On June 10, the world celebrates the International Day of Heraldry, which originated in Western Europe approximately between 1120 and 1150, and later grew into an extensive language of forms, colors and signs capable of articulating a whole layer of identity. Its appearance is associated with the development of chivalry, crusades and changes in military equipment. For modern Ukraine, heraldry is not a relic of the aristocratic past, and not a decorative decoration of official forms. It is a living fabric of a narrative in which every coat of arms, color stroke or graphic detail becomes an instrument of self-determination, a political statement, a reminder of the continuity of the struggle. From city coats of arms to the emblems of military units, heraldry today manifests itself as a historical tradition, as well as a means through which society articulates its meanings. And today we remember not only the past, but talk about our present, which is formed under the influence of symbols with a deep meaning.
How it all began
The word “heraldry” comes from the Latin word “heraldus”, which means “herald” or “herald”. This word refers to people who reported on signs, coats of arms and the rules for their use. The tradition of celebrating the International Day of Heraldry did not appear in the deep Middle Ages, as one might assume, but quite recently. This holiday was founded in 2013, choosing a symbolic historical event as a link to the date: on June 10, 1128, the English king Henry I Beauclerc presented his future son-in-law Geoffrey Plantagenet with a shield decorated with three pairs of golden lions during the knighthood ceremony. According to many historians, this gift was one of the first documented coats of arms in European history. In the 12th century, heraldry performed a purely practical function — recognizing allies in the chaos of battle. However, it gradually turned into a system with its own laws, aesthetics and even a language — a blouson (a special way of describing coats of arms that allows you to accurately convey their image in words – ed.).
As a rule, in the mass imagination, heraldry is associated with something exquisitely ritual or archaic – knights, dynasties, ancient shields. However, behind this visual language lies an extremely precise system of signs, restrictions and symbolic meanings. It not only has strict canons, but also serves as a kind of passport of belonging, identity and even political status. In coats of arms, every color, figure, line had and has its own meaning: from family origin to religious beliefs or territorial claims. And while we rarely think about these details today, they remain visual markers of historical memory and belonging.
Heraldic colors are divided into metals (gold — yellow, silver — white) and enamels (red, blue, black, green, purple). They cannot be mixed at will: for example, metal cannot be placed on metal, and enamel cannot be placed on enamel. In addition, coats of arms have a language: for example, a lion symbolizes courage and strength, an eagle – power, a lily – nobility, and a sword – military prowess. At the same time, the combination of symbols creates a complex narrative — the so-called heraldic legend. Women had their coats of arms, often with a rounded or rhombic shield, without a helmet — to distinguish female heraldry from military heraldry.
The forms of the shield also indicated geography: the French, Italian, Spanish, and German versions had different proportions. The helmet was not just an ornament, in fact, its position (in profile, full face, lowered or with the visor raised) testified to the rank of the owner. The decorations around the coat of arms — shields, tents, mantles — were strictly demarcated by status. There is even a heraldic “code” of gestures. For example, if the coat of arms shows a lion standing on its hind legs, then it symbolizes bravery. And the lying lion is the embodiment of peacefulness. In general, the symbolism of animals has a very deep meaning. It is not difficult to guess that the lion embodies the image of strength and power, the eagle symbolizes spiritual exaltation, and the wolf – loyalty, while the horse was a symbol of nobility and freedom. Dragons were depicted as a sign of protection or mighty power depending on the region. Coats of arms were worn not only by knights, but also by women. However, in them they were not on the shield, but on a diamond-shaped background and symbolized modesty.
Later, heraldry became the basis for vexillology, the science of flags. In many cases, the coat of arms itself was the basis for creating the flag of a city, state or dynasty. It survived kingdoms, wars, empires, then adapted, turning from knightly shields into city coats of arms, university emblems, and company logos.
Heraldry arose not as a decoration, but as a practical, strictly regulated tool, deeply connected with law. In the twelfth century, during the Crusades, the need for the recognition of a warrior in armor gave rise to the need for fixed signs on shields. Later, the coat of arms became a sign of heredity, feudal status, and the right to land. It is interesting that coats of arms did not arise spontaneously, they were provided by monarchs or heraldic colleges. Drawings were officially approved, and the coat of arms itself was considered a legal document included in the registers. Any unauthorized copying or use of the coat of arms was tantamount to forgery and could have legal consequences. For example, in France or England, such actions could result in the deprivation of a noble title.
