The coat of arms of Archbishop Alexander Sample who will be installed as Archbishop of Portland, OR on April 2.
what is the blazon ofthe bottom half of his personal arms ?
The Archdiocese’s arms are very nice. Should the double tressure on his personal side be dimidiated like that? The Queen Mother’s was not.
I certainly think that his fleurs should all be straight up; whether it’s supposed to be semé-de-lis or just eight of them doesn’t matter.
I know that this is all purely hypothetical, but the fact that there are fleurs on both sides of his per-fess is a bit redundant. Could the design have been improved as just: per fess Gules and Azure, a monstrance (ostensorium) proper within either a double-tressure flory-counter-flory, or eight fleurs-de-lis in orle Or. That would allow the monstrance to be much more prominent. Just a thought…
Vultum Christī Contemplārī = “to contemplate the face of Christ”
His current coat of arms (as illustrated by Sullivan) shows silver fleur-de-lys in the blue half of his shield. Do you know, Fr. Guy, if he has changed the tincture with this promotion or did the artist get it wrong?
As to the random scattering, I think it’s a refreshing change and corresponds nicely with the Black Madonna of Częstochowa with which it is supposed to identify.
The tressure being truncated is a more egregious offense. I suppose I can see the design merits of doing it that way, but I think it’s bad practice. It’s as if it’s a vertical impalement of a horizontal impalement (or vice versa - you know what I mean).
Well let’s hope that the Archbishop stays out of Scotland. I certain that Lord Lyon will strongly disaprove of the double tressure in the Arms.
Kenneth Mansfield;98113 wrote:
It’s as if it’s a vertical impalement of a horizontal impalement (or vice versa - you know what I mean).
"As if?" That’s what it is, isn’t it? A coat that’s parted per fess, then impaled with the diocesan arms?
Joseph McMillan;98127 wrote:
"As if?" That’s what it is, isn’t it? A coat that’s parted per fess, then impaled with the diocesan arms?
Parted isn’t the same as impaled. Unless I’m missing something, his personal arms aren’t supposed to be two marshalled coats. I have no problem with the treatment of the tressure in relation to the arms of the archdiocese, but the personal side seems like it’s implying something that it isn’t. That’s all.