College of Arms Newsletters 2016

The discussion board for all things concerning heraldry which falls under the jurisdiction of The College of Arms
User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
Posts: 283
Joined: 24 Apr 2015, 23:34

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Michael F. McCartney » 30 Jul 2016, 00:49

Chris - you believe the fridge test would leave you cold? :)

I may (or may not) have something worthwhile to add after I access the link...
Michael F. McCartney
Fremont, California

User avatar
Arthur Radburn
Posts: 719
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Arthur Radburn » 30 Jul 2016, 15:23

Steel on gold aside, there's a definite deviation from the "rule" in placing two roses Argent directly on the field Or. The green barbs help to outline them to some extent, but not fully.

The armiger appears to be a mechanical engineer, which would explain the cogwheels.
Regards
Arthur Radburn
IAAH Vice-President : Heraldic Education

Ryan Shuflin
Posts: 481
Joined: 26 Jul 2012, 13:00
Location: Germany

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Ryan Shuflin » 15 Aug 2016, 14:23

I disagree with the use of proper to go around the rule of tincture. Once I saw it suggested online that one can blazon Argent, a sword Or as Argent, a gold sword proper. I think that is a bunch of pedantic legalistic nonsense. It is as if the only reason for the rule of tincture is for the sake of grammar.

There is often more than one way to blazon a coat of arms, as there is more than one way to emblazon one. Different blazons that result in the same arms should be considered identical.

I think the use of steel proper is problematic, as many steel objects blazoned proper are depicted as argent. After all in the middle ages, plain steel armour was called white. Furthermore, it combines the difficulties of using proper with the difficulties of using grey. Grey if too dark can be mistaken for Sable, and too light mistaken for Argent. I have seen Sable as light as these cog wheels on the Pedder arms.

I think there are three ways in which proper is used. One is simply as short hand, for example the roses here are described as barbed or seeded proper, which always means barbed Vert seeded Or, but is shorter to write. The second way proper is used is to depict non heraldic colours, most often brown. Although this use is often interpreted to mean drawn naturally or photorealisically, I think that is still up to artistic license. The third use, which I believe to be illegitimate is to skirt the rule of tincture. Which depending on the jurisdiction, isn't allowed or isn't necessary.

The use of the steel cogs proper here, can fall into the last two uses. That it is the second use, but functions as the third use, which in my opinion puts it is a grey area. And has precedents.

That said, I think the Pedder arms would have looked nicer with a few changes, such as having only three roses, so that there isn't a crowded center with empty space outside.

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
Posts: 283
Joined: 24 Apr 2015, 23:34

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Michael F. McCartney » 16 Aug 2016, 06:40

Re: the roses each surrounded by a gear wheel Proper in the Pedden arms - note that this pattern is repeated in the badge. I've read that the English heralds have in recent years sometimes designed badges which they then include as compound charges in the arms. Looks to me that this is what they have done here. Using a non-heraldic "proper" color - here a grey steel - they have a badge which can be used on almost any background with only a little artistic fudging (oops, license ;) )

In the arms, painted a fairly dark grey, the gear wheels show up well on gold, without visually overwhelming either the red or white roses. The same gear wheel & rose badge would stand out on a white or silver - or any light color - background; and with a little lighter or shinier metallic color, on nearly any dark background.

All in all, to me a successful design; though I agree with Ryan that it would be an interesting exercise to see fewer and slightly larger badges on the field, forcing the two wavy cottices a bit further apart and thus slightly shrinking the empty spaces on either side.
Michael F. McCartney
Fremont, California

User avatar
Arthur Radburn
Posts: 719
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Arthur Radburn » 29 Oct 2016, 17:33

Newsletter 48 (October 2016) is now online. As usual, not very lavishly illustrated, but there are two rather interesting images (one of them via a linked page) :

Image
Baron Brooke of Alverthorpe and other descendants of his late father; and ...

Image
... the Materials Processing Institute.
Regards
Arthur Radburn
IAAH Vice-President : Heraldic Education

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2592
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Chris Green » 29 Oct 2016, 17:48

Thank you Arthur.

I am again disappointed that York Herald, who is I believe responsible for the newsletter, cannot bring himself to publish images of all the grants of arms listed in each edition. It cannot take more than half and hour of his time, or that of a research assistant. It is not as if he needs to seek permission from each grantee. The College needs merely to tell them on applying that as part of the grant process their new arms will be illustrated and the blazons published in the College newsletter. If they have any objection to that they have but to say so.
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
Mark Henderson
Posts: 79
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 07:42

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Mark Henderson » 29 Oct 2016, 17:53

Chris Green wrote:Thank you Arthur.

I am again disappointed that York Herald, who is I believe responsible for the newsletter, cannot bring himself to publish images of all the grants of arms listed in each edition. It cannot take more than half and hour of his time, or that of a research assistant. It is not as if he needs to seek permission from each grantee. The College needs merely to tell them on applying that as part of the grant process their new arms will be illustrated and the blazons published in the College newsletter. If they have any objection to that they have but to say so.



I concur, Chris. Heraldry is art.
Regards,

Mark Anthony Henderson
Commonwealth of Virginia

User avatar
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 1047
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 17:27
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Martin Goldstraw » 01 Nov 2016, 14:14

I entirely agree. They don't even really need permission since each grant is conveyed by way of Letters Patent, which is an open, published, legal document.
Martin Goldstraw
Cheshire Heraldry
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

User avatar
JMcMillan
Posts: 520
Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 22:33
Location: United States

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby JMcMillan » 02 Nov 2016, 00:57

Is it York's decision to make? Or is it the kings' of arms? Or the entire chapter?

[Kings of arms'? What is the possessive form of "kings of arms"?]
Joseph McMillan
Alexandra, Virginia, USA

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
Posts: 283
Joined: 24 Apr 2015, 23:34

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Michael F. McCartney » 02 Nov 2016, 01:42

As much as I love and look forward to the eye candy, York has apparently grasped the wisdom of giving us less than we'd like and wanting more; rather than giving us everything we'd like up front. Also, whether or not there would be a legal obligation to ask permission of the new armigers, it strikes me as better customer relations to ask and honor their individual decisions.
Michael F. McCartney
Fremont, California


Return to “College of Arms”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest