Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

inaccurate graphics

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Originally posted by Korath
While Croatia's arms may indeed have had both, the language used is quite precise as to which color is placed in the upper left - always the first. ("Chequy of argent and gules" says nothing about how many checks, but white is always in the honor point.)
Click to expand...

thanks korath, i didn't know about the honor point (which is why it's always good to have someone around who knows more than i do :))

i was going to suggest maybe some kind of singular situation in croatia in which the rules on this were bent, but looking at the original correspondence i see that croatia's arms were alternately listed as chequy of gules and argent...


hi,

i had a question regarding croatia's arms that i hope you could answer. on at least two other sites, heraldica.org being one, i see the medieval arms of croatia being a red and white chequy, but in particular 5 columns across and 6 rows down, starting with a white square in the viewer's top left. on most other sites, like flags of the world, i'll see a chequy of 5 x 5, starting with a red square in the top left... it seems like sometime in the 1600's (just to pick a number) the arms changed from 5 x 6 to 5 x 5 - i was wondering if you could tell me if that really is the case, and if so, what year the change occurred.

****

Hello,

Regarding the number of cheques in the Croatian chequy shield one has to consider that the herladic blazon of that arms is simply "chequy gules and argent" (in English, that is). The heraldic "theory" does not give any importance to the number of cheques, nither to the "starting colour" (colour of the "first" cheque). In ancient sources, one can find the representation of
the Croatian coat of arms with 3x4, 3x5, 4x5, 5x5, 5x6 and probably others, too (even 8x8 in a seal of a most important document, accepting the Habsburgs for Croatian kings). The first cheqes was different, too. Only in rather recent history the 5x5 was settled finally. I wouldn't know what the date would be (it would be difficult to give any exact date, anyway). By 18th century 5x5 prevailed for sure, and since 1848 there is no doubt about it. The starting colour was not stablized until much longer. The combined COA of three kingdoms (Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia) that was used almost always since 1848 (until 1920's) preffered the first white cheque, which was explained as more convinient design when COAs are combined, while when
the chequy COA was shown alone, the red was preffered, for better "outlining". However, it seemed of little importance. The kingdom of Yugoslavia retained white cheque in the new combined arms, but red was used in cases when chequy shield was alone (as for the Bannate of Croatia formed in 1939). The Ustasha movement and axis Croatia in WWII used COA with white first cheque. Socialist Croatia reverted back to red cheque
first, and this was also adopted in the modern Croatian COA.

Hope this helps. Cordially,

Zeljko Heimer

steph
 
Originally posted by stephanos

Dyou have any way to tell if this was the norm or not in the west? is this what you meant about the arms being "simplified"? (due to the number of panes not being the same...? i learned while talking to the webmaster of flags and arms of the modern era that unless a number is specifically given, chequy can mean any number of panes; consider croatia - in the eu timeframe it can 3x3, 3x4, 4x4, 4x5, 5x5, etc. up to 8x8 or so with either color in the top left :))

...or is there an example of arms being (grossly) simplified?

stephanos
Click to expand...

It was certainly the norm from the twelth century onwards at the least... when i say simplified i mean the seal seems to be a "basic" version of the actual shield.

I have other far more simplified examples, however the link is the same and the similarities obvious.

Do you have an example of a byzantine seal?
 
Originally posted by Languish


Do you have an example of a byzantine seal?
Click to expand...

nothing other than the text at heraldica.org stating that the seals were usually personal and iconographic in nature, depicting the cross, the virgin mary, etc. many familial arms of course portray the cross, but none so far depict mary, and only one depicts angels (the arms of the angeloi, go figure :)) most call for a variation on the eagle theme.

about georgia:

i wish i knew enough about the arms of georgia to say whether or not an image is inaccurate; i'm going to list the suppositions i've used thus far:

the pages of international civic arms, which had arms for georgian provinces or towns (i forget), but not georgia herself, listed arms that incorporated saint george killing the dragon in some fashion. the shading suggested that the field was silver, and saint george faced right. (orthodox icons show saint george facing right when killing the dragon as well.)

