Re: Tour de France
Posted: 27 Jul 2015, 00:19
Greetings all,
re the aeroplane in the arms of Issy-les-Moulineaux -
I would suggest that the view from above should be regarded as the default as the shape of the body and wings and position of the engines generally defines a particular aircraft. (I will refer you here to the charts used by the military to identify aircraft from the ground.)
However, should the aeroplane be a charge on a chief or fesse then I would suggest that the view from the side with the front towards the dexter (as if the aeroplane was standing on the tarmac) should be regarded as the default - unless it is accompanied by other charges or unless two or three aeroplanes are the charges - in which case, I would revert to the first default definition.
I appreciate that this does complicate the issue at hand and from the point of view of 'blazon pedants' is not very helpful.
I prefer a simple, straight forward approach to blazon. However, in this case more information is better than less information.
Regards,
Iain Boyd
re the aeroplane in the arms of Issy-les-Moulineaux -
I would suggest that the view from above should be regarded as the default as the shape of the body and wings and position of the engines generally defines a particular aircraft. (I will refer you here to the charts used by the military to identify aircraft from the ground.)
However, should the aeroplane be a charge on a chief or fesse then I would suggest that the view from the side with the front towards the dexter (as if the aeroplane was standing on the tarmac) should be regarded as the default - unless it is accompanied by other charges or unless two or three aeroplanes are the charges - in which case, I would revert to the first default definition.
I appreciate that this does complicate the issue at hand and from the point of view of 'blazon pedants' is not very helpful.
I prefer a simple, straight forward approach to blazon. However, in this case more information is better than less information.
Regards,
Iain Boyd