My latest

 
MohamedHossam
 
Avatar
 
 
MohamedHossam
Total Posts:  967
Joined  03-12-2006
 
 
 
08 January 2007 22:53
 

Those arms being, btw, based on the banner of Skanderbeg, the Albanian national hero who led the resistance against the Turks.

That headgear above the eagle is, btw, the Helm of Skanderbeg. This was also used as a crown by the former Albanian kingdom under

His Majesty Zog I Skanderbeg III, King of the Albanians.

 

I found a very nice rendition of the royal arms, and I will post them soon, they feature a royal ermine mantle ensigned by the Skanderbeg helm. Will post soon!

 
Chapulin
 
Avatar
 
 
Chapulin
Total Posts:  480
Joined  19-08-2005
 
 
 
08 January 2007 23:36
 

My client will be pleased to know that he is not the only rebel, but I would gladly try to convince my client to conform to “tradition” if anyone can tell me of the "proper" color of a cross. Sure, traditionally one might state for all historical proposes, the color of wood, but wood comes in a few different colors.. even “red”. But keep in mind, the cross symbol was used a few years or more before the symbolism it is renowned for now. (God bless us all)

 
Chapulin
 
Avatar
 
 
Chapulin
Total Posts:  480
Joined  19-08-2005
 
 
 
09 January 2007 00:06
 

MohamedHossam wrote:

Hey for more practice, how about I make a nice line drawing of my arms and you can render it? wink


I’ve read that you have already made a verbal/written intent of services with Denny, I would never impede on a fellow artist, perhaps afterward, if you’re still interested in alternate renderings8-)

 
MohamedHossam
 
Avatar
 
 
MohamedHossam
Total Posts:  967
Joined  03-12-2006
 
 
 
09 January 2007 00:59
 

Sounds like a good plan.

Ok!

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
09 January 2007 09:02
 

Chapulin wrote:

My client will be pleased to know that he is not the only rebel, but I would gladly try to convince my client to conform to “tradition” if anyone can tell me of the "proper" color of a cross. Sure, traditionally one might state for all historical proposes, the color of wood, but wood comes in a few different colors.. even “red”. But keep in mind, the cross symbol was used a few years or more before the symbolism it is renowned for now. (God bless us all)


Well, Chap, you can also invoke the "it’s the exception that proves the rule" principle and/or rest upon the "cultural practice" argument: things heraldic came to Eastern Europe much later than to Western Europe and they persisted (despite the absolute horror of the French) to do things their way. Eastern European heraldry gives us plenty of examples that ignore (if not blatantly break) the rules.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
09 January 2007 11:12
 

Chapulin wrote:

My client will be pleased to know that he is not the only rebel, but I would gladly try to convince my client to conform to “tradition” if anyone can tell me of the "proper" color of a cross. Sure, traditionally one might state for all historical proposes, the color of wood, but wood comes in a few different colors.. even “red”. But keep in mind, the cross symbol was used a few years or more before the symbolism it is renowned for now. (God bless us all)


There is no proper color of a cross.  The alternative solution would be to reverse the colors of the field and the pheon:  Or in chief a pheon point to chief Azure and in base two crosses fleury Gules.

 

Is the client insisting that the crosses have to be red, or that they have to be proper?

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
09 January 2007 11:16
 

Patrick Williams wrote:

Eastern European heraldry gives us plenty of examples that ignore (if not blatantly break) the rules.


No, they give us some examples, most prominently from Hungary.  If the client is of Hungarian origin and the arms were designed in a Hungarian style (which they aren’t), I might buy this argument.  But the tincture rule exists for a reason—visibility—and shouldn’t be lightly tossed aside.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
09 January 2007 11:18
 

Chapulin wrote:

All the charges and field have symbolic meaning and there is no way around it, just as the arms of the republic of Albania and their long debated violation of the rule of tincture.


The king who adopted these arms was a sovereign who could obey or break heraldic rules as he pleased.  Your client is not, I take it, a king or ruling prince?