that seemed to be in accord with a statement on flags of the world, which said the arms of georgia during the time period we're interested in was probably saint george killing a dragon on white. (the direction faced not given.)

the first image i used to make georgia was a muscowy without a red field; the one i just made was based on an image from a greek icon. i learned in the case of muscowy at least, that the colors of the cape (indeed if there is one), the horse, and the dragon have some significance. i used different colors from one to the other, but i have no way to know what is right or wrong in that respect.

about serbia:

my curiosity was piqued while flipping through a website devoted to serbian history. i'm e-mailing people still, but so far it looks like serbia should just be a white, double-headed eagle on red (the arms of the nemanjic family, of which stephen dushan is the most famous member), or maybe red on yellow. the arms-as-escutcheon (the white cross, four ocila on red) may not date from that time period in that color scheme, and it's looking like it wasn't even put on the white eagle until much later, not sure. i'll let you know when people write me back.

stephanos
 
Here are some info about Serbia Steph.

http://www.njegos.org/symbols/symbols.htm

Quote from the site:

"Double-headed eagle, the coat of arms of medieval Serb Empire, was accepted by the Crnojevics, the rulers of Zeta, the last free Serb medieval state, which fell under the Turks in 1499.

Double-headed eagle was always, even under the Turkish and Austro-Hungarian slavery, the symbol of Serb nation. It was natural that Nemanjics' coat of arms should be the Serb state symbol, the coat of arms of modern Serb states, Serbia and Montenegro.
One of the symbols used by Serb Emperor, Uros Nemanjic, was - the lion. The lion was also, very often, used by Serb medieval landed gentry as well as on the Serb coins".

Image found here: http://www.kosovo.com/default3.html

orlovi.jpg
 
I've done some additional research about Wallachia, I haven't found much, it seems that there's not much info on the web.
I thought I should check with you guys first. :)

The thing is I think that Wallachias coat of arms were only a eagle holding a cross.

Check out these links, (not the best pics):

http://www.bl.uk/collections/easteuropean/romanian.html

http://www.culture.gr/2/21/218/218dp/00/l16-16.html


Every site that I've looked a states the following about Romania's CoA:

"After 1859 (when Wallachia and Moldavia united into one state) the question of a representative coat of arms arose.
In 1863 the solution was found of joining the ancient, traditional symbols of Wallachia (the golden eagle with cross)
and Moldavia (the auroch with a star between its horns). Later (1872),
Romania’s heraldry commission proposed a synthetic coat of arms that combined the traditional symbols of all
the Romanian provinces: Wallachia, Moldavia, Bukovina, Transylvania, Maramures, Crisana, Banat and Oltenia".

/BJ
 
About Georgia. FOT states the following: (http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/ge-feud.html)

"Georgian state (V-XVth century)
White field with an emblem, probably Saint George killing the dragon.

Georgians do not call themselves Georgians but Kartvelebi and their land Sakartvelo, These names are derived from a pagan god called Kartlos, said to be the father of all Georgians.
The foreign name Georgia, used throughout Western Europe, is mistakenly believed to come from the country's patron saint, St. George. Actually it is derived from the names Kurj or Gurj, by which they are known to the Arabs and modern Persians. Another theory purports that the name comes from the Greek geo (earth), because when the Greeks came to Georgia they saw the Georgians working the land. The Classical world knew the inhabitants of eastern Georgia as Iberians, thus confusing the geographers of antiquity who thought this name applied only to the inhabitants of Spain.

