Complex Lines of Division

From SCA Heraldry Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wiki to make the content "searchable" and easier to find. If you find the information you seek here, go to the original sources to verify the information and use them for your documentation.

See also Field Division, Divisions and Ordinaries, Complex Lines from old Heraldic Primer

Illustrations:

Period sources:

Bendy:

BSB277f124rSlaviatiBendyBretessed.PNG
Insignia Florentinorum BSB277, f124r, Salviati, bendy bretessed

Indented:

Ingeram Codex 136 1489 ComplexLine.JPG Insignia |
Complex Line of Division of Ordinary, Ingeram Codex, f136, 1489 Insignia Florentinorum BSB277, f59r, Davisi, per fess indented

Nebuly:

Nebuly
Nebuly in Insignia Florentinorum - BSB Cod.icon. 277 1550-55

Potent-counterpotent, crusilly-countercrusilly, indented (?) trefoils issuant from the points, indented flowers at the points:

CountsChampagne-potent-counterpotent-cotise.jpg UnknownIagopotentycounterpotenty.png BSB308, Siebmacher1605_plate096_indentedploye_trefoil_points.jpg Siebmacher1605_plate207_indented_flower_points.jpg
Arms of the Counts of Champagne, bend cotised potent-counterpotent Found by Iago, bend cotised potent-counterpotent BSB308, Wernigeroder Wappenbuch, 1475-1500, ? Crusilly-counter-crusilly line of division? Siebmacher 1605, plate 96, die Hilinger, indented (?) with trefoils issuant from the points Siebmacher 1605, plate 207, die Rehlinger, indented with flowers at the points

More potent-counterpotent:

PotentyCompacted.png
Collection of potent-counterpotent cotises courtesy of Gunnvor silfrahar

Urdy:

BSB266 1550-55 Pontificum p50 urdy.jpg
BSB 266, Pontificum Romanorum Insignia Insignia I. et cardinalium Felice III. ad Paulum IV. - Italien 1550-1555 on page 50, urdy and diapering, FB image courtesy of Sneferu sa Djedi

Modern:

Pictorial Dictionary, 3rd edition:

Per Mistholme, may use PicDic art for submission purposes without prior permission.

Vector Graphics:


Sources:

Academy of St. Gabriel "Medieval Heraldry Archive" - http://www.s-gabriel.org/heraldry/

Archive of St. Gabriel reports - http://www.panix.com/~gabriel/public-bin/archive.cgi

Laurel Armory Articles - [[1]]

New Heraldic Primer (Heraldry for Non-Heralds) - http://heraldry.sca.org/armory/newprimer/h4f5.shtml

Period Armorials

SENA Appendix H: Low-Contrast Complex Lines of Division

as of 6/2022

The primary standard for low-contrast complex lines of division is that they be readily identifiable.

In many cases, a charge overlying a low-contrast complex line of division will render the line of division unidentifiable. Thus, divided fields with low-contrast tinctures with complex lines of division will be registered with a charge overlying the line division only if the line of division remains readily identifiable.

In some cases, even if there is no overlying charge, a low-contrast complex line of division may be unidentifiable and thus unregisterable. Similarly, in some cases, the specific shades used in a submission may render a low-contrast complex line of division unidentifiable and thus unregisterable, even if the combination has previously been registered.

Some low-contrast complex line combinations which have been registered recently are:

  • argent and Or: with a right step
  • azure and gules: embattled
  • azure and vert: embattled
  • gules and sable: arrondi; indented; rayonny
  • gules and purpure: indented
  • gules and vert: enarched
  • purpure and vert: wavy
  • sable and vert: dovetailed; indented

Some low-contrast complex line combinations which have been ruled unregisterable, even when there is no overlying charge, are:

  • sable and purpure
  • sable and azure

Lines of Partition

http://www.modaruniversity.org/Lines.htm

Dovetailed Dovetail.gif
Embattled Embattled.gif
Embattled Grady Embattled-Grady-0.gif Embattled-Grady-1.gif
Engrailed Engrailed.gif
Flory Flory1.gif
Flory-Counterflory Flryctr2.gif Flryctr1.gif
Indented Indented.gif
Invected Invected.gif
Nebuly Nebuly.gif
Potenty Potenty.gif
Raguly Raguly.gif
Rayonny Rayonny.gif
Urdy Urdy.gif
Wavy Wavy.gif

Per Modar University: Many of the pictures used above were adapted from the article "Heraldry for Scribes" by Mistress Eowyn Amberdrake.


Difference between embattled, bretessed and embattled counter-embattled:

fess-embattled-1.gif fess-bretressed-1.gif fess-embattled-counter-embattled-1.gif
fess embattled fess bretessed fess embattled counter-embattled
no bottom embattlement embattlements are opposite other side embattlements are off-set from other side

Line of Division Conflict Table

https://web.archive.org/web/20160324174330/http://webpages.charter.net/bobjames/lines.htm

Robert mac Cormaic, Herald-at-Large, Barony of Jararvellir, Principality of Northshield, Middle Kingdom This table includes precedents through Alisoun MacCoul of Elphane. Of considerable interest to me are the instances where "logic" breaks down in the determination of conflicts. By logic, I am referring to the chain that we usually have no need to question, where "If A = B, and B = C, then A = C." It works in math, but not always outside of it. In the case of these precedents, we find places where a line of division conflicts with two others, but those other two do not conflict with each other. Special care is needed to avoid such pitfalls. I've also found it interesting that so many lines of partition have just never been ruled on for purposes of conflict at all. Last updated January 4, 2003.

