|
Greetings,
Here's the information we have on your device ideas.
The hardest thing to explain about period armory is why some motifs were used and others weren't. We can offer some generalizations and theories which can be useful guides to designing your own arms, but sometimes we simply have to admit that we don't know. Medieval heraldic artists did some things and they didn't do other things, and that's all there is to it. In order to have a device that re-creates a medieval coat of arms, we have to do what they did do and avoid what they didn't do.
The members of the Academy have looked at thousands of medieval coats of arms, and based on our research and experience, we would say that your designs include some things that medieval heraldic designers didn't do. But the good news is that they did do some things that might capture the features you want in your arms.
In most medieval heraldry, each object tends to be drawn in the same way. Lions, roses, bridges, and other charges usually had some specific features that identified them as what they were. Bridges, for example, were drawn flat, running in a straight line from one side of the shield to the other. We can say that the "heraldic bridge" is drawn in this way.
However, we did find one exception. In the mid- to late 16th century, a small number of arms used images that were more realistic drawings of the objects they depicted. The arms of Anhalt (1) contain a bridge which is drawn to look like a realistic picture of a bridge. It's drawn in perspective, very much like the bridge you've drawn, but also has detailing, masonry lines, and so on.
So, we know that heraldic designers usually used flat pictures of bridges, and at least once used a three-dimensional representation of a bridge. We don't have any example of a medieval coat of arms that includes a silhouette or outline of a three-dimensional object.
Since you expressed interest in a more abstract design, we can suggest a more abstract design which is fairly close to your second device idea, and looks like this:
/W\
/WWW \
/ WWW W\
/ WWW W\ _ top
/WWWWWW WWW\ /|
/ WWW WWWWWWW\ /
/ WWW WWWWWWWWW \ bottom
/ WWWWWW WWWWWW/
/ WWW WWWWWWWWW/
/ WWW WWWWWWWW/
| WWWWWWW WWW/
| WWW WWWWWW
| WWW WWWWW/
| WWWWWWW /
| WWW W/
| WWW /
\ WWWWWW/
This design (which looks much like yours, but with shortened "supports") would be described as "Per bend argent and sable, a bend betressed counterchanged." I'll explain each phrase:
Per bend the background is divided diagonally
argent and sable, top right is white, bottom left is black
a bend a diagonal stripe
bretressed with embattlments on both sides, which line up,
counterchanged colored in the reverse of the background
(black where the background is white, white
where the background is black)
In medieval armory, when the field is divided and crossed by a counterchanged stripe, the stripe usually does not cover the division of the field. It is more common for the stripe to intersect the field division. If you want a more medieval device, you may want to put the bend on a field divided "per fess" (horizontally) or "per pale" (vertically).
I hope this is helpful. If there's anything else we can help you with, please let us know.
In service,
Alan Fairfax
Academy of S. Gabriel