It is important to know that it is impossible to create a coat of arms independently from a heraldic point of view. If it is not approved by the relevant institution or given by the monarch (in the historical context), then it will be perceived only as a conditional stylization. It is interesting that interest in heraldry has been growing in Ukraine in recent years. The search for local symbols, the creation of community coats of arms after decentralization, interest in family signs indicate that heraldry is not a dead discipline. It lives on while we look for visual ways to express who we are.
Ukrainian heraldry: lions, Cossacks and a little healthy chaos
Ukrainian heraldry is very interesting, because our history is not straight, but with turns, like the Carpathian road. In Europe, coats of arms began to appear in the 12th century, because knights had to somehow distinguish themselves on the battlefield. Ukrainian lands did not stand aside either. But there is a nuance: we were under the influence of several cultures at once – Russia, Lithuania, Poland, Crimea, and later – Austria-Hungary and the Russian Empire. As a result, our coats of arms looked like a mix of ideologies, styles and even alphabets. Let’s start with the trident. It was the sign of the Rurik princes, which Vladimir the Great minted on coins in the 10th century. But this is not yet a coat of arms in the classical sense. It is rather a personal symbol, like a signature or seal.
After the accession of the Ukrainian lands to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, classical heraldry appeared in the form of shields, colors, animals, helmets and eloquent mottos. The nobility had their own coats of arms, which often came from Polish or Lithuanian ones. For example, the “Chase” coat of arms with the image of a knight on a horse became popular among Ukrainian families as well. And then the Cossacks came and added a little wild spirit to heraldry. For example, the well-known coat of arms of the Zaporizhzhya Army with the image of a Cossack with a musket was simple, but very impressive and easily recognizable. This coat of arms, by the way, still lives today, becoming the basis of the emblem of the modern Ukrainian army.
The cities also had their coats of arms, such as Lviv has a coat of arms with the image of a lion coming out of the gate, which symbolizes strength and protection. The gate indicates the defensive functions of the city. The coat of arms of Kyiv depicts Archangel Michael with a sword. This is one of the few coats of arms with a religious image as the main symbol. The coat of arms of Kharkiv generally represents a real story, encrypted in colors and symbols, which tells about the spirit of the city, its past, present and even a little about the future. The green shield, which is the basis of the coat of arms, immediately catches the eye. The green color symbolizes not only life and youth, but also hints at the rich agricultural heritage of the Kharkiv Region. This color combines hope, development, the fresh breath of nature and fertile fields that fed the region from generation to generation.
In the center of the coat of arms is a real mythological mystery: a golden caduceus, the rod of Hermes. Two snakes coiled around a winged staff look like something from an ancient legend, but here they mean something very practical: trade, peace, wisdom and entrepreneurship. Everything that Kharkiv has always been famous for. This is a city where knowledge and business, intelligence and action combine. Nearby sat a cornucopia, filled with gifts of nature: fruits, ears of corn, symbols of generosity and well-being. It seems to be a hint that Kharkiv is not only smart and business-like, but also generous, open and fertile. The history of the coat of arms dates back to 1781, when Kharkiv received its first official symbol and became the center of the vicarage of the same name.
Of course, since then, the image has changed, adapted to different eras, but the modern version, approved in 1995, very well retains its historical significance. It seems to contain respect for the past and at the same time expresses a desire for the future. There is also a full version of the coat of arms with luxurious decorative elements. Here you can see an ear of corn, a gear, a book, which represent Kharkiv as a center of science, technology and education. Under the coat of arms is the motto: “With kindness to people.” This concise but profound phrase is the real credo of the city: live, create, develop always with an open heart.
