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.