Talk:Animals (Heraldry): Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Saying that the lion was sometimes referred to as the "leopard" is misleading as it is its attitude which makes it a leopard. --[[User:Daniel C. Boyer|Daniel C. Boyer]] 14:23, 15 Dec 2005 (CST) |
Saying that the lion was sometimes referred to as the "leopard" is misleading as it is its attitude which makes it a leopard. --[[User:Daniel C. Boyer|Daniel C. Boyer]] 14:23, 15 Dec 2005 (CST) |
||
<br>With respect, no -- it is/are the heralds who decided that the English arms were leopards (''sans'' spots): the presumed reason was to distinguish them, terminologically, from "other" lions. -- [[User:Simoncursitor|Simoncursitor]] 05:47, 1 Feb 2006 (CST) |
|||
Latest revision as of 22:47, 1 February 2006
"a torso, with limbs and head arranged round it -- presumably to make out how bold a hunter the bearer of the arms must have been" -- it is by no means certain that this is the meaning of the "lion couped in all its joints" in the arms of Maitland. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:25, 15 Dec 2005 (CST)
Lion as Leopard
Saying that the lion was sometimes referred to as the "leopard" is misleading as it is its attitude which makes it a leopard. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:23, 15 Dec 2005 (CST)
With respect, no -- it is/are the heralds who decided that the English arms were leopards (sans spots): the presumed reason was to distinguish them, terminologically, from "other" lions. -- Simoncursitor 05:47, 1 Feb 2006 (CST)