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
09 January 2007 11:19
 

The point of heraldic "rules" (for that word you could substitute customs, laws, conventions, etc.) is not to do whatever you feel like regarding a design and then come up with some rule to quote in order to justify your actions. Rather, there are rules that should be observed in making a design. Exceptions are called just that because they aren’t usual so citing them is pointless. In addition, one cannot justify going against the rules for a new design by citing an example of ancient arms (like Albania’s) that seem to break the rules. New designs are supposed to conform with the rules, customs, laws, conventions that have arisen over the centuries.

Once again, heraldry is a science as well as an art so you can’t justify doing what you please in the name of freedom of expression. If you want freedom of expression then use a logo. Heraldry has restrictions.

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
09 January 2007 14:34
 

Joseph McMillan wrote:

...the tincture rule exists for a reason—visibility—and shouldn’t be lightly tossed aside.


And I would agree with you. Red crosses on a blue shield shouldn’t present much of a visibility problem, don’t you think? He could also fimbriate the darned things and then the argument goes away.

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
09 January 2007 14:54
 

gselvester wrote:

The point of heraldic "rules" (for that word you could substitute customs, laws, conventions, etc.) is not to do whatever you feel like regarding a design and then come up with some rule to quote in order to justify your actions. Rather, there are rules that should be observed in making a design. Exceptions are called just that because they aren’t usual so citing them is pointless. In addition, one cannot justify going against the rules for a new design by citing an example of ancient arms (like Albania’s) that seem to break the rules. New designs are supposed to conform with the rules, customs, laws, conventions that have arisen over the centuries.

Once again, heraldry is a science as well as an art so you can’t justify doing what you please in the name of freedom of expression. If you want freedom of expression then use a logo. Heraldry has restrictions.


Of course all that is true, Father Guy, however reading Chap’s messages I get the feeling that we’re talking about a slightly different situation. Here is a client who has apparently already assumed arms, whether they break the rules or no, and Chap is experimenting with shield shape. What does one do when a client insists on design that breaks the rules?

 

We can’t say, ‘No, you cannot bear those arms." USHR could say, "No, we won’t register them because they break the rules." And an artist could explain the rules and see what the client thinks, but ultimately you either take the commission and try to minimize the damage or send the client packing. Unfortunately, perhaps, they are merely the Rules, not the Laws, of Heraldry.

 

Additionally, Chap didn’t ask anyone what they thought of the design, he stated that he was experimenting with shield shape. So, Chap…I dislike those scrolly shields, for what it’s worth. And did you realize that the design, btw, violates the color on color rule?

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
09 January 2007 17:10
 

I’ve read speculation that the Albanian arms were originally Gules an eagle Argent etc.; that the eagle on the flag (banner) of those arms was originally embroidered in real silver; that over time the silver thread tarnished to black; & that is the version that "stuck."

Whether true or not, I can’t say…

 
Chapulin
 
Avatar
 
 
Chapulin
Total Posts:  480
Joined  19-08-2005
 
 
 
09 January 2007 17:13
 

Joseph McMillan wrote:

There is no proper color of a cross. The alternative solution would be to reverse the colors of the field and the pheon: Or in chief a pheon point to chief Azure and in base two crosses fleury Gules.

Is the client insisting that the crosses have to be red, or that they have to be proper?


They have to be red because that is what denotes him and/or property, fimbriation is a possibility but I doubt it.

p.s.

They are actual physical items; does that not matter when something is labeled proper?

 
Chapulin
 
Avatar
 
 
Chapulin
Total Posts:  480
Joined  19-08-2005
 
 
 
09 January 2007 17:31
 

gselvester wrote:

one cannot justify going against the rules for a new design by citing an example of ancient arms (like Albania’s) that seem to break the rules. New designs are supposed to conform with the rules, customs, laws, conventions that have arisen over the centuries.


Actually, I believe these arms were established in the early 1990’s (May 22, 1993)

 
Chapulin
 
Avatar
 
 
Chapulin
Total Posts:  480
Joined  19-08-2005
 
 
 
09 January 2007 17:44
 

Patrick Williams wrote:

... So, Chap…I dislike those scrolly shields, for what it’s worth. And did you realize that the design, btw, violates the color on color rule?


Thanks… I’m not sure if I like it either, perhaps I will give him an option of style with 2 more different designs and I will sneak in some fimbriation in one of them to see if the client approves….. and Yeah, I heard mentioned about that 8)