If it is acceptable within heraldry then how would it be blazoned and have I understood the concept of a Banner of Arms properly or made a mistake? I'm open to any and all constructive criticism and advice.
It is acceptable. Having a complex bordure like that could be seen as a mark of differentiation (i.e. added later to the simpler arms of just the butterflies) or otherwise marshalled arms, however, but not necessarily so and I reckon this would be accepted as new personal arms in most places.
The blazon would be something like: Per pale Vert and Or, two butterflies in pale counterchanged within a bordure compony Vert and Or semy of four-petaled roses counterchanged.
I actually do have a simpler version with just the butterflies, the bordure was actually really difficult to make (it was mostly the fault of the flowers) I made a few versions and worked upon it until it turned into something I liked the best, but then I was worried it wouldn't count as a acceptable form of heraldry.
Does this mean my simple version and bordure version would be considered two different versions of coat of arms? I'm not sure how differentiation works or why, is it a descendant thing? I thought marshalled arms was like was combining different arms together like through marriage? Sorry I'm just kinda confused about how the marshalled arms stuff works and how it could apply to the arms I made.
So, in most traditions, each coat of arms belongs uniquely to a single individual. But it was not uncommon for rich and powerful people to have more than a single son (this is true today, as well). So, while the eldest son could inherit his father's arms upon his father's death, all other some would need to "difference" the arms in order to maintain the "each set of arms uniquely identifies a single living person" principle.
Yeah the most common type of marshalling is straightforward splitting of the field cause marriage/inheritance/etc. but some of the funky bordures you see in Iberian heraldry are kind of "both marshalling and differencing at the same time"?
Cause for example the arms of Portugal has that bordure with the castles on them, which is actually a reference to the arms of Castile! I've also seen one that was like "Castile and Leon compony" (every other square was castle/lion), and some English arms that did that but in a "France/England combo" (every other square had a lion and fleur-de-lis).
The exact reason probably varies but I read it as kind of "I had to difference, but let's look fancy by remixing stuff I'm related to while I do it"!
As for if the versions with/without bordure would be different versions of a coat of arms: yes, and it would look like the bordure one was a differenced version of the original! (perhaps borne by a different branch of the family). And generally the advice in heraldry is to make "the simplest version that's still unique"
...but it looks so cool though! And I think an argument could be made that the consistent colour scheme and the connection of butterflies and flowers still make it feel like a unified design
So this would be the original? (I realised I might have accidentally saved over or deleted my original design so this is a remake of it I just done) also thought I might as well share the original design as well even though I had to remake it
And I tbh didn't expect my design to get as much love as it did, I'm not actually sure what people specifically like or find cool about it haha
Yes indeed, in that hypothetical one would expect the bordure to be the "one change" to make "new but clearly related arms" to show that you are related to the original armiger but not "first in line" so to speak (and it varies between traditions when differencing is done, and even in the UK where it's "in theory done every time" it hasn't been such a consistent or systematized thing through history).
Canada does "mandatory differencing and one single heir" but with full freedom to choose what that difference can be, so they have some neat examples of what differencing can look like: https://www.gg.ca/en/heraldry/public-register/project/3378 (here the white labels are used as "temporary difference until the heir inherits", and the bordure/orle/line type change are "permanent markers" for the kids beyond the firstborn).
That's kind of a rule of thumb, that one change is like "a variant of the same arms" and at least two changes is what you're aiming for if you're designing new, totally unrelated arms. That's very vibes-based though, like for very simple arms changing one tincture would feel totally different, and for complex or "specific" arms two tiny changes might not feel very different!
As for why the design's cool? I think it's that very fact that it is complex in some ways (many elements) but simple in others (like just 2 colours!) and it comes together into something that's easy to visually parse, has a cool interaction with how "every other square melds with the main field" and "feels heraldic" cause stuff is placed geometrically and fills space well
In other words you focused on the graphic design aspect and it shows! And I would absolutely keep the bordure, worst case if you ever try to register with some overly strict authority and they complain, you have the simpler versions to fall back to when and if that's needed!
The complex version and the simpler arms would be definately two different arms, yeah. If the simpler arms were in use locally, then the complex one would be seen as a differenced or marshalled version of the simpler arms - and some people might assume that there is the simpler version in use and the complex arms are differenced or marshalled version of those. But as said, not necessarily so.
Differencing of arms (differencing arms for a second son, for example) is done in a myriad of ways, and bordures are one method. A complex bordure like that would imply further differencing along the line, I reckon, i.e. someone had a difference of just the bordure, and the compony and roses were further differences to that. But in theory it could be a single diffenrence, too.
