NEVER done with silver. It represents white furry tails with black tips. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 4
An ermine tail is an ermine spot without the dots. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 6
Adding a powdering of azure ermine spots does not make the field a fur. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7. [I.e., a field ermined is not exempt from the rule of tincture.]
An estoc is a sword with a long, narrow, quadrangular blade intended solely for thrusting; earlier ones hung from the saddle or passed through rings on the belt. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 3
Crossed in estoile means the first [charge] is bendwise sinister, the second is bendwise and the third is palewise, placed one upon the other. This is an SCA convention. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 2
Hereafter suns and estoiles shall have rays and mullets will have points. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 3
A person can always use their first name, as long as they difference it properly. Nobody else can use N. as a name unless they also have it as their first name. This is a specific exception to the normal rules, granted only to her. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 5
This is a special exception to the rule against complexity and does not constitute a precedent. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 1
Submissions under a grandfather clause are recognized exception rule and do not constitute precedent for breaking the rule. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 2
As a reward for their excellent documentation on [charge] I am granting a specific exception to the rule to N. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 2
This is a specific exception to the rule against uneven division violating the rule of tincture. Her mother has the same division in her previously registered device. WVS [40] [LoAR 20 Apr 81], p. 2
N. is a variant of her first name, M., so she can have it. N. seems to be out of period, so this is a specific and not a general approval of the name. WVS [40] [LoAR 20 Apr 81], p. 4
You may not have a name consisting only of one word. I have therefore added N. to the currently registered name, as a nickname. Normally we do not register nicknames but since he was knighted with the name, I will allow it. WVS [57] [LoAR 30 Nov 81], p. 4
The use of human eyes proper was very rare in period, if they were used at all. WVS [70] [LoAR 24 May 82], p. 7
In the SCA we use heads caboshed instead of faces. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 6
A single bar and a fess are not really visually different. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 10
The three diminutives of the fesse are the bar, the closet and the barrulet in decreasing order of size. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 4
You can specify one bar in the blazon, and it will be drawn that way, but it will be no different than if it were a fess for the purpose of conflicts. WVS [54] [CL 27 Oct 81], p. 1
Badges for territorial branches should either obey the rule of tincture or have no specified field. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 3
The field is blazoned completely first, then come the charges. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 2
Fields and tinctures of charges need not all be specified in a badge. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 1
This is not an inescutcheon of pretence because there is no device behind it. The College of Arms does not consider a single tincture field to be a protected entity. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 10
This was passed with an argent field for Society use on scrolls. She may drop the field for personal use as a mon. A device must have a field. WVS [34] [LoAR 23 Jan 81], p. 4
The College will not register a badge without a field that has a division of the field or an ordinary or subordinary that depends on the shape of the field for its own shape. This means you cannot register a fieldless badge with a pale, because if a pale is on a lozenge it is pointed at both ends, while on a heater it is straight at both ends. A badge with a field has the field in the shape of a roundel. A badge without a field is just the charges it contains. If you want just a mullet on a pale for a badge, blazon it as a mullet on a billet. WVS [35] [CL 24 Feb 81], p. 5
You cannot have an ordinary or subordinary without a field unless it can be couped. In order for a charge to be used in a badge without a field, its shape must not depend upon the shape of the field. A gore's shape does depend on the shape of the field (heater, lozenge, roundel, etc.) and so cannot be used by itself, without a field. WVS [42] [LoAR 12 May 81], p. 10
There [are] ZERO point(s) of difference for having a fieldless badge versus having a field. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 8
Normally we do not worry about mundane arms consisting only of fields, but you cannot have a device consisting of one of them plus a mark of cadency. WVS [48] [LoAR 29 Jul 81], p. 13
A person cannot register a single abstract symbol without a field as a badge. If we allowed such a practice, people would register the symbols they liked and deny their use to others. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 11
