[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: coat of arms necessary vs required
Poster: Thomas Hudson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To throw another point into the fray:
You state as zealously that your side is true and Tibor's is false,
as he does his own. But was there truly a single practice throughout
In the "Thames and Hudson Dictionary of the Italian Renaissance"
(ISBN et al. available upon request), the senior editor under his own
initials states that impresa (Italian heraldry of the late Renaissance)
were assumed by individuals as they saw fit. I'm attempting to find the
sources for his assertion, although it may be original with him. One
would then not necessarily "determine [arms one wishes to assume] were not
in conflict with other known arms"; although one might be careful
not to impersonate those of the local authorities or persons one
respected, one could certainly imitate them.
There are cultures in period where it is perhaps *inappropriate*
for one to register one's heraldry. A central heraldic authority?
The first heraldically-decorated item I ever made bore a badge of
my own devising; when I replace it and make more, they will be likewise.
I should be a fool to take the arms of His Majesty or Her Excellency in
these lands where I now live, but those arms do not suit me anyway.
(It's not as if I could display my impresa anywhere about my person
in public, what with the dress codes of the Senate, but perhaps I could
have a painter limn them in the lower hall of the palazzo, among the
family's shields and war trophies that we, being old-fashioned, still
Giovan Donato Falconieri
Kappellenberg, Windmasters' Hill, Atlantia: OCFA - LFET
Hreodbeorht, Drakkar Herald, wrote:
> Sir Tibor,
> Given the tone of you posting, if education, and not chest thumping, were your goal you really
> should have limited your response to the parties, especially when you are as incorrect as you
> are here. (I do; however, applaud your pedantry - it certainly improves with age). In point of
> fact registering ones device is "necessary", if heraldry in the SCA is to represent anything
> like period heraldry. It is necessary to register one's device to insure that it does not
> conflict with the arms of other members in the SCA. As you well know, in period a person would
> often protect their arms as zealously as Disney protects its mouse ears logo. One's arms
> defined who they were, what they owned as well as their genealogy. In period one would neither
> assume nor be assigned arms without determining they were not in conflict with other known arms.
> It is also necessary to register it in the SCA so that should one be Awarded Arms by their King
> they may (eventually) receive their scroll. If one fails to register their device until after
> they receive their AoA, someone else may have registered it.
> You are correct to say it is not "required" (but then - that is not what she said is it?). You
> are wrong to say it is not necessary. To say that it is not "necessary" to register one's
> device is as correct as it is to say that it is not "necessary" to be polite or courteous.
> May one infer your opinion on the later based on your expression opinion of the former?
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: email@example.com