home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Organization: Information Networking Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!ag1v+
- Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
- Message-ID: <AfC7ELu00UhW41OK5Y@andrew.cmu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 09:13:43 -0500
- From: "Andrea B. Gansley-Ortiz" <ag1v+@andrew.cmu.edu>
- Subject: Re: Heraldic questions...
- In-Reply-To: <725040701.F00001@ocitor.fidonet>
- References: <725040701.F00001@ocitor.fidonet>
- Lines: 59
-
- Good people, I recommend me to you. Tadhg writes:
-
- > There IS a consensus regarding what is "useful" with respect to heraldry
- > in the SCA; Arval just disagrees with it, apparently because it doesn't
- > include everything that was ever done in period in one big grab-bag.
-
- I believe you are overstating your point. With each new Laurel comes a
- different interpretation of the rules as to what they feel is important.
- People in the College argue all the time as to the usefulness of certain
- rules and what can be done to make them more useful. Thus we have rule
- changes. Not everyone agrees with those changes. There really is no
- consensus; never has been one. I don't expect that to change.
-
- > One of Laurel's oft-repeated maxims is "We follow the general practices,
- > not the exceptions", and red bends and chiefs on blue fields were
- > exceptions, not general practices; considered in the context of western
- > European heraldry as a whole, regional practices such as green mounts on
- > blue fields, however much they may have been the height of fashion in
- > Hungary or wherever, were still exceptions rather than general practices.
-
- The comment of Hungary makes no sense. Different areas had different
- flavors to their heraldic display. If a person has a Hungarian persona,
- and likes the heraldry of their chosen country/period then what is the
- basis for the CoA to state that it was just a fashion and not a general
- practice. The evidence points to it being a general practice in Hungary.
-
- > I have made a modest contribution in that directio with my "Ten Word
- > Blazon Test", the rationale for which is "if they did it a lot, they had a
- > term for it; if it takes you a lot of words to describe it, then they
- > didn't have a term for it, and so they probably didn't do it a lot, and so
- > it probably isn't good style".
-
- A question. Why is it that when other countries have words for particular
- things, but since those words translate to a long string in English, we
- still use the English for the term? It would be much more exact to use the
- 'foreign' term. And much more 'useful'.
-
- What the rules are there for is to make a herald's job easier for judging
- a submission as a period design. If the submitter gives evidence to support
- a different period standard, then that device should be accepted and maybe
- a rules change is in order.
-
- For example, when enough evidence and support was gathered for words being
- on both Spanish and Arabic heraldry, when the rules were re-written, it
- allowed words on devices.
-
- The CoA is full of motion and difference of opinion. It is not static, even
- when it comes to interpreting the rules. Many peoples goals are for a slow
- drift toward more period heraldry. Some, like Arval want to see all pieces
- of heraldry that have even one period model to pass. Others, like Tadhg, feel
- (please correct me if I've misinterpreted) that the general practices of
- Western European High-Middle Ages heraldry should be followed.
-
- > Tadhg, Obelisk
-
- Written Wednesday before the celebration of the birth of Our Lord, from my home
- in the Debatable Lands.
-
- Esmeralda, Sycamore
-