Semy is a treatment of the field ... This means that an SCA device which consists of a field, semy of something, plus one or more charges is automatically sufficiently different by the complete-difference-of-charge rule from a mundane arms consisting of just that field semy of something. This is equivalent to saying that we do not worry about conflicts between mundane arms consisting only of a field or a field semy and an SCA submission which adds a major charge to that field or field semy. An exception is ... France Ancien (Azure, semy-de-lis Or), which may not be used as a field in the SCA. Inasmuch as only unusual cases will allow an SCA member to register a device consisting of only a field or only a field semy, I feel the complete-difference rule should not apply for conflicts between these and other SCA devices. If somebody added a major charge to the arms of Raymond the Mild (Bendy pily sable and Or), I would say that is only one point and another is needed (such as changing the sable to azure) because, as Master Raymond's arms are so distinctive and unusual, there would be a visual conflict with any device that added just a charge. The same is true for an SCA device consisting solely of a field semy. one must change one of the colors of the field or semy or the type of semy as well as add a charge. WVS [66] [CL 21 Apr 82], p. 3
The Rule of Tincture applies to fieldless badges. While the field is not specified, the understanding is that the badge will only be borne on contrasting backgrounds. This means that, if the badge consists of separated charges, they must be all metals or all colors. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 8
Redraw the badge so that it is not an exact copy of the Oseburg vessel's figurehead. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 15
Fimbriation is a makeshift way of avoiding violations of the Rule of Tincture. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 14
Normally the fimbriation would not suffice to avoid lack of contrast, but the semy adds enough extra contrast to make it work. WVS [8] [LoAR 19 Nov 79], p. 1
This is blatant fimbriation to foil the rule of tincture. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 7
Wherever possible, use voided rather than fimbriated. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 4
Fimbriating a living charge generally adds too much complexity. Fimbriation should be reserved for simple charges. WVS [44] [LoAR 24 Jun 81], p. 11
This is excessive use of fimbriation, used solely to get around the Rule of Tincture. WVS [63] [LoAR 26 Feb 82], p. 10
You cannot void complex charges like a tyger. Voiding and fimbriation should only be used with simple charges. WVS [65] [LoAR 15 Mar 82], p. 6
Use of fimbriation becomes excessive when it is used on a complex outline, such as a flower or a bird, or on multiple charges. You should only use fimbriation on a single simple charge. Sometimes you can get away with fimbriating a group of identical simple charges. Fimbriating a number of different charges is excessive fimbriation. WVS [71] [CL 18 Jun 82], p. 2
Any creature with four limbs can be rampant if the limbs are arranged in that specific artificial position. Wings count as limbs, as do fins. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 6
On this scale it is impossible to tell which fir tree they are, so one does not have to give genus and species. Calling it a fir tree does give the fact that it is a conical evergreen. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 7
A ball of flames differs from a sun in that it is irregular. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 8
Flames proper on a colored field are gules on the inside and Or on the outside. On a metal, it is the opposite. WVS [40] [LoAR 20 Apr 81], p. 1
A fireball Or is a bezant with four flames issuant from it in cross. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 12
The arms of branches must have at least one laurel wreath as a major charge. Nothing else may, including badges and flags of branches. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 14
Flags must obey the rule of tincture. They count as devices. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 3
While I do not like putting banners on banners, I cannot construe this as a form of augmentation. Any other such use must, however, avoid conflicts both with the whole blazon, and with the blazon of the device on the gonfanon. WVS [13] [LoAR 18 Mar 80], p. 1
The terms ensign and flag are out of period but standard is not. WVS [20] [CL 21 Jul 80], p. 3
By default, pennons stream to dexter. WVS [65] [LoAR 15 Mar 82], p. 1
see FIRE
It is now acceptable to have flaunches of different colors. WVS [21] [LoAR 21 Jul 80], p. 12
This is color on color. A chief and a flank are charges, not divisions. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 9
Flaunches voided and flaunches cotised are both non-period. WVS 152], p. 4
[Azure, semy-de-lys Or.] This color-semy combination may not be used in the SCA. WVS [65] [LoAR 15 Mar 82], p. 5. [Azure, semy-de-lys Or, also known as France Ancient, is the early form of the royal arms of France.]
