Talk:Fess

blazon is primary?
User:Daniel C. Boyer wrote in an edit summary:
 * deleting this stuff; blazon is primary, after all, as evidenced, inter alia, by Rietstap having no pictures

I have no quarrel with the deletion, but disagree with the stated justification! Rietstap has no pictures because they would make the book more costly and bulky. Blazon is certainly convenient, but if blazon is primary, why are there old rolls with only pictures? Perhaps DCB had in mind the irrelevancy of details of depiction; that certainly implies that the essence of a coat of arms is somewhat abstract, but that does not in turn mean that it is verbal.

The coat of Holstein is now usually blazoned Gules, a nettle-leaf argent, but some have said that it was originally Argent, a border indented gules. (See Fox-Davies The Art of Heraldry, fig.997, p.411.) Perhaps DCB sees this confusion as illustrating the primacy of the blazon, and others see it as the opposite! —Tamfang (talk) 18:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

JFL
Gotta say it's weird to get a coat of arms and then want to keep it secret. On another hand I'm not sorry to see it removed as it's not really heraldic style! —Tamfang (talk) 17:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fess. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050926182954/http://bartleby.com:80/61/94/F0089400.html to http://www.bartleby.com/61/94/F0089400.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)