Source: Rosen & Foxx The Georgian Republic, 1992"


The shield that I've done for Georgia is based on this pic
1.jpg

that I found here: Georgian Flags and Emblems



In 1491 the Kingdom of Georgia was divided into these three Kingdoms:

Imerti
11.jpg


Kakheti
2.jpg


Kartli
12.jpg
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Birger Jarl

orlovi.jpg
Click to expand...

thanks, birger :)
that's in accord with what i read here; you can flip through one family to the next by clicking on their names on the right. i got the impression that the arms should just be a white eagle on red, then. if you look at the arms of the mrnjavcevic family, you'll see the motif borne on the modern arms, but not the color scheme. being the obsessive person i am, i wrote the webmaster, but he hasn't written back yet. i got the idea that the flag at least should be a red eagle on yellow from references to catalan maps of the 1300's.

that would be a great image to make a shield set from; i was also thinking of using frederick ii's and changing the colors... i might be able to lift the image from the nemanjic coat of arms; i'm not sure how well i'd do.

*****

georgian flags and emblems is a hard nut to crack... the image of saint george obviously faces left; but if you look on the flag animation, the flag of the georgian state v-xv has him facing right. this could mean:

he faces one direction for arms, another for flags; or

in accordance with orthodox tradition he faced right, then about the time of the russian reform he was made to face left for the georgians as well; or

he's done a "left; left, right, left" (sorry, couldn't resist :)); or

the flag is in error...

i've written the webmaster to see what info he can give; in the meantime, here's international civic heraldry so you can click on "georgia" to see what my suppositions were based on.

steph
 
Based on the pic I found and the coa of the Mrnjavcevic family, not much to work on but this is what I've managed to do. :)

SER.gif
SER1.gif
 
Originally posted by stephanos


i've written the webmaster to see what info he can give; in the meantime, here's international civic heraldry so you can click on "georgia" to see what my suppositions were based on.
Click to expand...

got a classic response:

the pictures were taken from an 18th century atlas. she doesn't know any of the details; she just scans pictures and posts images.

left me speechless :)
i wrote the webmaster of international civic heraldry to ask if he knew the age of the images he posted.

steph
 
alright birger :)

i wonder when the sun and moon were placed above the eagle's head, though... maybe it was just put on later depictions due to the influence of moldavia and siebenburgen?

*****

something's bugging me, though... the exact wording from flags of the world for the georgia v-xv is a white field with an emblem of saint george killing the dragon; the flag animation that accompanies the website you linked to shows a white flag with a dragon-killing george in a red circle. if saint george ends having to be on red for georgia too, i'm going to scream :eek:

the only thing i can do is wait for the webmaster of international civic heraldry to write back.

i hate waiting.

steph
 
Originally posted by Birger Jarl

Here's some additional info about the Byzantium flag Steph:

http://www.fotw.ca/flags/it-padan.html#rom
Click to expand...

the flag is turning out to defintely be as much of a bugger as the arms :(

i found out that gules, crusilly a cross between four annulets or is definitely the arms of the emperor/empire of constantinople during and after the courtenay family; earlier latin emperors used the lion of flanders, in the example of baldwin. the red and gold arms bear a superficial resemblance to the earlier arms of jerusalem, which according to the chronica majora started as or, crusilly a cross argent and then became argent, crusilly a cross or from which the familiar image of argent, a cross potent between four crosslets or is derived. the latin arms of constantinople also bear a superficial resemblance to the coat of armor of henri i according to one source, gules, a semy of crosses or

about the rest, my theory will probably have to shelved for the time being; the armorial universel calls the arms of the byzantine empire gules, an eagle displayed and crowed or, while another will list that as the arms of the emperor. similarly, heraldica.org calls gules, a cross between four b's or the arms of the empire, while yet another lists the same as those of the palaiologoi...

the flag takes a similar course. i was certain that there was a general flag; however it seems that there were "graded" flags and none of them could be seen as the empire's per se. consider the following from a private message:

Ok,maybe i wasnt that clear.
Both black on yellow and black on red patterns were used at the same time.The black -red was used by the emperor personally.The other one by anyone else.
That means,that when the emperor was -lets say-in Smyrna,the red banner was hoisted.The same goes with the 4B banner of the palaiologoi.It was used by the imperial family.
The rest of the empire mostly used the black-yellow banner and variations,not the red one.Everyone was lesser to the emperor.

the idea that the black on yellow was the empire's flag i think can now be explained as the flag flying over the residence of the governor of a theme or a high ranking church official, which would explain why it was seen in naples, for example. the rest of it i don't know, i can't think anymore :(

steph
 
serbia in ck and eu

got the response back from the webmaster of the serbian history page:

Thank you very much for your e-mail and interest you have shown both for the "Medieval Serbia" web site and Serbian history. I will try to answer some of your questions in relaton to the Serbian coat of arms.

Without any doubt, the two-headed eagle of the Nemanjics dynasty was taken from Byzantium - this symbol was used by high Byzantine officials and nobelty, they loved to have it on their clothes and arms. The Emperor used to have the eagle on his boots, tent, coat and other part of the clothes. With the high titles Serbian noblemen received from Byzantium, the two-headed eagle was also taken as the symbol of power and allegeance. From the 10th up to 13th century, the two-headed eagle was common on the clothes and arms of the ruler, particularly during the reign of Emperor Dusan the Mighty - it is believed that during this period, the two-headed eagle was finally regarded as the Serbian and Nemanjics' coat of arms. Map maker from Catalonia, A. Dulsert on its map of 1339 puts a banner with red two-headed eagle on a white field in Skopje, as the capital of Serbia during Emperor Dusan (1331-1355). The same symbol (just with the inverted color scheme, white eagle on a red field) can be seen in many medieval monasteries and churches on the clothes of royal family members. The one that can be seen on my web page is the scanned version of the eagle from the Noth side of the church bulit by Prince Lazar in Chilandar in 1380. The eagle on the shield of Nemanjics is a re-drawn version of the same eagle from a fresco painting in Monastery of Ljeviska's Madonna (1310) - above the eagle St. Sava, Stefan Nemanja and Stefan the First Crowned are painted, so it is obvious that at that time (1310) the two-headed eagle was considered to be their coat of arms. Later, the eagle can be seen on the seals of the Lazarevics family, who regarded themselves as the new rulers of Serbia and thus, taking the Serbian coat of arms.

Cross with the four ocila was known in medieval Serbia - in the church of Decani, many ornaments inside are rows of two-headed eagles and four ocilas (1397). The origin of this is very old. Byzntine royal family of Paleologists adopted the cross with the four B (beta) letters as their royal "flamoulon" (royal flag). The four Bs most likely stood for "VASILEUS, VASILEON, VASILEION, VASILEUSIN" (King of the kings has its kingdom over the kings). Something similar can be found on the coat of arms of the Mrnjavcevics family (as recorded in heraldic books in Italy in 15th and 16th century, even as the coat of arms for Serbia under the Turkish regime). The Obrenovics family are taking this symbol in 1819 as their own arms and arms of Serbia and in 1882 when Serbia was proclaimed to be Kingdom again, coat of arms is combined with the two-headed eagle and four ocilas. Eversince, it is the coat of arms of Serbia.

There were many variations of the Kotromanics coat of arms, so the thing that you saw may be one of them.

Thank you one more time for visiting my website, and I do hope that this e-mail helped you a little bit. If you have any other questions or just want to share something that may be interested in, do not hesitate to get in touch.

Efharisto,

Zeljko Jovanovic

birger, the bit about the kotromanic coat of arms is related to a question i asked about the gold border on bosnia, since he said every member of the family pretty much altered the arms a bit; so either way, with or without is probably correct :)

steph
 
just picked up a book from the bargain section at barnes and noble called lines of succession: heraldry of the royal families of europe; it goes by country showing the trees of rulers from medieval times to the present, placing underneath each their coat of arms whenever possible. i haven't gone through it in any great depth yet, but i've noticed a few things:

byzantium
they give the usual spiel about how byzantium didn't have heraldry as we know it, but that rollmakers would attribute arms that they thought were appropiate. the emperor or his immediate family have the golden, double-headed eagle on red underneath, while a cadet branch of the palaiologoi has the golden cross between four b's. this may go a long way in explaining why both blazons appear on the later arms of the gonzaga family of mantua.

