Rule of Tinctures

 
Chuck Glass
 
Avatar
 
 
Chuck Glass
Total Posts:  265
Joined  12-06-2007
 
 
 
05 August 2008 19:17
 

I know there are some notable exceptions to the rule of tinctures (Albania, Jerusalem, et al) but I’ve noticed some pretty blatant violations recently such as this one for the city of Grans, France.

[ATTACH]464[/ATTACH]

Just how strictly do the various countries or heraldic authorities "enforce" this rule?

Do the gold acorns nullify the rule in the case of Modrice, Czech Republic?

 

[ATTACH]465[/ATTACH]

 

Other notable violations:

 

La Barben, France

[ATTACH]466[/ATTACH]

 

Gemenos, France

[ATTACH]467[/ATTACH]

 

Albocàsser, Spain

[ATTACH]468[/ATTACH]

 
Chuck Glass
 
Avatar
 
 
Chuck Glass
Total Posts:  265
Joined  12-06-2007
 
 
 
05 August 2008 19:21
 

A couple more:

Cati, Spain

[ATTACH]469[/ATTACH]

 

Gaibiel, Spain

[ATTACH]470[/ATTACH]

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
05 August 2008 20:20
 

In most of these countries there are not authorities to enforce or waive the rules in the first place.

But many of the examples would probably be passed off as cases of "proper," like the green oak leaf on red and perhaps the black dogs as well.

 
Michael Swanson
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Swanson
Total Posts:  2462
Joined  26-02-2005
 
 
 
05 August 2008 22:37
 

Charles Glass;61768 wrote:

I know there are some notable exceptions to the rule of tinctures (Albania, Jerusalem, et al) but I’ve noticed some pretty blatant violations recently such as this one for the city of Grans, France.

[ATTACH]464[/ATTACH]


Winter rye can be red naturally…  i.e., proper.

 

http://www.ppws.vt.edu/scott/weed_id/Rye1.jpg

 
Stephen R. Hickman
 
Avatar
 
 
Stephen R. Hickman
Total Posts:  700
Joined  01-12-2006
 
 
 
06 August 2008 06:26
 

What’s next?  Argent, three snowflakes Proper?  The Tincture Rule exists for a reason.  These are textbook examples of bad heraldry!  :rolleyes:

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
06 August 2008 06:40
 

Stephen R. Hickman;61780 wrote:

What’s next? Argent, three snowflakes Proper? The Tincture Rule exists for a reason. These are textbook examples of bad heraldry! :rolleyes:


Yes…and so?

 
Doug Welsh
 
Avatar
 
 
Doug Welsh
Total Posts:  445
Joined  20-06-2008
 
 
 
06 August 2008 10:31
 

1. Examples of bad heraldry should not be held as exemplars to call it good heraldry.

2. If no authority exists in some countries to "control" tinctures and metals in juxtaposition, then it does not rise to the level of "bad heraldry" within that context.

 

3. The examples shown DO show some questionable taste and a lack of colour-sense.  These may be more damning than some violation of rules that do not exist in those countries.

 
Michael Swanson
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Swanson
Total Posts:  2462
Joined  26-02-2005
 
 
 
06 August 2008 10:49
 

Doug Welsh;61787 wrote:

2. If no authority exists in some countries to "control" tinctures and metals in juxtaposition, then it does not rise to the level of "bad heraldry" within that context.


I don’t think heraldic standards require authoritarian control.  There is no speed limit on the German autobahn, but you can still go too fast for safety (300 miles per hour is legal, but it is poor driving).  You don’t need government rules regarding parenting to point out that feeding children too much fatty food is poor parenting.  There is a cosmopolitan but fuzzy set of heraldic practices built up over centuries, with regional differences, that serves as one measure of good and bad practices.  Poor tincture contrast is, in most cases, bad with respect to tradition (deviating from expected practice)  and bad with respect to natural consequences (bad visibility).

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
06 August 2008 12:37
 

I agree with Mike.  I have yet to run across a country in which heraldists would approve of blatant disregard for the tincture principle.  But in most parts of the world cities and towns and organizations and individuals are free to design and use arms whether or not they conform to the norms universally accepted by the heraldic community.

Arms that don’t conform to these norms generally are bad heraldry, or at least not the best heraldry.  At some point of nonconformity they cease to be heraldry at all.  If confronted with arms that are bad, it’s perfectly appropriate to say that they are bad.

 

But the tincture principle isn’t the only principle of heraldic design the disregard of which can make arms bad.  The arms of Princeton University violate the tincture principle (Sable chevron and chief on a Tenny field), yet are much, much more heraldic than many designs that scrupulously adhere to the rule.

 

My "so what" comment earlier was merely intended to convey that no one should be shocked that these things exist, or even be particularly offended by them.  Obviously if people want to collect examples of bad heraldry so we can tut-tut over them, they’re welcome to do so; personally I’m prepared to stipulate that there is bad heraldry in the world without needing it proven to me.

 
Alexander Liptak
 
Avatar
 
 
Alexander Liptak
Total Posts:  846
Joined  06-06-2008
 
 
 
06 August 2008 15:19
 

france did, with its revolution, change it’s mind about coat of arms, as that of snobbish nobility that was mostly killed or run out of the country.  depending on the date that the french arms were adopted, this rule may have purposely been ignored.  or, like the german flag, the colours used on colour may have greater significance and dictate the tintcure rule be overlooked.