[Images from "Lines of Partition" - http://www.modaruniversity.org/Lines.htm]

Line No CD CD
Embattled Embattled.gif Dovetailed [07/99, R-Lochac]
Bretessed [08/00, R-Ansteorra]
Raguly [02/01, R-Atlantia]
Urdy [04/01, R-Drachenwald]		 Potenty [03/00, A-An Tir]
Bretessed Raguly [04/02, R-Artemisia]
Embattled Grady Embattled-Grady-1.gif
Engrailed Engrailed.gif Invected [3/93, Cover] ,
Indented [3/93, Cover]
Invected Invected.gif Wavy [06/00, A-Middle]
Indented [3/93, Cover]
Engrailed [3/93, Cover]
Indented Indented.gif Wavy [LoAR 23 Apr 88, p. 21] Invected [3/93, Cover]
Engrailed [3/93, Cover]
Dentilly
Rayonny Rayonny.gif
Nebuly Nebuly.gif Wavy [01/02, R-Atenveldt] Urdy [2/95, Merides]
Urdy or Vallary Urdy.gif Wavy [2/95, Merides] Nebuly [2/95, Merides]
Dovetailed [3/93, R-Middle]
Dovetailed Dovetail.gif Raguly [LoAR 5/91 p.4] Urdy [3/93, R-Middle]
Wavy or Undy Wavy.gif Nebuly [01/02, R-Atenveldt]
Urdy [2/95, Merides]
Indented [LoAR 23 Apr 88, p. 21]		 Invected [06/00, A-Middle]
Crested or Wavy Crested Not permitted [12/97, R-Outlands]
This division is out of period.
Wavy-Counterwavy or Wavy Bretessed Not permitted [LoAR 12/91 p.21]
This division is out of period.
Dancetty
Potenty Potenty.gif Embattled [03/00, A-An Tir]
Raguly [03/00, A-Atlantia]
Raguly Raguly.gif Embattled [02/01, R-Atlantia]
Dovetailed [LoAR 5/91 p.4]
Bretessed [04/02, R-Artemisia]		 Potenty [03/00, A-Atlantia]
Saxonized Not permitted [LoAR 3/92 p.13]
This division is out of period.

Precedents:

Precedents of the SCA College of Arms - http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/precedents.html

Morsulus Heralds Website - http://www.morsulus.org/ (to search the LoARs and Precedents)

Restatement Wiki - http://yehudaheraldry.com/restatement/index.php?title=Main_Page]] (restatements of Precedents)

Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.


Definition:

Registerability:

(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)

September 2009 - wavy-crested:

"wavy-crested is a line of division which significantly post-dates 1600 and thus is not acceptable for SCA use." September 2009 LoAR & February 2004 LoAR

May 2006 - two or more complex lines on a charge:

[A chief triangular embattled] With very rare exceptions (e.g. in combination with enarched lines), the use of two or more complex lines on the same charge is confusing, and unattested in period armory. (Wavy raguly? Embattled rayonny? I think not.) In this case, the chief could be either embattled or triangular --- but not both. (Johann Götz Kauffman von Erfurt, December, 1992, pg. 20). Mairgreg ingen Chailtigirn: http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2006/05/06-05lar.html

December 1997 - two complex lines on same charge:

Anne Aliz de Bâle. Device. Sable, a swan naiant argent and a bordure engrailed, fleury at the points Or. "The bordure uses two different complex lines of division: engrailed and fleury. Such has been disallowed in the past: [A chief triangular embattled] "With _very_ rare exceptions (e.g. in combination with enarched lines), the use of two or more complex lines on the same charge is confusing, and unattested in period armory. (Wavy raguly? Embattled rayonny? I think not.) In this case, the chief could be either embattled or triangular --- but not both." (Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme, LoAR December 1992, p. 20)" http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/1997/12/lar.html

Conflict:

Identifiability:

A Collation of Laurel Precedents Regarding Contrast and Complex Lines

http://www.modaruniversity.org/Complex1.htm compiled by Lady Alanna Volchevo Lesa, Golden Dolphin Herald Laurel precedents have also established that certain colors do or do not have sufficient contrast when used with complex lines of division. The following have been compiled from the published Precedents of the various Laurel Sovereigns of Arms and from recent Letters of Acceptance and Returns. Newer rulings override old ones, so I have arranged them in reverse chronological order. Past precedents, especially those before the 1989/90 implementation of the current Rules for Submission, do not necessarily indicate the current policies and practices of the College.

Webminister's Note: Significant tinctures have been capitalized and highlighted in a contrasting color.

