A Conversation on Heraldry

by Thomas Barnes, aka Lothar von Katzenellenbogen

What's the standard arrangement for 3 objects?

2 and 1 usually. If they're tertiaries then they follow the orientation of the ordinary they're on.

For 4 objects?

If they can be divided evenly between two sides of an ordinary then 2 and 2, if they are alone then it's unusual to say the least. In that case I'd guess that they would be arranged 2 and 2 unless they were arranged in cross, which I think is more common.

For 5 objects?

Again, an unusual number. They seem to be arranged 2,2,1 especially if placed around a primary charge. Otherwise they can be placed "in saltire" e.g. 2,1,2 or "in cross" e.g. 1,3,1

Generally, medieval heraldry tended to use the following patterns:

1) Single primary charge (if this charge is an ordinary it could be charged itself).

2) A group of three primary charges (if these charges are ordinary diminutives, they are occasionally charged, especially in Spanish heraldry but are more likely to have field treatments if they are multitinctured).

3) A group of six primary charges arranged 3,2,1.

4) A group six secondary charges arranged 3 & 3 between an ordinary primary charge.

Bordures and/or chiefs could be added as necessary. Generally, if a bordure was charged it had a plain line of division. If it had a complex line of division it wasn't charged. Ordinaries could be charged or be left plain and could have either straight or complex lines of division.

The typical SCA arrangement of "Field, an ordinary between an X and a Y" is most unusual in medieval heraldry. It would be much better style to have "Field, an ordinary between three X and three Y."

Does the typical arrangement change if the objects are long and skinny vs. roundish?

Yes. Generally the number and orientation of the charges allows the charges to be displayed to their best advantage. Swords and other long skinny charges tend to be oriented palewise or occasionally in saltire. Roundish charges, being more typical, use the default arrangements.

What's the typical way to arrange object around a bend?

2 & 1, or 3 & 3. As I said 1 & 1 is rare in Period.

A pale?

Pales are slightly uncommon in period heraldry. I would guess that the typical arrangements would be 1 & 1, or 2 & 2.

A fess?

2 & 1, occasionally you'll see 2 & 2 if the two charges in base don't get squashed.

A chevron?

2 & 1.

A cross?

2 & 2. If the cross was no throughout, then you might get away with putting a fifth charge in base under the foot of the cross.

A saltire?

2 & 2.

A pall?

A pall was a tremendously rare charge in Period heraldry and it seems to have been limited solely to churchmen. Due to its rarity it is usually encountered as a sole primary charge.

Lothar's Hypothesis: The weirder the primary charge the simpler the device. The weirder the tincture the simpler the device. A lot of SCA heraldry isn't right because it tries to incorporate too many weird tinctures [vert, purpure] and charges into a single device.)

Anyhow, I'd guess that if a pall were to have secondaries arranged around it they would be be placed 1,2,1 (in cross), or 2 & 1 (with the 1 in base).

How many objects are usually placed around an ordinary?

I've pretty well covered this already.

Do the numbers change with long objects vs. roundish objects?

I'm not certain, but I think not.

How many objects do you normally see on an ordinary? Are they the same or different than the objects on the field?

Tertiary charges were almost always of the same type and tincture. On a saltire or cross, there were usually 1,5 or 9 tertiaries. On a pale, bend, or fess the number was usualy either 1 or 3.

Tertiary charges don't have to be the same as the charges on the field, and often they're not. Generally, if a device has tertiary charges then it doesn't have secondaries or vice versa.

How are secondaries typically arranged around a single primary that's not an ordinary?

However they best fill the space. Usually the best arrangement is 2 & 1, so that's most common. Fesswise 1 & 1 occasionally works as well.

Where do you see secondaries/tertiaries placed when there's more than one object in the primary charge group?

Generally, you don't. That is, where there is more than one charge in the primary charge group, you don't see secondaries. Tertiaries, of course, are only seen on other charges ;). They are almost always found on ordinaries, chiefs, or bordures, seldom on other charges. Very occasionally you'll see a charged roundel.

How does the medieval heraldic sense of "balance" differ from the modern sense?

Which modern sense? I personally think of heraldry as being something like page layout. If the text looks unbalanced it's wrong. If the heraldry looks unbalanced, it's (probably) wrong.

Medieval heraldry tended to be very static and solid looking and was very stylized, even when contemporary art was not. It must be studied as a separate art form to get a sense of what was going on.

Mikjal is right in using the word "balance". The best I can describe it is that the escutcheon had a "balance point" at fess point. Each charge added had to maintain that balance as well as filling space. For a charge added in dexter chief you added one in dexter base, and so forth. The only exceptions to this rule are that, occasionally, you could get away with adding (or just using) a canton or a charge in dexter or sinister chief. However, in this case, the arms had to be dead simple otherwise.

I'd also venture to say that there wasn't a lot of "outward" motion where charges looked like they're flying off the shield, and there wasn't a lot of "radial symmetry" of charges (it happened, but it was rare).

The magic words are "balanced", "space filling", "centered" and "static".

This information is based on looking at mostly Anglo-Norman rolls of arms. German heraldry tends to be a bit simpler. Iberian and Hungarian heraldry is a bit more complex and follows different stylistic rules. Late English heraldry tends to be quite complex and follows its own rules.