NIC:

Kappa Sigma
Sigma Phi Epsilon
Theta Chi
Theta Xi


NPC:

Alpha Phi
Delta Gamma
Sigma Kappa
Zeta Tau Alpha


Other:

Alpha Phi Omega


.....Kelly :)

and
Actually, on the Alpha Sigma Phi coat-of-arms, it's a bend, not a bar (or bar sinister).

A bend is a diagonal band extending from the dexter chief (top right corner from the perspective of the shield bearer) to the sinister base (bottom left). A "bend sinister" extends from the sinister chief (top left corner from the perspective of the shield bearer) to the dexter base.

Properly speaking, there is no such thing as a "bend dexter" - or rather, "bend dexter" is redundant since a bend by definition begins in the dexter chief. The Alpha Sigma Phi, Alpha Phi, Alpha Gamma Delta and Teke arms all have a bend as the principal charge of the shield. Kappa Sigma has a bend sinister (which, along with the bend and the bar is one of the "honorable ordinaries" and is not necessarily a sign of bastardy) as the principle charge.

A bar is a horzontal band on the shield. The Alpha Xi Delta arms show a bar as the principle charge. Since a bar is horizontal, there is no such thing as a bar sinister.

Thanks for saying one of your favorites is the Sig Kap crest :) as an FYI we dont have a crest. Sigma Kappa has a Coat of Arms which is pretty cool actually. Id post a picture but it wont work :( oh well!

At the risk of sounding pedantic (did I already pass that point a few posts ago?), Sigma Kappa does indeed have a crest -- it is a radiant dove:

http://www.geocities.com/sigkap_sdsu/images/coa.gif

Although in common usage, "crest" and "coat of arms" are often used interchangeably, they really are not the same thing. The crest is the top portion (i.e., "crest") of the coat of arms, derived from the decorative identifier that a knight might have worn on his helmet. Properly speaking, then, "crest" refers only to the top part, while "coat of arms" refers to the entire design. Some GLOs are more particular than others about correct use of the two terms.

thanks for posting a picture!!

BUT per Sigma kappa it is a Coat of Arms NOT a crest. per our National Website: 1911 Sigma Kappa coat-of-arms adopted. Some people refer to the sunlight and dove above the coat of arms as the 'crest' but technically the whole picture is our coat of arms. thats what we are taught and listed on our national website.

I think MysticCat81 was just trying to clarify that Sigma Kappa has a crest within its coat of arms.

Alpha Gamma Delta is very particular about calling it the Armorial Bearings--not a crest, not a coat of arms. Yes, we have a shield, a torse, a crest, a motto, but watch out if you call it a crest to an Alpha Gam's face! You will be politely corrected. ;)

Exactly. Heraldically speaking, "crest" and "coat of arms" (or "armorial bearings" ;) ) are not synonymous. The crest is the part of the coat of arms above the shield and helmet (if there is a helmet).

Again, exactly right -- the whole design is the coat of arms, and the dove with rays of light is the crest of that coat of arms. Those people who "refer to the sunlight and dove above the coat of arms as the 'crest'" are simply using the term "crest" correctly.

Yes i too am trying to politely correct the post by stating that we have a Coat of Arms NOT a crest. rRegardless how its interpreted to refer to it as a coat of arms is the only correct term. We do not use the term crest and it is not how SK refers to it.

As a side note its kinda irratating when a member of a GLO states how the GLO calls/refers/or has a certain policy others try to tell them they arewrong. I have seen it done to many different GLO members. When we say our certain GLO says/has something please believe us we are in the organization and we know our histtory/policy better than those not in that GLO.

I didn't mean to suggest that you or Sigma Kappa are wrong (nor do I think that I did suggest that -- in fact I think I suggested just the opposite), and I apologize if it came across that way. What I did suggest is that you/Sigma Kappa are using the term "coat of arms" correctly by not treating "crest" as synonymous with "coat of arms."

At the same time, I was also pointing out that, using heraldic terms properly, Sigma Kappa does indeed "have a crest" for the simple reason that a crest is a component of virtually all coats of arms, including Sigma Kappa's.

I applaud Sigma Kappa for instructing its members that it is not correct to call its amorial bearings a crest. It is a coat of arms -- a coat of arms that is comprised in traditional heraldic fashion of (using heraldic terms) a shield, a crest, and a motto.

Oh I know Im sorry If u thought or it sounded like I meant you :) I know what you were trying to say. (sorry If I was bitchy-ish)

I just meant that some times people correct others when they are not in that GLO and dont know that information (IE GLO specific)... and it gets annyoing to read it. (just an observation from this and other forums on here).

I see what doves95 is saying - that while the radiant dove may be the crest of the coat of arms, it's only a part of the whole, so it's always referred to as a coat of arms. If you called it the crest, you'd only be referring to the radiant dove part, so SK makes a point of calling it the coast of arms.

Like:
I have a foot with toes. The toes are a part of the foot, and do have their own name, but it's always called a foot. You'd never call the whole appendage (sp?) toes.

Did that make any sense?

And in defense of MysticCat - he is a wealth of interesting, if unusal, knowledge and it only trying to enlighten the rest of us to specifics. He means no harm! ;)

ETA: OK, my foot analogy took too long and you already straightened it out...Oh well!! :)

Hey MysticCat81 - clean out your PM box!

xo_kathy, you made my day . . . glad that even though it's "unusual" information you still find it interesting! :D

And no problem, doves95.

Done. Didn't realize it was full.

Nice way of saying it!!! I like the metaphor :) Ill have to use that to explain it to the new members and current ones who dnot quite get it...