Talk:Armorial of the Holy Roman Empire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Armorial of the Holy Roman Empire is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| List | This article has been rated as list-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). |
Taken from fr:Armorial du Saint-Empire. The French are great. I'd like to convert all the images to SVG format and provide blazons in the second column. Help would be appreciated. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 02:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A better source would be nice
Surely there must be a better source than the page indicated. A self-proclaimed "Imperial College of Arms" of a state that hasn't existed for 200 years, with a postal address in (of all places) Middlesex, England, and which claims that it has the leading royalty of Europe as honorary members, but begs for donations at the same time. Such homebrew cannot qualify as a reliable source. Valentinian T / C 00:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- Agree. It's better than nothing, though. I took this page from the French, and they didn't supply any sources at all. I would greatly appreciate it if somebody looked for another one. I've been concentrating on completing what we have, but you're completely right. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 06:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- You might find this interesting. [1] It is a digitized version of a 16th century armorial. Unfortunately, the original doesn't seem to be organized very rationally. Interestingly, this volume also includes a number of foreign arms, but those aren't all kosher. At least not the Scandinavian ones. 83.89.43.14 (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed an unreliable source and it should be removed. It's blazoning for Luxembourg is incorrect and might very well be based on wikipedia itself (circular reference).--Caranorn (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] base arms for the HRE
hello ipankonin. as i understand you created most of the coats of arms on wikipedia, and fantastic job to you. regarding the base HRE one (ie the double headed eagle on gold shiled, excuse the lack of professional terms) would it be correct to inlcude crowns and perhaps a papal crown as per http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Virgil_Solis_HWG_Wappen_des_HRR_mit_Putti.jpg or would that be wrong? cheers 04:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)deguerra
- It's hard to tell from an image. That might just be the artist's styling, but it might be right. If we had a blazon from a more reliable source, I would say definitely yes or no. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 07:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Also, you give me far too much credit. I've done about 200 images. That's a lot, but there's many, many more than that. Most of the time, there was already an image there, and I just made an SVG version based on that image, so it's kind of misleading when you see my name on all of them. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 08:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Blazonning
I notice some of these coats of arms show differences between the blazonning and the images. In at least some cases I know the images to be correct. Therefore should I go and correct our blazonnings? For instance many eagles are clearly beaked, langued and membered in tinctures differing from their bodies, yet they are often not blazonned. And yes, I'm aware that in many cases these differences have no heraldic meaning and are/were instead just a matter of artistic taste and fashion (certainly in early heraldry). We should also try to find a better source so we can remove that supposed Imperial College... Though I won't have time for the sourcing for a few more weeks (my Luxembourgish Armorial is almost nearing graphic completion).--Caranorn (talk) 22:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
