by Andreas Janek-Israel
my offers
my pictures & music
A few words about heraldry
Linguistically, the name "Wappen" (Englisch: “coat of arms”) goes back in the German language to the Middle High German word wapen, which originally referred to all the weapons of a knight. In addition to the sword, these weapons also included the shield as the most important defensive weapon. A conceptual separation between the weapon as an offensive fighting device and the shield as a defensive protective weapon only emerged in 16th century.
​
The Wappen (coat of arms) in the actual sense consists only of Wappenschild (heraldic shield), which has a symbol on it. Strictly speaking, the term "Wappenschild" (heraldic shield) is a duplication of the original term "Wappen" (coat of arms), which was also referred to as "Schilde" (shields), and the term "Schild" (shield) for the special defensive weapon. In Dutch and the Scandinavian-Germanic languages, whose heraldry is also more or less strongly influenced by German, this double name "Wappenschild"(this means:"blazon") is still used for coats of arms today, which is actually a more precise term than "Wappen".
However, due to the difference between the words "Wappen" (coat of arms) and "Waffen" (weapons), this is not perceived as disturbing in German. The English and French names for coats of arms also show that coats of arms do not simply mean weapons. The English name coat of arms refers quite poetically to the fact that it is a kind of coat for weapons, while the very precise French heraldic language uses blason specifically to mean the drawing on the coat of arms.​
Strictly speaking, the coat of arms itself - contrary to popular belief - regardless of its pictorial representation, consists solely of its "Blasonierung" (it means in German language blazon). A "Blasonierung" is the technical description of a coat of arms. The term is derived from the French word le blason, which translates as much as “the painting of the coat of arms”. The term "Blasonierung" (blason) describes exactly that what the implementation of a coat of arms on the heraldic shield is, again regardless of how this description is interpreted in the outline of the heraldic artist. Strictly speaking, this description is not a description of the coat of arms, but of the blazon.
In French the description of the coat of arms or better the blason is called blasonement, in English blazon. When a blazon is blazoned, i.e. described, one speaks of emblazon in English, whereas in French the relevant term is chanter les louganges, which quite flowerily refers to the singing of a coat of arms, similar to medieval courtley love.​
​
​
​
In both French and English there is a more precise term for the heraldic shield ("Wappenschild"), ecusson or escutcheon, from which the Spanish term for the coat of arms, escudo, is derived. This clearly shows that the image on the heraldic shield exists and endures independently of it and that the different forms of the shield, subject to the customs of the time, have no effect on the coat of arms itself. Whether shown in a round shield, a half-round shield, a pointed shield, a full coat of arms or achievement (ceremonial coat of arms); the coat of arms itself remains unaffected.
Since the heraldic shield and the signs and symbols on it are the actual coat of arms, the charges (coat of arms images) should also be mentioned here. A distinction is made between herald pieces, herald images (ordinaries) and shield figures, which are also referred to as shield figures. Shield figures include all objects or living beings.​​​
Herald pieces and herald images are areas on the heraldic shield created through cuts based on geometric structures. The difference between a herald's piece and a herald's picture is not particularly great and is often a cause for confusion and falsification of coats of arms. It is not even mentioned in many standard heraldic works.
​​
​
​
While a herald's piece refers to areas delimited from one another by various tinctures, a herald's picture is a figure created by the division or divisions of the shield. ​​There are also sub-herald images (subordinaries), which, to put it somewhat casually, are herald images that are too small.​​​
​
There are heraldic rules for the creation of coats of arms, the most important of which were established very early on and which have proven to be comparatively stable. Regulations added later rarely served to improve the representation of coats of arms or to provide a clearer description. One of the most important rules in a very short and concise manner is that coats of arms should consist of an abstraction that is at the same time sufficiently objective and authoritatively describable. With this one the space of the sign or field should be filled as much as possible, almost to the edge.
Another imperative is to always limit yourself to the essentials. As well as the shield figures are highly stylized, the entire shield should always be clear and understandable at first glance. Colour nuances are not permitted. The coat of arms must always consist of full colours, the number of which is fundamentally limited and which cannot be specified normatively. For example, red is always red and never crimson, vermilion or even Pantone 185.
​
​
​
Regarding the tincture - as the colour of the coat of arms is called, there are two metals, namely gold and silver, which can also be referred to as yellow and white. The colours red, black, blue, green and purple are also used. Other colours are not permitted - apart from skin color for human figures. Another tincture are fur works such as ermine or feh, which were originally skins attached to the shield, which were and are later depicted with fixed patterns.
​
​
The important heraldic rule applies to tinctures that colour must not border on colour and metal must not border on metal. For example, a black eagle (colour) on a gold shield (metal) is in accordance with the rules, but a gold eagle (metal) on silver (metal) or a black eagle (colour) on red (colour) is against the rules. This rule does not apply to fur works. It may border on colour, metal and also other fur.
​
​
​ Contrary to popular belief, everyone is entitled to use their own coat of arms. In practice, due to a lack of heraldic knowledge, there are often irregular coats of arms even among municipal coats of arms. And even some states, such as Albania, use a coat of arms that is inadmissible from a heraldic perspective. If you want to get a coat of arms, you should seek the help of a heraldist who is familiar with the heraldic rules. I would be happy to help you with this.​