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
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 1091
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 17:27
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Martin Goldstraw » 01 Feb 2016, 10:25

We tend to get too hung up on the so called tincture rule, there are numerous examples of the heralds accepting breaches in the English Visitations. It is arguably good practice visually to comply with this rule but was it ever an official taboo? I doubt it.
Martin Goldstraw
Cheshire Heraldry
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2701
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Chris Green » 01 Feb 2016, 11:08

Martin Goldstraw wrote:We tend to get too hung up on the so called tincture rule, ...


Which is why I invariably call it the tincture "rule".
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
Chas Charles-Dunne
Posts: 624
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 15:48
Location: England - TL 80102 93862
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Chas Charles-Dunne » 01 Feb 2016, 12:27

JMcMillan wrote: If they didn't realize that this coat violates it, they never would have weasel-worded the blazon.


What you see as weasel words, I see as the clever use of blazon to overcome a perceived problem.
Regards
Chas
IAAH Fellow

Image

User avatar
JMcMillan
Posts: 550
Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 22:33
Location: United States

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby JMcMillan » 01 Feb 2016, 14:58

Certainly there are a great many examples of officially approved English arms with tincture violations. For example, the arms "Argent on a chief or three corbies proper" confirmed at the 1619 visitation of Warwickshire to George Corbin of Hall End. My objection is not to the violation but to the gutless (or what Chas prefers to call "clever") wording of the blazon. If you're going to put a colored chief on a colored field, then do it and call it what it is; don't pretend that calling it "per fess enhanced" somehow changes reality. The visiting herald in 1619 called the thing by its right name; the kings of arms who issued the University of Manchester grant didn't.

See Confucius, Analects XIII:3
Joseph McMillan
Alexandra, Virginia, USA

User avatar
Arthur Radburn
Posts: 771
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Arthur Radburn » 23 Apr 2016, 15:24

The April newsletter is now online at http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/news- ... tter-no-46 .
Regards
Arthur Radburn
IAAH Vice-President : Heraldic Education

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2701
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Chris Green » 23 Apr 2016, 15:54

I find it increasingly irritating that the College of Arms cannot/will not illustrate all its grants of arms in the Newsletter or elsewhere. It is hardly a labour of Hercules.
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
Posts: 309
Joined: 24 Apr 2015, 23:34

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Michael F. McCartney » 23 Apr 2016, 19:18

Perhaps the heralds are reluctant to post the artwork without prior OK from the grantee?

Personally I'd love to see them set up an online armorial similar to the Canadians; or at least do as Chris suggests. But either would require a far bigger unpaid workload than the current approach. As mothers tell their daughters, who will buy the cow if the milk is given away free? ;)
Michael F. McCartney
Fremont, California

User avatar
Arthur Radburn
Posts: 771
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Arthur Radburn » 29 Jul 2016, 10:04

The latest newsletter (no 47) is now online. The lead story is the Team GB arms, which is old news by now. A few other arms are illustrated, including another example (arms of Pedder) of the use of "proper" to get around the rule of tincture.

Or is it? As steel is not an heraldic metal, and is clearly distinct from Argent in this blazon, does placing steel cogwheels proper on a field Or go against the established principle?
Regards
Arthur Radburn
IAAH Vice-President : Heraldic Education

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2701
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Chris Green » 29 Jul 2016, 11:58

I think the Pedder arms would fail the "fridge" test.
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
Mark Henderson
Posts: 84
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 07:42

Re: College of Arms Newsletters 2016

Postby Mark Henderson » 29 Jul 2016, 13:10

Why does a "steel gear-wheel" need to be proper? Could it not be Sable or Azure?

On another note, the arms of Rumney are rather nice.
Regards,

Mark Anthony Henderson
Commonwealth of Virginia


Return to “College of Arms”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests