[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Protected Items) |Next Page (Royal Armory)]
[A] rainbow [proper]'s tinctures are counted individually; it could have been solidly tinctured, after all. If that means rainbows proper can only be used in very simple designs, so be it. (Yvon Bater of Darkwood, August, 1992, pg. 29)
The heraldic rainbow proper has four stripes, vert, argent, Or and gules, in that order (on a light-colored field, which [this submission] implies). The submitted rainbow [colors not given] isn't correctly tinctured for a heraldic rainbow; neither is it properly tinctured for a natural rainbow. And blazoning each of its stripes individually would only emphasize the non-heraldic nature of the submission [badge returned]. (Ruben Klaus Winterhalter, October, 1992, pg. 24)
The Norse serpents (or "Norse twisty-beasties", as they're sometimes called) currently defined for SCA use are still permitted; the Laurel precedent that everyone half-remembers (LoAR cover letter of 12 July 86, p.3) banned any new types of Norse serpent. (Katherine Dun na nGall of Westmeath, August, 1992, pg. 12)
[A serpent nowed] The serpent was blazoned in the LOI as nowed in a Heneage knot. That wasn't strictly true --- at best, it would have been a Heneage knot fesswise --- and in any case, the exact form of a serpent's nowing is normally left to the license of the artist. We've done so here. (Ragnvald Bloodaxe, July, 1993, pg. 3)
[Aoife ni Aodhagain with Chevronelly azure and argent, a serpent glissant palewise gules holding in its mouth an apple slipped and leaved vert] It has been ruled acceptable (Thora of Thescorre, LoAR of Aug 92) to have a single armorial allusion to a deity name that's also a documented period given name. It's reasonable to extend the policy, in this case, to the Biblical name Eve (often used as an anglicization of Aoífe). The allusion here is mild, and acceptable. (Aoífe ní Aodhagáin, August, 1993, pg. 6)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Protected Items) |Top of Page |Next Page (Royal Armory)]
The charge in base was submitted as a sea-turtle; but that term in heraldry would refer to a fish-tailed demi-turtle, not the natural sea-turtle. Since there's no heraldic difference between a natural sea-turtle and a regular turtle, we've used the latter term. (Alexander Michael Connor O'Malley, March, 1993, pg. 1)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Protected Items) |Top of Page |Next Page (Royal Armory)]
There was some question as to whether this serpent-entwined axe was too close to the rod of Aesclepius, a reserved charge; I decided that the prominent axe-head made it quite clearly not a rod of Aesclepius. (Olaf of Forgotten Sea, October, 1992, pg. 7)
[(Fieldless)A fountain palewise] There is no evidence that fountains were ever borne in other than their default orientation. I consider the "rotation" of a fountain to be a change in its partition, from barry to (in this case) paly. By definition, it then ceases to be a fountain --- just as it would if the tinctures were changed, say, to gules and Or. This submission must therefore be considered a display, on a roundel, of Paly wavy argent and azure; and it thus conflicts with the arms of Amesley ( Papworth 1017), Paly of six argent and azure. (Alden Pharamond, September, 1992, pg. 37)
We see no heraldic difference between a roundel and an egg. (Sarah Rumoltstochter, September, 1992, pg. 41)
I grant a CD between a roundel engrailed and a sun. (Solveig Throndardottir, October, 1992, pg. 10)
We're willing to grant a CD between a bezant and a hawk's bell, although perhaps not Complete Difference of Charge. (Meurisse de Blois, January, 1993, pg. 20)
[A roundel charged with five rays issuant from base throughout] While it is true that roundels may be charged with rayed objects in the SCA, those rayed objects are not normally issuant from the inner edge of a roundel. To have charges issuant from the edge of a roundel is to give the roundel the appearance of an inescutcheon of pretense. This appearance is heightened by the use of five tertiaries on the roundel. This is therefore returned for appearance of marshalling. (Alberic Kentigern, October, 1993, pg. 17)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Protected Items) |Top of Page |Next Page (Royal Armory)]