[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Simple Armory) |Next Page (Style - Modern)]
[A Maltese star cross] This conflicts with [a snowflake]. The visual similarity between the Maltese star cross and a snowflake is too large to ignore. (Elgar of Stonehaven, January, 1993, pg. 23)
While we're generally content to mix-and-match elements from different heraldic regimes, we draw the line at mixing oriental and occidental charges. The College of Arms has frequently restricted the use of charges from Japanese Mon to Mon-style submissions: e.g. the nami or Great Wave, restricted to Mon-style submissions on the LoAR of 25 Feb 83. The use of a Chinese ideogram with lozengy flaunches falls into the same restricted area. (Dallán Ó Fearchaidhe vom Kirschwald, July, 1992, pg. 21)
[a bend sinister bevilled between in pale a skull and a skull inverted] The bend sinister in the device is not correctly drawn: it does not issue from the sinister chief, as the ordinary should, nor is it correctly bevilled [the two pieces of the bend sinister significantly overlap] (see the LoAR cover letter of 18 Sept 92 for a complete discussion on bevilling). Combined with the inversion of the lower skull, the whole device is unacceptably poor style. (Juan Sanchez Ramirez, September, 1992, pg. 45)
[Two angels bendwise sinister, passant to sinister guardant, originially blazoned as rising] The angels' posture is not particularly heraldic, as evidenced by the number of suggestions for reblazoning them; neither volant nor rising is appropriate to humanoids. The above blazon was the closest we could devise, and it isn't all that accurate. The angels need to be in a blazonable posture. (Meghan Pengwyn of Wynterwood, September, 1992, pg. 46)
[Per bend bevilled "fesswise", in sinister chief a <charge>] As noted in the LoAR cover letter of 18 Sept 92, this is not a correctly drawn Per bend bevilled; it follows neither the example of Per bend bevilled found in period heraldic tracts, nor is it a valid extrapolation from the documented bend bevilled. Added to the fact that such bevilled fields were never used with charges, the whole becomes unacceptable. (Theodora Delamore, September, 1992, pg. 47)
[Argent, two herons statant counter-statant in saltire, and a bordure flory azure] This is not really drawn in a period style. The ripples around the (couped) legs of the herons, and the Art Deco bordure that doesn't follow the line of the shield, combine to warrant a return for redrawing. (Ander Vargskinn, September, 1992, pg. 47)
[A slip eradicated joined to a snake's head] The College of Arms was nearly unanimous in declaring this monster to be obtrusively modern: the references to triffids (from Day of the Triffid) and Audrey (from Little Shop of Horrors) were very strong. Laurel hasn't seen any of the productions of either, but is willing to accept the opinions of those who have. (Brian di Caffa, September, 1992, pg. 51)
[A falcon rising, wings displayed, surmounted by a drawn bow, arrow nocked] This is essentially a falcon drawing a bow and arrow; in this case, we're willing to treat the bow and arrow as a separate group of charges from the falcon. (Aelfric the Kestrell, October, 1992, pg. 11)
Tongues of flame are not period [device returned for this reason in combination with other style problems]. (Shire of Crystal Moor, October, 1992, pg. 31)
We can see granting a CD between a comet and a mullet. This therefore does not suffer from the stylistic problem of using the same charge in both the semy and the primary groups. (Barony of Three Mountains, January, 1993, pg. 3)
[Per pale, a mullet inverted between in chief three roundels one and two counterchanged and a chief] The arrangement of the roundels is a "weirdness", being poor style and awkward of blazon; since it was noted in her previous return, it needed to be changed or justified before the submission could be registered. In this case, the motif is already registered to the submitter's husband, ([Per pale, a mullet inverted between in chief three roundels one and two all counterchanged]); the Grandfather Clause permits her to register it as well. (Zillah de Barcelona, March, 1993, pg. 4)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Simple Armory) |Top of Page |Next Page (Style - Modern)]
[Per pale, three wolves' teeth issuant from the dexter flank and three wolves' teeth issuant from the sinister flank, counterchanged.] Siebmacher's Wappenbuch of 1605 shows the arms of von Keudell (plate 135): Argent, a fess vert, in chief three wolves' teeth issuant from dexter and three issuant from sinister sable. The use of wolves' teeth from both sides of the shield seems acceptable, at least in a design as simple as this. (Talon Graymane, March, 1993, pg. 18)
[Sable, three pallets and three bendlets fretted, between in bend sinister a rabbit rampant contourny, maintaining a sword, and a natural panther rampant argent] The device is unbalanced, and certainly not ideal style. On the other hand, given period grants that explicitly blazoned crosses tripartite as three pallets woven with three barrulets, this is not completely unreasonable [device registered] (Shea mac Conn, May, 1993, pg. 13)
[In chief an eagle displayed, facing sinister, and in base a saltire, overall a <charge>] This raised some question in the commentary as to whether the saltire could legitimately be "abased" (not issuant from the corners of the chief), as in this submission. Normally, the placement of a saltire is fixed by the points of the shield: the upper limbs issue from the corners of the chief, as would bends and bends sinister. However, using the 13th Century arms of FitzWalter (Or, a fess between two chevrons gules) as a model, we decided that a hypothetical Or, a fess between two saltires gules would be acceptable style --- which would therefore argue that a saltire need not automatically issue from the corners of the chief, but might move to chief or to base if the design dictated. We also decided that such movement should be noted in the blazon, either implicitly (as in our hypothetical example) or explicitly (as in this submission). (Angus Ulrich, July, 1993, pg. 8)
[Table of Contents |Previous Page (Simple Armory) |Top of Page |Next Page (Style - Modern)]