Floretty means there is a fleur-de-lys head emerging from each of the points of the indented line on the chief side. If they emerged from both sides it would be floretty counter-floretty. WVS [30] [LoAR 28 Nov 80], p. 3
A Kendal flower is defined to be a rose of six petals gyronny of six argent and gules, barbed vert, seeded Or. The result is a six petaled rose with alternately colored petals. You can have a rose of other than five petals as a rose petal is a well-defined shape, and a rose of N-petals is clear. WVS [2] [LoAR 16 Jul 76], p. 1
The difference between a rose and a dogwood blossom is basically five instead of four petals, plus barbs. There is thus not enough difference. WVS [36] [LoAR 23 Feb 81], p. 7
Whether the feet are hooved or webbed is a matter for the scribe. It's still a sea horse. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 3
Human footprints were, to my knowledge, not used in period. Try using actual feet. WVS [61] [LoAR 17-18 Jan 82], p. 8
From now on people should not use forceny, as it is ambiguous, but rather rampant or salient. WVS [17] [LoAR 15 May 80], p. 10
Salient means leaping bendwise up, forelegs together. Forceny means rearing up bendwise, forelegs separate, as if to strike furiously. Rampant means to have the body palewise with the limbs in the classic rampant position, and the mouth open. In the latter two cases the horse is drawn in a fierce aspect as in combat, while in the former it is drawn in a calm aspect, as if jumping playfully. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 3
A ford is a base barry wavy argent and azure, representing water ... If the ford were placed upon a metal field the colors would be reversed to azure and argent. WVS [9] [LoAR 22 Jan 80], p. 2
Medieval forks had two tines. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 3
A chevronel fracted is like a chevronel rompu but the point section is lowered instead of raised. WVS [50] [LoAR 13 Aug 81], p. 1
A broken sword is the hilt and stub of blade. A sword fracted is both pieces. WVS [70] [LoAR 24 May 82], p. 4
You cannot place argent upon ermine, as there is insufficient contrast. Similarly you could not place Or on erminois, nor sable on counter-ermine or pean. WVS [27] [LoAR 20 Oct 80], p. 4
Papelonny of one tincture is a form of diapering. Papelonny of two tinctures is an allowed fur. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 9
Adding a powdering of azure ermine spots does not make the field a fur. WVS [67] [LoAR 19 Apr 82], p. 7. [I.e., a field ermined is not exempt from the rule of tincture.]
[Fusily bendwise sinister.] This division of the field doesn't exist. Try paly bendy sinister. WVS [55] [LoAR 26 Oct 81], p. 10
A lymphad is a stylized galley. WVS [59] [LoAR 21 Dec 81], p. 4
Guardant means looking out towards the viewer, no matter how the body is positioned. WVS [23] [LoAR 27 Aug 80], p. 1
A gargoyle is a water spout. The [charge] drawn has its mouth shut and shows no other opening for the spout, so I have blazoned it as a demon. Gargoyle is a class of object, and so you must say a gargoyle in the shape of something. If they wish to redraw it to make it an obvious water spout off the side of a building I will be happy to reblazon it a a gargoyle in the shape of the demon described. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 2
"Garnished" means all minor details are of the second tincture. This applies to animals, swords, and any other charges with minor details of a second tincture. WVS [38] [LoAR 10 Mar 81], p. 3
[Iron grill gate.] The gate is similar to those at Buckingham Palace -- vertical spear-like rods with horizontal bars at top and bottom, with the fleury spearheads rising in an arc above the top bar. WVS [15] [LoAR 14 Apr 80], p. 2
A gate proper is brown, as is any other wooden object. A corral gate is the type you see in a corral, consisting of three horizontal and one or two diagonal bars. WVS [72] [LoAR 14 Jun 82], p. 2
These are the stylized trilliums used by Ontario, and hence they are blazoned piecewise, rather than as proper. This way no genus and species are needed. WVS [5] [LoAR 24 Oct 79], p. 10
There are many species of angelfish but they all have the same basic outline and this is just a single specified tincture so there is no need for listing the genus and species. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 1
This is your basic ivy. Genus and species is not needed. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 1
Sp. stands for species, i.e. any species. They all look alike to the untrained eye. If you can easily specify the appearance just by specifying the genus, use this form. WVS [11] [LoAR 13 Feb 80], p. 2
When the intent is just to have small standard charges in the default colors the genus and species need not be specified, as in this case. WVS [131, p. 1
Whenever a common name for a plant or animal has only one species associated with it, the genus and species need not be given. If there are variations within the species then the breed must be specified. When the charge is a specified tincture the only question is whether or not there is more than one possible outline for the data given. When the charge is proper the question is whether