I know poland does not have as strict guides to tincture, as his holiness john paul the great original arms had the "m" on his shield black on the blue field.  this may be similar with chezch arms, though they may, in the example of modrice, be proper.

 

those of gemenos and albocàsser are technically correct.  gemenos has an argent field upon which sits the vert, atop which is the or.  same with albocàsser, the sable goat is atop a castle or.  the tincture rule is followed because the charge is blazoned a colour sitting on metal, and it is irrelevant to the charge what the metal sits on because they are separated in the blazon.

 
Madalch
 
Avatar
 
 
Madalch
Total Posts:  792
Joined  30-09-2005
 
 
 
06 August 2008 15:34
 

xanderliptak;61800 wrote:

those of gemenos and albocàsser are technically correct.  gemenos has an argent field upon which sits the vert, atop which is the or.  same with albocàsser, the sable goat is atop a castle or.  the tincture rule is followed because the charge is blazoned a colour sitting on metal, and it is irrelevant to the charge what the metal sits on because they are separated in the blazon.


I think you’re misunderstanding the term "on" in this context.  The goat may be standing on the castle, but it’s on a field of Azure.

 
Doug Welsh
 
Avatar
 
 
Doug Welsh
Total Posts:  445
Joined  20-06-2008
 
 
 
06 August 2008 16:00
 

Clearly, I was not successful in explaining myself, above, numbered 2.

What I meant was that a non-standard colour on colour or metal on metal is not automatically bad heraldry.  We generally agree that it violates a rule, but that rule was based on making the shield identifiable at a distance.  When that can be done with metal on metal, as apparently was done in the case of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, it works.  When it fails to make the shield identifiable at a distance, as in Stephen’s example of "argent three snowflakes proper", it clearly does not work.

 

One of the very first things I learned about heraldry, way back in elementary school, back in the day when such schools taught students about the world and not just their own country, was the rule of tinctures, and the arms of Jerusalem and of the Vatican were held as examples of "the exceptions that prove the rules".  That said, the arms of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem were, in my opinion, excellent heraldry in spite of the "technical violation of the tincture rule" in the context of the times and the mindset that existed among those who used heraldry every day to identify friends from foes, allies from enemies.  I doubt very much that the arms of a Christian Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem would be created today in the same manner.

 

It is clear that in most places, the "standard" rule is British-based with some support from German practise, and the separation of tinctures is adhered to, to such an extent that the exception calls for comment.

 

However, I think it is an error to make an assumption that ONLY that version of "rule" is acceptable, period.  I think it is entirely possible that countries of which I have no knowledge may well have practises that differ, and whatever I think, whatever Joseph thinks, whatever Michael thinks, whatever Stephen thinks, the practises of those countries have validity for them.

 

So, for Spain, my standards are not valid, and my opinions are relevant only to those who share similar opinions, because clearly the Spanish share a different standard and opinion in at least these cases.

 

With that, I will withdraw.  I have no wish to accidentally create another circular argument where most of us agree on most of the broad spectra and even on most of the narrower ones, too.

 

My apologies if I have assaulted anyone’s intellects too harshly.  Such was not my intent.

 

Which is what I meant to say but clearly managed to not achieve.

 
Alexander Liptak
 
Avatar
 
 
Alexander Liptak
Total Posts:  846
Joined  06-06-2008
 
 
 
06 August 2008 16:05
 

Madalch;61802 wrote:

I think you’re misunderstanding the term "on" in this context.  The goat may be standing on the castle, but it’s on a field of Azure.


i wasnt blazoning the arms.  while it appears on the field, the goat is blazoned standing upon the castle.  since it its the blazoning that is most important to be separated by rules of tinctures, the blazon would appear to be so.  yet when displayed does the problem arise.  im sure the blazon does not put a castle and goat on a field, yet rather a castle on the field on which is a goat.

 
Kenneth Mansfield
 
Avatar
 
 
Kenneth Mansfield
Total Posts:  2518
Joined  04-06-2007
 
 
 
06 August 2008 16:24
 

Except, Xander, that the goat is not on the castle the same way the castle is on the mound. Heraldically speaking, I believe the goat is surmounting the castle.

And besides, the field looks like it may be the enigma Bleu Celeste, in which case all bets are off.

 
 
Madalch
 
Avatar
 
 
Madalch
Total Posts:  792
Joined  30-09-2005
 
 
 
06 August 2008 16:34
 

xanderliptak;61805 wrote:

since it its the blazoning that is most important to be separated by rules of tinctures…

I disagree with this completely.  The rule of tincture exists to prevent low-contrast arms, and is all about how the shield looks, not how it is blazoned.

People should not use the term "proper" as a weasel-word to avoid the rule of tincture (such as blazoning snowflakes "proper" instead of Argent so that they can be used on a field of Argent or Or).  People do, but I’d like to see them all given a good smack.

 
Kenneth Mansfield
 
Avatar
 
 
Kenneth Mansfield
Total Posts:  2518
Joined  04-06-2007
 
 
 
06 August 2008 17:00
 

It is sort of charming in it’s own way…. wink