File talk:Viceregal college arms.jpg

I would put the native part at the bottom so as not to give it the appearance of being an inescutcheon of pretence. Also, I think the supporter should be the same as those of the NAL arms. Otherwise, good one. --Marc Pasquin 20:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

And the newly discovered "God" arms could be added. Six coats in two rows? Benkarnell 21:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

PS: That's the sea-lion beast on the crest, correct? Benkarnell 22:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The crest is the seapanther. I'll admit to being resistent to the addition of the "sixth" viceroy into the arms, but that is because of my own very strong views about the separation of church and state--a matter perhaps more akin to the situation *here* rather than *there*. But I'll take another try. Zahir 22:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

And Scandinavia's arms are already a cross, after all. And the turtle technically does have its origins in relgion. Benkarnell 22:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you think it would be better to have the FK's all rolled into 1? Misterxeight 00:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

From the NAL perspective, absolutely not! The foreign powers are represented by separate viceroys - to the point where a single person (Queen Diana) is represented by 2 different viceroys representing the two crowns of England and Scotland. The provinces that are loyal to Scotland, England, and Kemr are not affected by the 3 Kingdoms' federated relationship. Furthermore, the NAL actually predates the FK by two years! So as far as the League is concerned, those 3 kingdoms are totally separate countries. Benkarnell 00:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no. The NAL legal basis is that the individual provinces each fall under one of several different monarchs (two of whom happen to be the same person) regardless of any legal alliance that unites the nations of those monarchs. England, Scotland and Kemr continue to be distinct nations, albeit in a close-knit alliance. Each have their own viceroy. So each gets their own quarter in these arms. Zahir 00:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

a minor quibble, shouldn't the native part be in position 6 since it is the most recent addition ? otherwise, looks nice but why did you get rid of the seapanther as crest ? --Marc Pasquin 13:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

A matter of balance, basically. The supporters were already these fantastical, fierce-looking beasts. Another predatory monster gives the wrong impression of the NAL which is, after all, not an imperialistic or aggressive state in general. Nor do they seem themselves that way.

I wasn't putting the different arms in positions based upon seniority but rather for artistic effect. I'm presuming that was an indiocyncrasy of the College of Heralds who drew it up (which in this case, of course, is me). This denotes a slightly less formal approach to Heraldy, which I'm assuming is somewhat the NAL norm.

Besides, the native arms are in the sixth quarter. I was under the impression the numbering of quarters goes clockwise, starting in the upper left hand corner. Zahir 15:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

numbering usualy goes by line so that the native one is actualy in position 4.--Marc Pasquin 19:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

I think there could possibly be a mistake here. Is it supposed to be "in pace"? At any rate, pacis is genetive? --Quentin 12:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't feel qualified to judge. I used an online translator for creating mottoes. If someone with a greater knowledge of Latin will chime in...? Zahir 21:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)