[HS] Lesson 5: Tinctures

[Sara L Uckelman <liana@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The subject line says it all.

The SCA recognizes and uses the following tinctures:

Argent = white/silver/grey
Or = yellow/gold
gules = red
vert = green
azure = blue
purpure = purple
sable = black
ermine = black ermine spots on white
counter-ermine = white ermine spots on black
erminois = black ermine spots on gold
pean = gold ermine spots on black
(See http://www.s-gabriel.org/heraldry/ermine for pictures of
period examples of ermine spots)
vair = alternating bells of azure and argent

You sometimes hear of a few other tinctures: Tenne (orange), sanguine
or murray (purplish/red, blood), and bleu-celeste (sky blue).  We don't
use these tinctures in the SCA, partly because precedent was set long
ago that we weren't going to, and that hasn't ever been challenged or
changed, and partly because in most cases, our only evidence that these
came into common use (i.e., beyond more than half a dozen examples in
ALL OF EUROPE over ALL OUR PERIOD) comes from after 1600.  Reading the 
early precedents on these tinctures is a treat in historical ways
the College of Arms work:

"Some arms have been submitted to the College using tenne (orangy-ret) 
or sanguine (purplish-ret) and have been rejected. These colors to occur 
in late continental European heraldry and are occa[s]ionally used as 
livery colors in England but they appear in the later, decadent period 
and are not acceptable. (JvG, Summer 1970 [6], p. 9)"

"Neither stains nor abatements have so far been allowed to intrude upon 
the purity of Society heraldry. (HB, 20 Sep 71 [47], p. 3)"

(Tenne, murray/sanguine, and bleu-celeste are often called 'stains' to
differentiate them from the "real" tinctures).

"Tenne is forbidden. WVS [32] [LoAR 29 Dec 80], p. 9"

Tenne remains an unregisterable tincture:

"The large emblazon had the sun colored tenne. As this is not a
registerable heraldic tincture, we must return the device. [Catrina 
Mackrae, 05/01, R-An Tir]"

However, sometimes these stains appear in important non-SCA armory which 
is protected from conflict, and so it's important to know how it is to
be treated.  Precedent says:

"Given that tenne is one of the standard heraldic stains, we believe that 
it should be granted the same difference from Or and gules as purpure is 
from gules and azure." (LoAR 10/91 p.1).

Lastly, it's interesting to see what a period (well, almost - published
in 1611) source says about these:

"Tawney (saith Leigh) is a Colour of worship, and of some Heralds it is 
called Bruske, and is most commonly borne of French Gentlemen, but very 
few doe beare it in England. In Blazon it is knowen by the name of Tenne. 
It is (saith he) the surest colour that is (or so bright a hew being 
compounded) for it is made of two bright colours, which are Red and Yellow: 
neither shall you have any Colour so made among all that may be devised; 
and not to be stainand.

"The last of the seven mixed colours, we doe commonly call Murrey, but in 
Blazon, Sanguine, and is (as most truly saith Leigh) a Princeley Colour, 
being indeed one of the colors appertaining of ancient time to the Prince 
of Wales. It is a colour of great estimation, and very stately, and is of 
use in certaine roabes of the Knights of the Bath. Some Heralds of approved 
judgement doe hardly admit these two last mentioned for Colours of Fields, 
in regard they are reckoned Staynand Colours. Yet some Coats of Armes there 
are, and those of reverend antiquitie, whose Fields are of those Colours, 
for which respect they have beene allowed for Colours of Fields, as Sir 
John Ferne in his Glorie of Generositie noteth. This kinde of bearing, 
Leigh doth instance in two English Gentlemen of ancient Houses, that have 
of long time borne Tawney in their Armes: the one of them he nameth 
Hounzaker, and the other Finers."

This is from Sect. 1, chp. 3 (http://www.btinternet.com/~paul.j.grant/
guillim/s1/gu_s1c3.htm) of John Guillim's _Display of Heraldrie_ (the
entire chapter is quite short, and I recommend it).

