The Grand Unified Flag/Shield Mod 1.0

[unmerged(8523)]

zollflagge?

http://anthos.botanik.biologie.tu-muenchen.de/~mevs/rusflag.html

what does 'zollflagge' mean? that's the flag they used for pskov; speaking of which: the webmaster of the one russian site didn't know, and sent me a link to another. i quess it'll a couple more days until i get any info on pskov's flag...

steph

 

[Leprechaun]

Hmmm

Zoll = toll / duty / customs
Flagge = flag

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by Walter Hawkwood


So I say. White-on-red version just didn't look good, as historic as it might be. So maybe this one could work out better. As for cossack flags (though modern) see http://anthos.botanik.biologie.tu-muenchen.de/~mevs/rusflag.html , the bottom of the page.

As someone said, that could be the source for the current Paradox Ukraine shield and flag. I've always wondered about that.

I really don't think any of the Cossack flags shown would work, however. Cossacks are not an exclusively Ukrainian group - there are Russian Cossacks, and these apear to be some of their flags.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy

I really don't think any of the Cossack flags shown would work, however. Cossacks are not an exclusively Ukrainian group - there are Russian Cossacks, and these apear to be some of their flags.

Not quite so. Cossacks never were a settled people. Except for Zaporozhye, most other cossacks now live in Russia, while earlier they could easily form a backbone of "Ukrainian" state. Ukraine in period covered is eccentially either a cossack state, or an entity formed around Kiev. In first case, any cossack symbolic would do (my personal favorite - Black Sea group), because it would only serve to represent never documented, ever-changing cossack symbolics, and in second archangel Michael is the most appropriate symbol.

 

[Mjuice]

I was wondering what is the reasoning on the shield you have used for Finland, as it is merely the arms of the province of Finland Proper (or Varsinais-Suomi or Egentliga Finland) and not of the whole country.

The current coat of arms of Finland (the lion with sword) date from the 16th century, so I should think that is what should be used.

info: http://virtual.finland.fi/finfo/english/vaakeng.html

and btw, you guys are doing some really great work here
All the new Turkish minor flags and shields were great... finally don't have look at those dreadful black/grey things

 

[Aetius]

It would be nice if you redid the Murghals and the Uzbekhs, both of them are a bit "off" centre, for a lack of better term. The Murghal shield is too far to the rightand the Uzhbekh shield is too far to the left...

 

[Birger]

Originally posted by Mjuice
I was wondering what is the reasoning on the shield you have used for Finland, as it is merely the arms of the province of Finland Proper (or Varsinais-Suomi or Egentliga Finland) and not of the whole country.

The current coat of arms of Finland (the lion with sword) date from the 16th century, so I should think that is what should be used.

info: http://virtual.finland.fi/finfo/english/vaakeng.html

...

Something like this then?

Finland

 

[unmerged(6491)]

good work on the GUFSM!

 

[unmerged(8523)]

re: pskov

i e-mailed the same webmaster birger did to find out any info on pskov's flag; he referred me to another russian scholar who said...

...he didn't know:

Hello, Stephanos
I think, Pskov have no flag in medieval era.
We know about Pskov`s seals only (seal with the animal looks like a tiger).

Military units of Pskov may be had flags in the past... But nobody know it.
Victor

so there you have it; i guess the best thing for now is for birger to make a flag based on his shield.

steph

 

[unmerged(8523)]

birger...

good catch on putting armenia minor's quarter diagonal from luxemburg's in cyprus' avatar instead of underneath like in the original...

 

[unmerged(9884)]

Thanks Korath

Kudos to you sir and your outstanding coordination of this flag project. You and your crew have done an admirable and albeit tough job of tackling and fixing the flag innacurracies that were endemic to EU2.
Folks....its an easy conversion. DL that file directly into to your EU2 main directory.....double click it and say yes to all. Poof! New flag and shield graphics!


Thnx guys!

 

[Mjuice]

Originally posted by Birger Jarl


Something like this then?

Finland

Yes that is what I meant. Actually I have been using it all the time having found it on your site. My point is that it should also be used it in GUFSM in place of the Finland-Proper arms.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by Walter Hawkwood


Not quite so. Cossacks never were a settled people. Except for Zaporozhye, most other cossacks now live in Russia, while earlier they could easily form a backbone of "Ukrainian" state. Ukraine in period covered is eccentially either a cossack state, or an entity formed around Kiev. In first case, any cossack symbolic would do (my personal favorite - Black Sea group), because it would only serve to represent never documented, ever-changing cossack symbolics, and in second archangel Michael is the most appropriate symbol.

