home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Tim@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Tim)
- Sender: FredGate@ocitor.fidonet
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!news.oc.com!utacfd.uta.edu!trsvax!rwsys!ocitor!FredGate
- Newsgroups: rec.heraldry
- Subject: Re: Fields of green (and blue, or gold and silver)
- Message-ID: <721713513.F00002@ocitor.fidonet>
- Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:18:33
- Lines: 24
-
- JG> Fields of two metals or two tinctures:
-
- JG> I've been talking about this lately, and could do with some advice.
- JG> It's been my understanding that when the field is divided into equal
- JG> parts the parts are considered to be side-by-side rather than charged
- JG> on top of each other, so they can be colour-and-metal,
- JG> colour-and-colour, or metal-and-metal. Fox-Davies says "... a field
- JG> can be and often is barry of two colours or two metals..." and goes on
- JG> to assert that there must, in modern heraldry, be equal numbers of
- JG> pieces (p 120 of the 1978 reprint of the 1909 edn).
-
- JG> Does this form a general guideline? Does it apply to lozengy and chequey
- JG> fields? And if not, why not?
-
- This is correct with respect to real-world heraldry. In SCA heraldry,
- Laurel has consistently ruled (and it was enshrined in the new Rules for
- Submissions) that fields divided of more than three parts (with a special
- exception for quarterly and per-saltire) must have "good contrast", which
- the Rules artificially (and, I think, erroneously) define as being of
- opposite tincture classes, i.e. one must be a metal and one a color.
-
- Tim of Angle
-
- * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
-