Moving on, one of the most well-known and often misapplied rules of
SCA heraldry is the Rule of Contrast (aka the Rule of Tincture aka
No Color-on-Color/No Metal-on-Metal).  Below is quoted what the RfS
actually have to say about armorial contrast:

VIII.2 Armorial Contrast. - All armory must have sufficient contrast to 
allow each element of the design to be clearly identifiable at a distance.

Each tincture used in Society armory may be depicted in a variety of 
shades. Therefore, contrast is not determined by the lightness or darkness 
of the tinctures on the submitted emblazon, but by the traditional heraldic 
categorization of tinctures as colors and metals. The colors are azure, 
gules, purpure, sable, and vert (blue, red, purple, black, and green). 
Ermined furs or field treatments on a background of one of these tinctures 
are treated as colors for contrast in the Society. The metals are argent 
and Or (white or silver, and yellow or gold). Ermined furs or field 
treatments on a background of one of those tinctures are treated as metals 
for contrast in the Society. Furs equally divided of light and dark pieces, 
such as vair, are classed with other evenly divided elements, such as paly, 
per bend, or lozengy.

    a. Contrasting Tinctures - Good contrast exists between:
        i. A metal and a color;
        ii. An element equally divided of a color and a metal, and any 
           other element as long as identifiability is maintained;
        iii. A color and a charge, blazoned as proper, that is predominantly 
           light;
        iv. A metal and a charge, blazoned as proper, that is predominantly 
           dark.
    b. Contrast Requirements -
        i. The field must have good contrast with every charge placed 
           directly on it and with charges placed overall.
        For example, a pale vair between two owls Or might be placed on a 
        field gules, but not a field ermine because the owls would not have 
        good contrast. Similarly, a field vert with a fess Or contrasts with 
        a wolf rampant overall that is argent or ermine, but not a wolf that 
        is gules or sable.
        ii. A charge must have good contrast with any charge placed wholly 
        on it.
        For example, a tree placed on a pale azure could be Or, argent, or 
        ermine, but could not be pean or proper.
        iii. Elements evenly divided into two parts, per saltire, or 
        quarterly may use any two tinctures or furs.
        For example, a field quarterly could be composed of azure and gules, 
        argent and Or, Or and ermine, or vert and vairy gules and argent.
        iv. Elements evenly divided into multiple parts of two different 
        tinctures must have good contrast between their parts.
        For example, checky argent and gules is acceptable, but checky azure 
        and gules is not.
        v. Elements evenly divided in three tinctures must have good contrast 
        between two of their parts.

So, the first thing to notice is that the rule DOESN'T say that you can't
ever have colors touching colors or metals touching metals.  This is often
how people interpret the rule, but that is far more restrictive than what
it really says.

You can think of arms as being composed of layers: There is the field,
there are charges that lie directly on the field, and charges that lie
wholly on other charges.  It is these *layers* that must have good 
contrast with each other.  For example "Gules, on a pale Or, three 
roundels azure" has:

Layer 1: Field = gules = color
Layer 2: Pale = Or = metal
Layer 3: Roundels = azure = color

So, in this case, each layer has good contrast with the layer that
it lies on.

Now, this rule of thumb works when you're considered single tinctured
charges and fields.  When you start dividing charges and fields into
more than one tincture, then you have to consider *internal* contrast.
For example, when your first layer is a field divided per pale, you
need to a) check that all the charges in the second layer have good
contrast with the first layer, AND b) check that the first layer has
adequate contrast with itself.  Sub-rules iii, iv, and v above are
the relevant ones to determine if a divided charge or field has
adequate contrast.

Consider for example "Per pale argent and Or, a fess gules".

Layer 1 = field = per pale argent and Or
	You've got a divided field, so check and make sure that it has
good contrast before you proceed.  According to b.iii, "Elements evenly 
divided into two parts, per saltire, or quarterly may use any two 
tinctures or furs."  Per pale divides the field evenly into two parts,
so it can be comprised of any two tinctures.  So, this has fine
internal contrast.  Furthermore, since both tinctures are metals, the
entire field counts as a metal
Layer 2 = fess = gules = color

So, yes, the second layer does have good contrast with the first one.