  • [Quarterly indented VERT and SABLE, three gilly flowers in bend argent seeded Or.] Note: this is registerable because very little of the line of division is covered by the flower. (JoA, LoAR March 1999, p. 8)
  • There is insufficient contrast between PURPUREand SABLE to use a complex line of division such as urdy to separate them. It becomes unidentifiable. (JoA, LoAR January 1999, p. 14)
  • This is being returned for unidentifiability. From any distance, the wavy line separating the AZURE and COUNTER-ERMINE cannot be seen. This submission was ruled on at the roadshow meeting at the 1997 Known World Heraldic Symposium, and the people sitting in the second row could not tell what the line of division was. This return is in line with current CoA precedent. In the January 1993 return of Elspeth of Oxfordshire, Master Bruce as Laurel said: "[Per chevron embattled azure mullety of six points Or, and sable, in base a <charge> argent] The low contrast between azure and sable renders the embattled line indistinguishable from any distance. As with the recent case of Per pale embattled purpure and sable (LoAR of Aug 92, p.25), I must return this for lack of identifiability, per Rule VIII.3. (JoA, LoAR June 1997, p. 11)
  • [Per fess rayonny PURPURE and GULES] In the large emblazon, the line of division was clear even from all the way across the room the long way. (DiA II, LoAR December 1994, p. 8)
  • [Per bend sinister nebuly GULES and SABLE, a cross moline and an increscent argent] Note that the complex line of partition on this badge is between black and red, which have perhaps the best contrast of any two colors, and that nothing obscures the line of partition [badge registered]. (BD, October, 1993, pg. 10)
  • [Per bend potenty OR and ARGENT, a <charge> sable and a <charge> gules within a bordure potenty sable] The complex line of division is indistinguishable from any distance. As in the case of Landric D‘gmaer (LoAR of Aug 92), a complex line of division between two metals or two colors may be returnable for unidentifiability, per Rule VIII.3, regardless of whether the line is obscured by a charge. It only matters that the field portions have so little contrast that the complex line cannot readily be identified from a distance. That appears to be the case here. (BD, October, 1993, pg. 14)
  • [Per chevron embattled AZURE mullety of six points Or, and SABLE, in base a <charge> argent] The low contrast between azure and sable renders the embattled line indistinguishable from any distance. As with the recent case of Per pale embattled purpure and sable (LoAR of Aug 92, p.25), I must return this for lack of identifiability, per Rule VIII.3. (BD, January, 1993, pg. 30)
  • [Per bend sinister nebuly VERT and AZURE, two <charges> argent] The low contrast between vert and azure renders the nebuly line indistinguishable from any distance. As with the recent case of Per pale embattled purpure and sable (LoAR of Aug 92, p.25), I must return this for lack of identifiability, per Rule VIII.3. (BD, January, 1993, pg. 30)
  • PURPURE and SABLE are the darkest of heraldic colors, and there's insufficient contrast between them to permit [identification] of the embattled line. Rule VIII.3 requires all elements of the design --- including complex lines of division, if any --- to be identifiable. The Rule goes on to give examples of cases that wouldn't be identifiable: "For instance, a complex line of partition could be difficult to recognize between two parts of the field that do not have good contrast if most of the line is also covered mby charges." Those examples are just that: examples, not an exhaustive list. It is quite possible for a complex line of partition to be unidentifiable, even if not covered by charges; that is the case here. [For a full discussion, see LINES OF DIVISION --General] (BD, August, 1992, pg. 25)
  • [Per chevron nebuly GULES and PURPURE, three charges 2 and 1, not overlying the line of division] "The complex line of division of the field was almost entirely unidentifiable at any range because of the extremely poor contrast between gules and purpure. This is a color combination which should be avoided when using a complex line of division." [the device was returned for this reason only] (DiA I, LoAR 1/91 p.21).
  • OR does not have adequate contrast with ERMINE in our system. (AMoE, LoAR 21 May 89, p. 24)
  • The contrast between SABLE and PURPURE is too poor to permit the use of this complex [wavy] line of division. The overlying barrulet only makes the situation worse since it distracts the eye from such contrast as does exist between the two tinctures. (AMoE, LoAR 29 Mar 87, p. 15)
  • In the Rules published at the end of Master Wilhelm's tenure as Laurel, it is clearly stated (IX.4) "those partitions allowed to use two colors or two metals should not use complex lines of division, as those will be difficult to discern at a distance, due to poor contrast" and (IX.5) "the basic requirement in all cases is that there be sufficient contrast for clear visibility". (AMoE, LoAR 29 Mar 87, p. 23)
  • One of the requirements for the use of a complex line of division with two tinctures draws from the same class is that they have "sufficient contrast". Although the rules do make allusion to fields which are all "light", in most cases fields entirely divided of OR and ARGENT do not support most complex lines of division. In this particular case, where the wings of the birds, lying along the line of division, distract the eye from its nature, it is difficult to determine which line of division has been used. (AMoE, LoAR 26 Jul 87, p. 9)
  • http://www.modaruniversity.org/Complex1.htm

Collected Precedents:

In the Ordinary:

Retrieved from "http://scaheraldry.info/index.php?title=Complex_Lines_of_Division&oldid=7328"