In another current thread (and in my own experience) there’s concern about how close a new design may be to an existing design without being duplicative. Is there a good rule of thumb for this?
I’ve heard the "two differences of line for strangers in blood sharing the same surname" guideline, but what about similar designs between personal arms and collegiate/municipal arms? Does this apply across heraldic jurisdictions?
I don’t want to be unnecessarily concerned about duplicating existing arms, but also don’t want to err on the side of being "too close". So, how close is too close?
Thought provoking question!
At the moment, my opinion is that the more famous and/or notable the arms, the greater care should be taken to apply marked differencing regardless of the jurisdiction. When I say marked difference, I mean that at one hundred fifty yards range looking through open sites on a rifle, one can readily distinguish between the two emblazonments were they on shields. :D On banners of course, I’d add some distance to that recognition criteria. Basically, if you could tell friend from foe in a medieval battle, I’d say it’s differenced enough. Everything else being equal, charges on a saltire vs. the same charges on a cross would enough even in the same jurisdiction, HOWEVER, for the example of a university… if it’s a prominent one, having only that difference might seem like a relationship is implied to exist. I would try to avoid such a implication, but… I wouldn’t insist on it… it would merely be a consideration.
Otherwise, I feel that merely subtle differences across jurisdictions (ie. country to country) are enough. Given our global communication environment, I do believe actual duplication should be resolved into further differencing for those who encounter such.
I think it is fine to err on the side of really darn close. I mean if you take really simple arms, there is only one difference between Sable a chevron between three lions rampant Argent and Sable a chevron between three tigres rampant Argent. But no one would ever say they were too close. As you get more complicated, it’s easier to say things are too close. For instance, one might say that Argent a chevron between in chief two mullets and in base a rose Gules is too close to Argent a chevron between in chief two mullets and in base a martlett Gules. But is it really any closer than Argent a chevron on a chief Gules three mullets and Argent a chevron on a chief Gules three martletts? Both have two things in common and one thing that is not. Perhaps it is different because the two things in common in the last example are ordinaries, but there I think you are splitting hairs.
I agree with Jeffrey that the more prominent (famous?) the coat of arms, the more you ought to be concerned. But part of me thinks that’s a cop-out, too.
I guess for me it really would depend on both sets of arms and who/what each belonged to.
My general rule of thumb is: if you have to ask, then it is too close.
Ditto Steve—the various formalized criteria (e.g. two difference of line or whatever) are, or should be, merely practical applications of the gut reaction. To steal from a former judge in a different context, "We know it when we see it."
David Pope;100497 wrote:
In another current thread (and in my own experience) there’s concern about how close a new design may be to an existing design without being duplicative. Is there a good rule of thumb for this?
I’ve heard the "two differences of line for strangers in blood sharing the same surname" guideline, but what about similar designs between personal arms and collegiate/municipal arms? Does this apply across heraldic jurisdictions?
I don’t want to be unnecessarily concerned about duplicating existing arms, but also don’t want to err on the side of being "too close". So, how close is too close?
eeeee…. That’s something to think about. Over the past few days i’ve been thinking if draft CoA’s that i have, maybe it’s someone else’s…idk.