8: Giovanna Elisabetta Cellini - New Name & New
Device Accepted
Purpure, two lions in bend and four bendlets enhanced Or.
It was suggested that the lions are salient, rather than the default,
rampant. LoAR November 2003, s.n. Christophe de Lorraine, states:
It is important to note that there
is no consistent period
distinction between rampant and salient for beasts
or monsters. Heraldic treatises and dictionaries define these terms as
generally upright postures (with the body ranging from
palewise to bendwise), but the treatises are not
in
agreement on other specifics of the definitions of these postures,
such as whether the beast's legs are together or apart. In period
treatises, one often finds salient depicted with a more
bendwise (rather than palewise) body posture than rampant,
perhaps to give the impression of leaping. Otherwise, there are no
consistent trends. Most of the other trends for these postures follow
the general trends in the drawing of the rampant posture. In early
depictions of rampant animals, the body is usually palewise, while in
later depictions, the body is usually bendwise - these postures
evolved to best fit the shield, which widened from the kite shape (in
the 12th C), through the heater shape, to the broad-based shape (in
the 16th C).
The SCA defines both rampant
and salient as
upright postures, where the beast's body ranges from palewise
to bendwise. The SCA defines the salient posture
with the hind legs together and the rampant posture with the
hind legs apart. In the rampant posture the front legs are
always apart, while in the salient posture the front legs may
be either together or apart.
Because of the period
interchangeability of salient and rampant,
the SCA will register a beast in a posture that is somewhat ambiguous
as to whether it is rampant or salient, as long as
the beast is clearly not in any other posture (such as
courant) and the beast is adequately described by the
chosen
blazon term.
Since the emblazon shows the hind legs apart, rampant is an appropriate term,
and need not be included, as it is the default. |
9: Hildegardis quae et
Berthegundis - New Device Returned
Per chevron inverted sable and [checky] Or [and sable], in
chief a bee tergiant
Or.
This conflicts
with Elizabeth Braidwood (reg. 11/1998 via An Tir), "(Fieldless) A bee
Or," with one CD for the field but none for the placement of the bee.
The device similarly conflicts with Rhydderich Hael, Barony of the
(reg. 5/04 via Æthelmearc), "Per pale vert and sable, a bee Or."
(The latter badge was registered with a letter of permision to conflict
with the former.)
In addition, the line of division is drawn too high and too shallow. A
division line that is per chevron
or per chevron inverted
should divide the shield into two sections that are roughly are equal
visual weight and surface area. For a division per chevron inverted, we would
expect the angle to be much steeper, with the angle at the bottom of
the per chevron line smaller
than 45 degrees.
|
