The Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory - SCA Heraldry
The Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory - SCA Heraldry
The Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory - SCA Heraldry
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>The</strong> <strong>St<strong>and</strong>ards</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Names</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Armory</strong>:<strong>The</strong> Rules <strong>for</strong> SubmissionsAppendix F: Some Armorial Elements that Do Not Need Further DocumentationChargesCharges which were listed as being in use be<strong>for</strong>e 1600 in st<strong>and</strong>ard references such as Bruce Draconarius <strong>of</strong> Mistholme <strong>and</strong>Akagawa Yoshio, A Pictorial Dictionary <strong>of</strong> <strong>Heraldry</strong>, Gerald Brault's Early Blazon, <strong>and</strong> James Parker, A Glossary <strong>of</strong> Termsused in <strong>Heraldry</strong> do not need to be further documented. A Pictorial Dictionary <strong>of</strong> <strong>Heraldry</strong> is available from the <strong>SCA</strong> StockClerk. Parker can be found online at: http://www.heraldsnet.org/saitou/parker/Many charges which were registered in the distant past are not currently registerable; as our knowledge <strong>of</strong> pre-1600 practicebecomes better, we can say clearly that some charges are not used. It is generally safe to assume that most charges registeredin the last decade do not need to be documented to be used (but beware gr<strong>and</strong>fathering, which allows a submitter to registercharges that would otherwise not be registerable). Charges which have not been registered in over a decade should beredocumented.Complex Lines<strong>The</strong> following complex lines <strong>of</strong> division <strong>and</strong> complex lines <strong>for</strong> ordinaries <strong>and</strong> similar charges were in common use <strong>for</strong> most<strong>of</strong> our period:• embattled• engrailed• indented• wavyOthers are less common, but clearly attested to period:• bretessed• dancetty• dovetailed• embattled counter-embattled• enarched/ployé• flory-counterflory• indented fleury at the points• invected• lozengy• potenty• raguly• rayonny• urdyA few complex lines <strong>of</strong> division that are allowed only with restrictions:• bevilled: only allowed <strong>for</strong> per bend, per bend sinister, a bend <strong>and</strong> a bend sinister; use with charges around it is a stepfrom period practice• denticulada: only allowed <strong>for</strong> bordures• right step/left step: only allowed <strong>for</strong> per fess• rompu: only allowed <strong>for</strong> chevrons• triangular: only allowed <strong>for</strong> a chief• engouled: only used <strong>for</strong> bends (<strong>and</strong> bends sinister)Other complex lines <strong>of</strong> division must be documented as having been used be<strong>for</strong>e 1600 to be used in an armorial submission.Such lines will generally only be allowed with restrictions, as they were normally used only in certain kinds <strong>of</strong> simpledesigns.Rules <strong>for</strong> Submissions - January, 2012
Change language