--Exercise--
Which of the following have good contrast, and which don't?  For ones
that don't, cite the rule that it fails:

* Per fess sable and argent, a fess checky gules and Or between two
mullets Or.
* Or, a fess ermine between two chevronels argent
* Per saltire argent and azure, a saltire gules
* Per bend barry sable and Or and checky sable and Or a bend Or fimbriated 
gules
* Gules, ghouls gules
------------

There are two interesting questions that one can ask here:

1) Where some tinctures more popular than others?
2) Are there medieval examples where the rule of tincture is broken?
If so, are there any patterns that we can draw from these examples?

For the first, I'll just say a bit.  The answer is yes, and quite
definitively.  The following image is from  Pastoureau, Michel, _Heraldry: 
An Introduction to a Noble Tradition_ (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 
1997), p. 83

http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/sca/school/tinctures.jpg

Three charts are given = "European arms, Middle Ages", "Noble French
arms, 17th C", "Common French arms, 17th C".  The bars represent the
tinctures, and their relative frequencies.  Note that vert is extremely 
rare, comparatively, and purpure and the furs are so rare as to not show 
up at all.  Another related question here is whether some tinctures are
more common than others when you consider just the field or just the
primary charge.  I haven't done any extensive studies on this yet, but
I did do a study of around 300 arms from 16th and early 17th C
Cornwall ("Armorial Patterns from 16th and Early 17th C Cornwall"
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/arms/cornwallarms.html).  Here is the
data that I found:

--Distribution of field tinctures--
Field tincture	Number	Percent
Argent		110	40.6%
Sable		43	15.9%
Gules		34	12.5%
Or		25	9.2%
Azure		18	6.6%
Divided		18	6.6%
Ermine		14	5.2%
Vair		2	0.7%
Vert		1	0.4%
Erm.[1]		1	0.4%

[1] While 'erm.' usually abbreviates 'ermine' in this source, in this case, 
it abbreviatives 'ermines', e.g. 'counterermine', per Papworth.

When you consider the class of divided fields (18 examples), they are
divided in the follow numbers:

Division	Number	Percent
Checky		3	16.7%
Per pale [plain]3	16.7%
Paly of six	2	11.1%
Per chevron	2	11.1%
Per pale [complex]2	11.1%
Barry lozengy	1	5.6%
Barry wavy	1	5.6%
Bendy of six	1	5.6%
Per fess [plain]1	5.6%
Per fess [complex]1	5.6%
Quarterly	1	5.6%

Also of note:

--Distribution of number of tinctures used--
Tincture number	Number	Percent
Two		144	53.1%
Three		94	34.7%
Four		25	9.2%
Five		4	1.5%
One 		1	0.4%

As for the other question, again, I'll just note a few brief examples.
The Cornwall data cited above contains one instance of arms that
break the rule of tincture:

"Argent, five lozenges in pale erm., the centre one charged with a 
leopard's face Or" - Hele

While my source abbreviated all of the tincture names (hence 'erm.'
which is usually ambiguous between ermine and erminois), an 
independent source confirms that the lozenges in Hele's arms are
in fact ermine.  This is then an extremely flagrant abuse of the
rule of tincture, since argent and ermine have perhaps the least 
amount of contrast of ANY pair of tinctures, AND there is a third
non-contrasting layer.  These arms are very atypical, and shouldn't
be taken as a pattern of anything, without further examples.

Those of you who were reading closely will note another example of
rule-breaking arms from Lesson 4 (which also appear in the exercise
above).  Note that both of these examples contain ermine and Or in
one pair of non-contrasting tinctures.  At this point, this is too
few examples to try to build any sort of pattern from, but it does
show that this is a combination to watch out for.

Assignment: Look through the Medieval Heraldry Archive, under any
header, and find:
a) any example where the rule of tincture is broken)
b) any example of purpure 

As usual, send me what you find and I'll post everyone's response to
a web page.

-Aryanhwy



-- 
vita sine literis mors est
http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/
_______________________________________________
heraldry-school mailing list
heraldry-school@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/heraldry-school