Boutell writes that a semy should be more than six although how these are placed on a shield, I’ve always left to the discretion of the artist. I feel however it’s important to be able to clearly see what the charge is.
The discussion Sanguine vs. Gules is of particular interest. The stain isn’t recognised in Scandinavia where my arms are (also) registered. Here, my blazon reads, "Red field strewn with gold nails" (Rødt felt bestrøget med guld nagler). The blazon translates literally into English, and I’m perfectly happy with it. I adopted ‘Sanguine’ because this is closer to the preferred colour of my shield, and the stain is recognised and accepted in the language of Anglo/French heraldry.
(There is much to be said for Joseph’s suggestion of using plain English in a blazon, and if my arms where to be registered in the US, that is what I would use. This however is another discussion).
Question: Should I consider changing my blazon from Sanguine to Gules in keeping with Scandinavian registration and tradition? Can I change my blazon from a stain to a tincture without further adieu?
Richard G.;93913 wrote:
Question: Should I consider changing my blazon from Sanguine to Gules in keeping with Scandinavian registration and tradition? Can I change my blazon from a stain to a tincture without further adieu?
My answer to that would involve your tolerance for "artistic license" If there are a considerable number of red shades you just plain couldn’t tolerate - I’d stick with Sanguine (or Bloody). Personally, if I’m engaged in a discussion of shades that someone doesn’t like, I generally try to drive them to a different color for use in their arms… Or remind them to mention such preferences to any artist they commission.
Richard, my opinion is that you should keep your blazon just as you desire it to be.
When registering with various jurisdictions, modify that blazon for their purposes because you want the protection offered by having registration which makes usurpation less likely and establishes certain date of use. Registration should not hinder or limit you so I say continue to use sanguine as your primary blazon and register it as such in any jurisdiction which will allow it. If the jurisdiciton doesn’t allow it, modify it to the closest match as you have done.
I like sanguine better, and have painted your shield using it. 
A bloody field caltroppy? That could make a nice shield; or, is that too Drummondy?
Perhaps it does make more sense to stay with what I have, and augment the stain to a tincture when and where necessary. We’ve seen this before when attempting to straddle two heraldic jurisdictions. The issues are seldom insurmountable. Thank you Kathy and Jeff.
Guy, A red field strewn with gold caltaps would, an excellent shield make - although the gouts of blood, which are of direst cruelty, would be no man’s virtue or sufficiency when he shall endure the like himself ...
Joseph McMillan;93889 wrote:
By the way, to revive an old, old issue on which I am repeatedly shouted down, why should we not simply blazon Richard’s arms as "Red strewn with golden nails"?
As a personal taste, I like to use semee when the charges are repeating a fixed distance from one another. I prefer strewn when the charges are scattered about a shield in random fashion.
The question of gules versus sanguine is that the latter is a distinct heraldic stain whilst the former is a distinct heraldic tincture when speaking of British heraldry - gules and sanguine should not to be seen as interchangeable. As Kathy has already mentioned that when dealing with gules it may of any shade of red that is pleasing to the eye. This goes for any heraldic tincture. Sanguine as a stain is described by Brooke-Little as ‘blood-red or crimson’, which I take to be darkish red rather than a bright or vibrant red, but as with many things all is in the eye of the beholder and how one wishes to blazon one’s arms.
I also prefer the term ‘semy’ rather than the other terms mentioned, although ‘powdered’ has a certain appeal when dealing with, say, a beast or monster semy of some object. Otherwise, billety, bezanty, goutty, platy, etc still stand.
John
While I agree with your observation John, the problem here is when the stain is not recognised within an heraldic jurisdiction (Scandinavia) the armiger is then forced to use the nearest tincture equivalent. However, since the heraldic terms Sanguine, Gules etc. are not used in Scandinavia, the field of my arms are blazoned as Red. I stipulated however they should be shown as dark red which was not a problem. I am however not entirely comfortable with this.
My opinion would be to just have two sets of arms in this case, one for the limiting jurisdiction and another for everywhere. Anyone who challenges this can meet you at the list. :marine:
Jeffrey Boyd Garrison;93929 wrote:
My opinion would be to just have two sets of arms in this case, one for the limiting jurisdiction and another for everywhere. Anyone who challenges this can meet you at the list. :marine:
LOL - point taken Jeffrey although I’d need a champion I’m afraid. Should I ask Kathy? I’m not much for battle preferring instead the role of a gentle friar with his tinctures for bruises, potions for wounded egos and a can opener - just in case ...... :rolleyes:
A gentle demeaner is the most potent defense, greater than any weapon?
Anyhow, shouldn’t need a champion, your position would be unassailable. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no rule against having multiple arms (and there are medieval precedents as well).
Richard G.;93930 wrote:
I’m not much for battle preferring instead the role of a gentle friar with his tinctures for bruises ...... :rolleyes:
That would be purpure, wouldn’t it?:)
Richard G.;93930 wrote:
LOL - point taken Jeffrey although I’d need a champion I’m afraid. Should I ask Kathy? I’m not much for battle preferring instead the role of a gentle friar with his tinctures for bruises, potions for wounded egos and a can opener - just in case ...... :rolleyes:
I’m afraid I generally go for the distance shot - blaster in City of Heroes, Hunter in WOW…. Gun at home… we’ve had that conversation!:rolleyes:
Kathy McClurg;93945 wrote:
I’m afraid I generally go for the distance shot - blaster in City of Heroes, Hunter in WOW…. Gun at home… we’ve had that conversation!:rolleyes:
I challenge you to Karaoke at dawn. My country western ballads are deadly!
Joseph McMillan;93942 wrote:
That would be purpure, wouldn’t it?:)
Yup! Eventually fading to Vert and Or. :animlol: