Opinions on "redo" and blazoning

[keschrich]

Hi all,

Many years ago (probably before I was born), my grandfather went to the Bavarian Forest region of Germany to do some genealogy research and came across someone with a coat of arms for our family.   My grandfather traced the coat of arms and brought it home. Over time the drawing has faded, so at one point maybe about 10 years ago I scanned it and recolored it on the computer.



I've been playing with Inkscape and figured I'd try my hand at remaking the coat of arms in vector format. I exported the attached PNG. Any feedback on the redo?



While doing this, I was reading into blazoning a bit. Does the following seem accurate?:
Per fesse Bisque and chequy Or and Azure, a lion Or in chief. Upon a helmet mantled Azure doubled Or, a cubit arm proper holding an arrow Sable pointed downward.

Thanks!
Ken

[Kiltpin]

While doing this, I was reading into blazoning a bit. Does the following seem accurate?:
Per fesse Bisque and chequy Or and Azure, a lion Or in chief. Upon a helmet mantled Azure doubled Or, a cubit arm proper holding an arrow Sable pointed downward.

Thanks!
Ken

Well in a word, no.

1 - The problem is "Bisque" - that is not an heraldic colour in any heraldic authority. The Germans had at least 3 different shades of grey - Ashengrau (very light grey), Eisengrau (looks like steel, darker than Ashengrau) and Feldgrau (dark grey with elements of brown).

2 - The default position for a lion is rampant and should be stated as such.

3 - The helmet doesn't matter, it is the torse which should be mentioned and drawn.

As a holding word, I will use Grau and would blason it -

Per fess Grau a lion rampant Or and chequy Or and Azure. For crest above a torse of Or and Azure and mantling of the same a cubit arm Proper grasping an arrow point downwards to dexter Sable.
As an aside, the continentals were less precise with their blasoning "an arm" would have done for them.

Regards 

Chas

[Mart 'n' Al]

I'm not an expert but bisque was a new one on me, I'd never actually come across a secondary tincture.  See:

https://drawshield.net/user-guide/blazon-reference/tinctures.html

Martin

[keschrich]

I'm not an expert but bisque was a new one on me, I'd never actually come across a secondary tincture.  See:

https://drawshield.net/user-guide/blazon-reference/tinctures.html

Martin

And you've called me out where I did take a bit of license

I actually got Bisque from the graphic thats on that page you've linked. In the original drawing, the top half of the field isn't colored- the tannish color is the color of the paper it was drawn on. From what I understand, that would imply Argent, but then the lion would be Or on Argent which is a no no.

[keschrich]

While doing this, I was reading into blazoning a bit. Does the following seem accurate?:
Per fesse Bisque and chequy Or and Azure, a lion Or in chief. Upon a helmet mantled Azure doubled Or, a cubit arm proper holding an arrow Sable pointed downward.

Thanks!
Ken

Well in a word, no.

1 - The problem is "Bisque" - that is not an heraldic colour in any heraldic authority. The Germans had at least 3 different shades of grey - Ashengrau (very light grey), Eisengrau (looks like steel, darker than Ashengrau) and Feldgrau (dark grey with elements of brown).

2 - The default position for a lion is rampant and should be stated as such.

3 - The helmet doesn't matter, it is the torse which should be mentioned and drawn.

As a holding word, I will use Grau and would blason it -

Per fess Grau a lion rampant Or and chequy Or and Azure. For crest above a torse of Or and Azure and mantling of the same a cubit arm Proper grasping an arrow point downwards to dexter Sable.
As an aside, the continentals were less precise with their blasoning "an arm" would have done for them.

Regards 

Chas

Hi Chas,

Thanks for that! I had difficulty finding examples of non-basic Blazon's, so I put it together as best I could.

I didn't find any mention of the various gray tintures in the resources I found.. Not knowing what color it should be (as I said, in the drawing it is just not colored), maybe I'll go with Ashengrau.

Regarding the lion, I had read that since rampant was the default position, it should not be mentioned? Similarly that dexter is the default and should not be mentioned either. Is that not the case?

Also on the lion, one resource said the default for teeth and claws was the same as the color of the base animal, and should only be mentioned otherwise. Another resource (I think the Candian Heraldry Society) said the default for teeth and claws was Gules and should only be mentioned otherwise...

Thanks!

[Kiltpin]

Following on - 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say. Heraldry, like many things, went through a nadir when the artistry was BAD. 

Unfortunately they also produced many books and people today think that their bad artistry is the way forward. It is not, but there is a lot of it. 

The torse should be in contact with the helmet at all points - it should not look like a frisbee.

Most crests are drawn far, far too small. The most pleasing ratio is 1:1:1. That is to say, the shield, helm and crest should roughly be the same size (height). 

Mantling - I prefer a simpler style. The Germans went in for great slashing and tearing of the mantling. Your choice, but don't let it overpower the shield. 

May I also suggest a pot helm, or great helm. Simple classic styling. 

Please don't get dejected by my comments, we are all "experts" and all have our own precious opinions. 

Regards 

Chas

[Kiltpin]

Hi Chas,

Thanks for that! I had difficulty finding examples of non-basic Blazon's, so I put it together as best I could.

I didn't find any mention of the various gray tintures in the resources I found.. Not knowing what color it should be (as I said, in the drawing it is just not colored), maybe I'll go with Ashengrau.

Regarding the lion, I had read that since rampant was the default position, it should not be mentioned? Similarly that dexter is the default and should not be mentioned either. Is that not the case?

Also on the lion, one resource said the default for teeth and claws was the same as the color of the base animal, and should only be mentioned otherwise. Another resource (I think the Candian Heraldry Society) said the default for teeth and claws was Gules and should only be mentioned otherwise...

Thanks!

Hi Ken, 

Yes, you are quite right - but - I always put them in. As I say, continental heraldry leaves most of that out. It matters not, as long as the blason is consistent. 

Each heraldic authority is different (try and get your head round the horrors of Canadian cadency) and the rules they set themselves are different as well. 

So many of the lesser tinctures have gone out of fashion, or were never used in this country, so it is nice to see them resurrected now and again. 

I have some armorials and ordinaries about German heraldry. I will look them up tomorrow and see if I can't find a blason in German. 

Regards 

Chas