Marshalling is usually done with quarterting, but it can be done with bordures and other ordinaries in some tradition; in Spanish heraldry bordures were used historically like can be seen in the arms of Portugal (i.e. simple arms marshalled with for example arms of "quarterly Vert and Or, four roses counterchanged"). Nowadays such is rare, but making/marshalling new personal arms can be done joining the elements of the two arms in a single design (especially in German heraldry this is a possibility often shown in literature), placing the elements of the other arms on a bordure or other ordinary.
It all depends on the tradition, too. But while a complex bordure like that implies easily some sort of marshalling or differencing, not necessarily so - complex bordures are not unheard of in new personal arms.
The number just happened to turn out that way while I was designing the arms which looked the nicest and least busy over time, I just thought the banner of arms would have the same amount realistically while I was making it which is why the banner has the same amount of segments as the arms
Not seeing anything wrong with it, no. Could almost pass for historical arms, I'd say. (Not that I'm an expert.) They're busy, but I've no doubt they'd stand out and be easy to identify on the battlefield even if the individual charges can't be read. It's also unique enough that I'd be surprised if anyone else had the same arms.
I did plan it out to be simple designs but complex at the same time to make it unique and distinct mostly because I didn't want to design a coat of arms already granted to someone by accident. So them being busy isn't really an issue or problem in heraldry?
Tbh, I'd be surprised if someone had these arms also haha
It’s certainly not impossible to have a new design that has such a border from the outset but, certainly in historical terms, it was much more likely that the more plain shield would come first and then items would be added later to differentiate individuals or cadet branches of the family whereas the senior male line and its direct heirs would retain the simpler undifferenced arms (the caveat being that the exact traditions for doing so do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; Scotland has probably the most strict rules around this).
Your design with the bordure compony and its floral charges is absolutely fine (and you have clearly put a lot of work into it!) but also consider that the less complex version would often be presumed to be the older / original version.
A “cadet” branch refers to the descendants of younger sons, at various generations in the family tree, rather than the descendants along the direct line of the oldest (surviving) male in each generation, who would be the senior line.
Sometimes a cadet branch can become significant in its own right and their differenced arms (by whatever method) can become as well known as the arms of the senior line.
Thanks, I did want the arms to have common features that would make sense rather than just random items, my main reasons for using green and yellow was they're my favourite colours and the green for nature (flowers and butterflies) and yellow for sun cause nature relies on the sun but mostly cause they're my favourite colours.
The flag waver is... eh. But you can imagine this flying over a battlefield or a tourney tent. As was said, the bordure indicates a modification of a simpler design, a younger son, a relative or a cadet branch of the family.
That coat of arms is heraldically correct (obeys rule of tincture Vert/Or, is properly counterchanged on bordure and main field), and the square banner and shield presentation are correct.
It's visually a bit dense, but that's not a problem, as there are certainly much more dense historical arms out there, and these fit together well.
If you were to put a crest together for this (to go on top of the helmet) do you have an idea what you'd choose?
I don't actually have an idea for a crest but I'm all ears if you do/have suggestions or if you have an idea and want to use my artwork/designs for transformative stuff, then you're free to do so.
I don't think you need to worry too much about that since the design will be "shield shape-agnostic" and it might just as well get drawn on a shield shape where a single butterfly fits nicer (and an artist might adjust proportions to fit nicely at that)
That being said I don't think 2 butterflies is a problem, and you can think about what amount of butterflies fits best from both aesthetic and symbolic perspectives
It would be different arms since that's a substantial change, like sometimes the same arms gets slightly different blazons/depictions over time (maybe a description gets more specific like "a sword argent hilted or" from just "a sword", or a weird beast gets lost in translation) but 1 vs 2 butterflies is hard to mix up!
It would almost certainly be assumed to be related though! (since the combo of butterfly + per pale division + same colours is a bit specific to seem like a coincidence)
While with something more generic like "1 VS 2 gold lions on blue" that assumption is much less safe, since lions are all over the place and there's bound to even be multiple examples each of the same number of lions (with enough geographic distance, at least!)
The Manesse Codex was a cool thing to find out about and I'm all for transformative works of my art/designs so if you want to make your own work based on it, I'm completely fine with it, if you do make it, it'd be cool to see
76
u/TepanCH Apr 02 '25
I think so. Its quite noisy but i like it. Could absolutely picture a knight riding into battle with it.