You have a bit of a mis-understanding as to the Cossacks. Cossacks were not an ethnic group - they were more a class of people. Ethnically, Cossacks were Ukrainians, Turks, Russians, Poles, and others.

The Hetmanate, that revolted from Poland under Khmelnytsky and joined up with Russia, was however an ethnically Ukrainian state. During the initial revolt there were many calls for the hetmanate to encompas all Ukrainian speaking peoples. And the hetmanate, which is in the 1700 Scenario, is that particular Ukrainian proto-state.

So, I think we have to use a specifically Ukrainian cossack symbol. If we are unable to find one I'd suggest reverting to the 19th century trident and blue and gold flag.

 

[unmerged(8523)]

good idea?

korath, wouldn't your 'aragon-sicile' be the best choice for aragon? after all, those are the arms that were quartered with castile-leon's in spain's new arms...

 

[unmerged(7398)]

The only info I've found on the net seems to indicate Province's current graphics (or, four pallets gules) should be used.

Txini (who originally requested the Aragon-Sicile shield) sent me a shield and flag for Aragon with the St. George cross (below), but said there was an error in one of them, without specifying what it was, and that he'd be away for three weeks. Augh. If I had to guess, I'd think it would be the flag's stripes (four red three gold, instead of four red five gold), but I strongly dislike guessing.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy


You have a bit of a mis-understanding as to the Cossacks. Cossacks were not an ethnic group - they were more a class of people. Ethnically, Cossacks were Ukrainians, Turks, Russians, Poles, and others.

The Hetmanate, that revolted from Poland under Khmelnytsky and joined up with Russia, was however an ethnically Ukrainian state. During the initial revolt there were many calls for the hetmanate to encompas all Ukrainian speaking peoples. And the hetmanate, which is in the 1700 Scenario, is that particular Ukrainian proto-state.

So, I think we have to use a specifically Ukrainian cossack symbol. If we are unable to find one I'd suggest reverting to the 19th century trident and blue and gold flag.

Yes, that IS what I meant. Cossack as ethnic group were the ones who had most chances to form a state in the Ukrainian region, though Hetmanate has little to do with them. But before the time, we have no chances of such a Hetman state appearing. So "Ukraine" as it is meant earlier (don't tell me you never got Ukraine split from Golden Horde in late XV century) would be a cossack entity (remember Razin, for example). Anyway, as a symbol for Ukraine in all its possible diversity, I find the trident most universal and therefore most acceptible.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by Walter Hawkwood


Yes, that IS what I meant. Cossack as ethnic group were the ones who had most chances to form a state in the Ukrainian region, though Hetmanate has little to do with them. But before the time, we have no chances of such a Hetman state appearing. So "Ukraine" as it is meant earlier (don't tell me you never got Ukraine split from Golden Horde in late XV century) would be a cossack entity (remember Razin, for example). Anyway, as a symbol for Ukraine in all its possible diversity, I find the trident most universal and therefore most acceptible.

Sounds like we're in more agreement than I thought.

I get Ukraine to form from the GH in the 15th century every time. It really bugs me. I'd almost advocate putting a startdate on Ukraine as a revolter. The only thing making me a bit reluctant is that I think it was theoretically possible for a proto-Ukraine to form from revolts in the Golden Horde. I suppose I'd prefer to see the GH be a bit better at fighting rebels.

But there's no way of getting around the fact that the tryzub is a 19th century creation. Unless we can find some proof of its earlier use, I think we have to look at a different symbol.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Originally posted by BarristerBoy

But there's no way of getting around the fact that the tryzub is a 19th century creation. Unless we can find some proof of its earlier use, I think we have to look at a different symbol.

Well, actually, it is a VERY old symbol, dating back to the times of Kievan Rus. It was used by Rurik, and so it is the oldest symbol of Ukraine available. It was only re-adopted in the 19th century, as it could be any other time when one would need to appeal to people's patriotic senses, to remind them of their history. I see the tryzub as the only possible symbol of a true Ukraine, a state that outlived its birth, and is in need of permanent symbolics (the historical one didn't exist long enough to need one).

 

[Mad King James]

Actually the tryzub is REALLY freakin old, it's the Tamga of the Ruthenians, and is older than Christianity and Islam combined...

 

[unmerged(5664)]

But that's the problem, isn't it. It pre-dates the EU2 period until it was revived by 19th century nationalists.

Or is there any significant use in 1419-1820?