In the heraldry of the USSR, gears, ears of corn, stars, sickles and hammers were depicted. The essence of such images was not in the nobility or history, but in the glorification of production and work. Some cities redesigned their coats of arms in an industrial style: a miner with a lamp, a blast furnace, a tractor. Common elements were used in the coats of arms of all the union republics of the USSR – a hammer and sickle, a red star (which appeared on the coat of arms of the RSFSR only in 1978), an image of the sun and an ear of corn. These symbols of communist ideology were complemented by images of agricultural products characteristic of each republic: cotton — in Central Asian countries, wheat — in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, grapes — in Moldova. An obligatory part of each coat of arms was the slogan With kindness to the people “Proletarians of all countries, unite!”, presented in two languages - the state language of the republic and Russian.
After independence, Ukraine returned to the emblem theme with new interest. Everyone knows very well since school days that our small coat of arms looks like a trident with the encrypted word “will”. But the great coat of arms is still in the process of being created. It has been discussed for 30 years and they have not yet agreed on what it should be. In independent Ukraine, coats of arms are approved by decisions of local councils or Presidential Decrees. But some coats of arms, as a rule, in urban communities, often contradict heraldic norms. Sometimes prohibited color combinations, disordered shapes, and random symbols may be used. In this case, not only the appearance of the coat of arms suffers, but in general, the meaning is lost.
For example, in many modern coats of arms of Ukrainian villages there are symbols that are of Soviet origin, or have no explanation at all. Modern emblems in the form of swallows, computers or wheat fields, which do not have the status of heraldic figures, are also added here. In fact, there are clear rules that cannot be violated if we are not talking about a “logo”, but about a coat of arms. Yes, it is not allowed to combine metal with metal or color with color. For example, red on blue will be a gross violation. It is not possible to use figures that do not exist in heraldry, as well as to “oversaturate” the coat of arms with elements. It is quite clear that you cannot copy other people’s coats of arms, even stylistically. All these rules are not accidental, because the coat of arms is an identification tool. If it is unclear, confusing, unreadable, or stylistically unstable, then it obviously does not fulfill its function. In the Middle Ages, it could cost a life.
Heraldry in military design
The symbolism of military units is never created in isolation. Even where it is designed as an independent visual system, it reflects the relationship with the space to which the unit belongs. In the emblems of the units – from the battalions of the Teroborona to individual brigades – details that cannot be invented on the same place are increasingly appearing: old coats of arms of cities, local animals, colors of ancient flags, or even images borrowed from regional seals of the 18th century. All this does not seem excessive or anachronistic. On the contrary, military heraldry, which focuses on the territorial, becomes a way to understand more precisely who we are, where we are from, and why exactly these images make sense now.
It should be noted that in NATO countries it is the territorial heraldry that underlies the symbolism of the ground forces, it determines its structure and serves as a starting point for the creation of sleeve emblems. A similar approach is characteristic of the Ukrainian army tradition: the use of coats of arms of cities and regions in the symbolism of military units has a long history, which dates back to the time of the Hetmanship.
Even in the second half of the 18th century, the Nizhyn regiment used the coat of arms of the city in its banners. At the same time, despite the lack of clear standardization, visual elements marking a hundred or a regiment were placed on the canvases according to a certain logic, which took into account both local affiliation and general regimental subordination. In some cases, coats of arms used on military flags appeared even before the official design of city symbols.
Eight out of fourteen hundred depicted a figurative symbol — a Cossack with a musket. And on the other side of the panels there are local signs, which were supposed to indicate belonging to a specific hundred or place. Some of them used the so-called coat of arms of the nation, others used elements of the local seal or city coat of arms. And although the documents did not always clearly distinguish what exactly was reproduced on the banners, it is obvious that the system of identification through the coat of arms existed as a living practice even then.
With the declaration of independence, Ukraine began to build its own military symbols from scratch. In the 1990s, this process was mostly proactive: commanders independently initiated the creation of sleeve emblems, sometimes with the participation of artists, sometimes within the command. Already in the early 2000s, territorial and municipal elements became a common element of the visual content of military awards, especially in units stationed in the Kharkiv, Lviv, Chernihiv, and Ivano-Frankivsk regions. Moreover, the very presence of the military in the city could become an impetus for the design of its heraldic symbols. As, for example, in Fastov, where the coat of arms was approved only after the commander of the local unit insisted on its inclusion in the emblem of the unit.
