|
Post by Sir Didymous LaRoth on Mar 20, 2012 20:41:01 GMT -5
Most of the people who get into middle ages start dabbling into heraldry, most of those people create arms for their personae. What are yours and why? Mine looks like this: The general shield is based loosely on the Family arms of my mother (Roose), but the color of the water carriers have been diferenced to black from white. The Byzantine cross moline was added in rememberence of my father. The carriers symbolize service and the cross, God. Service to God is a theme in my life that I try to live upto. The crest is less meaningful. Again service, but the axe is just because it's my weapon of choice.
|
|
|
Post by Frere Reynald de Pensax on Apr 13, 2012 4:19:08 GMT -5
I re-create a number of different characters; and the majority of them are historical. Thus I don't have that much freedom with their heraldry. The challenge is to try and determine what arms a knight actually did bear, because armorials record variations in design or tincture; and there's always going to be someone at an event who will try to take you to task over what they consider to be 'incorrect' arms. However, a good example that reminds us of the need for caution is that of King Richard the Lionheart of England. His early arms (that is, prior to 1194) are a matter of some debate. His first seal (as Duke of Aquitaine) has him holding his shield at the wrong angle for us to see any design on the face; and his second seal (as king) shows a single lion facing to sinister. This could mean that he bore only a single lion, based on the evidence that Count Phillip of Flanders' seal of about the same date also shows a lion facing to the left: and it is known that the Count bore only a single lion facing to dexter as his arms. Some heraldists have proposed that two lions combattant should instead be inferred from the way the lion on Richard's shield is facing the wrong way (i.e. there must be another lion on the hidden portion of the shield). The evidence, however, does not allow a definite conclusion to be drawn either way. This brings me, though, to the choice of arms on one of my favourite shields. As a Knight Templar, one would think that even less freedom would be possible. I have always argued that the Military Orders, particularly during the early period, would have presented a much more variegated appearance than is generally realized. This was because arms and equipment was coming-in from all kinds of sources, and as it was always in short supply, the Brothers would probably have not been too fussy. Thus when I take on my twelfth century Templar persona, I like to use my 'Cressac shield'. This is based on the frescoes in the former Templar chapel at Cressac-sur-Charente, and it features an eagle as part of the design. My theory is that it could represent a shield that was donated to the Templars already painted with this emblem; and as the eagle is the symbol of St. John the Evangelist, they simply had no trouble about pressing it straight into service with the quick addition of a red cross in chief. I find it a great talking point at shows, and it draws a lot of attention. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Sir Didymous LaRoth on Apr 13, 2012 22:35:52 GMT -5
Nice to hear from you again old friend. I have actually read somewhere about that very subject regarding the heraldry of the shields of the great orders. It seems that you're not alone in your thoughts on that.
As per the heraldry of some of the individual persons, in our news letter we have the blazon game. In that game we give the blazon of a historic arms, and the reader is supposed to try and figure out who or what the arms belong to. Dame Latitia suggested King Richard's arms be used but I mentioned that there are some issues with using his.
As far as the arms of our anachronistic personas, I try to steer new members toward distinctive arms that fit their character and wouldn't be too hard to produce.
Which, do you have an anachronistic arms that you use for anything? Just out of curiosity.
|
|
|
Post by Frere Reynald de Pensax on Apr 14, 2012 3:17:44 GMT -5
I've always loved the simplicity of early heraldry: perhaps it's because I have an ancient lineage, and it's in the genes! Modern devices that have crept into heraldry over the years can send a shudder down my spine; but I do like to try to use charges that become the source of enquiry and discussion. This is certainly the case with Sir John Conyer's arms, which are a Maunch or; and members of the public are generally unfamiliar with this particular device, so it gives me an excellent opportunity to explain both what it represents and its history.
Heraldry that is anachronistic doesn't go down well in this country. To give an example; I've recently painted a twelfth century shield, and I was tempted to emblazon it with a Styrian Panther. However, although this device was known in the twelfth century, it seems that it was restricted to Germany; and as my character has to be Anglo-Norman to fit-in with the rest of the group, the Panther was out. Instead, I painted my shield with a Griffin azure, beaked and membered gules. Having said that, I don't personally have a problem with anachronisms in the right context; and I've always held to the belief that re-enactment should be fun for all. A relaxed attitude towards historical accuracy is often the case with jousting troupes who always ham it up. One knight has to be the villain, and another is sometimes a drunken buffoon, and it's great family entertainment. I love to see the carnival colour schemes of their surcoats; and I wouldn't actually mind if one of them was emblazoned with the kitchen sink as a charge because it's all in the spirit of the event (although, on reflection, that particular device is probably a step too far!). However, from the point of view of living history, what the British public tend to appreciate is the reassurance that the impression with which they are presented is as authentic as possible. So, Sir John's outfit is as about as anachronistic as I've ever become; and only then in the use of a crest.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Didymous LaRoth on May 23, 2012 17:36:37 GMT -5
Here in the States we can get a way with a lot more as it relates to heraldry. In our group we normally try to maintain simplistic heraldic compositions, and they must adhere to the rules of heraldry as is laid out in Boutell's Heraldry. We try to use shield shapes that are within our normal period of portrayal, but we normally use things like supports and specified compartments which are used in later heraldry. We do this to allow for a greater form of expression as to the ideals of the member. We do however, hold fast to the colors used in traditional heraldry. We also will not allow the use of charges that are outside of the middle ages. (We look the other way on regional charges, and in the case of color combinations on what are termed ancient arms.) We also work on the idea that unless there is a rule that expressly forbids a part of the composition, it is fair game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 3:42:45 GMT -5
I like your site its quite informative and i would like to come here again as i get some time from my studies. Cultural Articles[/u] i would like to invite my other friends to this site,rl] as you have done a great job.i must say. DOWNLOAD FREE SONGS[/u]..keep it up guys.. MODIFIED BY MODERATOR TO DEACTIVATE UNRELATED LINKS.
|
|