austria
in later years: when someone's title is "arch-duke of austria", then only the habsburg/austria/lorraine shield is shown. when the title is "emperor of austria", the shield is placed on the black, double-headed eagle.

tver
walter hawkwood was probably right. the arms of mary, daughter of boris, grand-duke of tver were a white knight on a white horse with a golden saddle and reigns, brandishing a white sword behind him as he is trampling a black dragon. the rider faces right. mary was married to ivan iii, grand-duke of moscow in 1452.

stephanos
 
muscowy in ck and eu

lines of succession didn't have anything more to say about the arms of tver, but has an interesting theory as to the origin of muscowy's arms:

basil i married a lithuanian princess, and during his reign a mounted figure (a weaponless white knight atop a white horse with a golden saddle facing right) appears as the arms of the rulers of moscow for the first time. the arms may be based on hers.

his grandson, ivan iii, marries a byzantine princess (his second wife; the first was mary, mentioned above); the horseman is now seen destroying a monster. later generations were to associate the cavalier with saint george, but it is possible that the image is another importation from constantinople of an iconographic motif of the emperor striking down evil as a champion of christianity.

what do you guys think?

steph
 
I've done some more research, this time about Siebenbürgen (Transylvania) coat of arms.
The original arms should be a black eagel on blue, like the top of the present day arms. There's one problem, I don't when it dates back from or when the present day arms were first used...

I found a great site the other day, Blaeu Atlas, with maps over north-, central and eastern europe, however this site got some weird arms for Siebenbürgen. Any ideas? :confused:


transylvania-preview.jpg
 
i can't say that i've ever seen the three rhinoceros horns in reference to siebenburgen; the blue field & black eagle do sound familiar, but to be honest i haven't researched that area in any depth, yet.

believe it or not, those for hungary are somewhat consistent with what an acquaintance told me, however i have not been able to confirm it as i haven't been on the net or in the library. let's call the two sides (the one on your left) arpad, and the one on the right, the patriarchal cross:

first, the right side - the patriarchal, apostolic, or cross of lorraine comes either from the byzantine empire, circa 1190, or pope sylvester ii, circa 1000. the triple mound, representing three mountains (of which only one, i think, is still in hungary) came in use in the 14th century; i'm not sure when the crown was added, maybe in the 16th, but the the crown it represents was made in the 12th. this much i learned from international civic arms. according to the site, only this side was used in the middle ages, but by "middle ages" they mean the last two thirds of the ck timeframe, and only very little of eu's.

now, the arpad side - simply enough the arms of the first ruling family, the arpads, which were also the first arms of hungary; but on to what's not so simple: while i was with my acqaintance, we were talking about heraldry, and he drew a picture of the hungarian arms (he's part hungarian) - he made seven stripes, to which i replied that there should be eight. he said he didn't agree because the four white stripes were meant to represent rivers, whereas the total were meant to represent the seven tribes; the problem with that is, to have four white stripes and a total of seven means that the first must be white (see below). another, and more plausible explanation is given by histrorical text archive, which states that the seven tribes were represented by seven divisions of the field. (if you divide a field once, you get two stripes and so on, so seven divisons will give you eight.)

i have no idea when the total would have been augmented to eight, if his story is indeed true; one i thing i know for sure, though, is that the top stripe must always be red for this period. there are numerous examples (the walford's roll being one) of a white stripe on top, but i believe this to be an error deriving from a (french and english... or just english?) practice of always listing the metal first in a blazon (barry of eight, argent and gules places the white on top). when talking to the webmaster of flags and arms of the modern era, he referred to the arms as barry of eight, gules and argent, which is confirmed easily enough by pictures of the banner (from flags of the world):

hu-arpad.gif


(real pictures here; note another anomaly - those of flags 9, 10, and 11, which date from the 17th and 18th centuries, all of which have nine stripes... flag 11 even starts and ends on white.)

i'm not sure, but the blue field & black eagle may have something to do with the arms attributed to janos hunyadi, which were a black crow holding a silver ring in its beak on a blue field. (janos was ban of transylvania before becoming regent of hungary.)

steph
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back