The most common solution was to include the full coat of arms of the city or region in the emblem of the unit. This practice was observed in more than 50 cases even before 2002. In some cases, only individual figures were used: images of Archangel Michael, a lion, a gate or other signs from local heraldry. Such examples can be seen in the emblems of units from Kyiv, Lviv, Chernihiv, Rava-Ruska, Izyaslav, and Bila Tserkva.
A separate direction is the rethinking of the historical emblems of the previous parts. For example, the 11th separate artillery brigade inherited visual elements from the 26th artillery division, but in the new version the image was supplemented with the coat of arms of the Ternopil region. A similar principle was used for the emblem of the 347th communication unit, where the image of ropes, lightning and mace complements a stylized element indicating belonging to a specific region.
In 2001, the Military Heraldic Service was established at the General Staff of the Armed Forces, and in 2008, methodological guidelines for the development of emblems were approved. It was the first attempt to formalize approaches to the use of heraldic elements in the military sphere. The document provided for a number of criteria: coats of arms had to correspond to official samples, be placed without arbitrary changes, and have sufficient dimensions for perception. It was forbidden to write the name of the city or region – instead, the coat of arms had to “speak” by itself.
At the same time, when finalizing already existing emblems, the principle of continuity was often observed — key elements familiar to the military were kept, and superfluous details, such as signatures or decorative ornaments, were removed. It is also important that the emblems continued to be produced at the expense of the servicemen themselves, so their voice remained decisive.
After the start of the war in Donbas in 2014, the approach to symbols began to change. The role of the state idea has increased, the emphasis on unity has increased. Many emblems received unified forms, stylistics associated with the official military identity. In a number of cases, territorial and municipal elements gave way to more generalized symbols — crosses, colors of military branches, images of weapons, or special insignia of command. Coats of arms of cities and figures from them went out of circulation or remained an exception.
This process is sometimes described as a complete rebranding. He did not abolish heraldry as such, but changed its status — from the bearer of local meaning, it gave way to a centralized visual style. However, the issue of the coexistence of state symbolism and municipal identity in the army remains open, and in some cases, acute.
Therefore, municipal heraldry in military symbols is not only a means of visual distinction of parts, but a way of rooting units in geography, history, and local tradition. The coat of arms on the emblem is often the first visual contact between the part and the citizens of the city in which it is located. It is also a way for the military themselves to record their belonging to a specific space.
And although modern challenges require unification, effective identification and quick recognition, in matters of symbolism, the idea of place as a marker should not be completely abandoned. Because identity is not limited to a flag or a coat of arms, it is formed in interaction with the landscape, memory, toponymy and local signs — those that often seem secondary, but become fundamental over time.
Heraldry in the era of design
It is interesting that symbols do not disappear even in the modern world. In the age of digital logos and identities, the coat of arms remains a universal language of recognition. The only difference is that now we understand it not as an element of status, but as a tool of identity. At the same time, the boundaries between heraldry and branding often disappear. People order “personal coats of arms” from designers without having any relation to the system. Companies create emblems stylized as shields, but without following any principles. In this case, we are not talking about any heraldry, but rather its likeness. In general, modern coats of arms try to combine history and modernity, while somewhere it works, and somewhere it looks like a logo. But the general trend is to return to the roots: Cossack symbols, princely insignia, color scheme based on the flag.
At the same time, there are real heraldic institutions, such as the Heraldic Commission at the State Archives in Ukraine. They fix coats of arms, carry out examinations, give recommendations, but public interest in them is limited. Whereas in Great Britain, the College of Arms is still an influential institution, and without its approval no coat of arms can be approved on the territory of the kingdom.
As we can see, heraldry cannot be perceived as a decorative art, because it is a whole system of symbols strictly inscribed in the history of law, power and status of any state. And if we want modern coats of arms in Ukraine to be not just visual decorations, but legitimate signs of collective memory, then we should abandon a random or formal approach to their creation and use. This involves both observing historical accuracy and heraldic rules, as well as understanding the context: why exactly this symbol appeared in this place, what history it continues, what it alludes to and what it lays in the future. Without it, the coat of arms becomes a decorative background, devoid of connection with place, people and events. Instead, a meaningful approach to heraldry is able to strengthen local identity, emphasize the durability of Ukrainian statehood, and in the conditions of war, also set an emotional and valuable reference point.
