Coat of arms of Bosnia and Herzegovina 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.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles
Is it known who designed the socialist flag and arms and who was responsible for the re-invention/revival of the fleur-the-lis arms and flag?--
80.57.69.15011:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)reply
Fojnički grbovnik - 19. century?
Of course it's not true that coat of arms from Fojnički grbocnik comes from 19. century. It comes from 14. century and that symbol is found medieval monuments in Bosnia and Croatia also.--
78.3.11.16613:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)reply
The image [[File:|x20px]] is based of an the painting from the Fojnica armorial, which may be seen here . The image you provided is neither contemporary nor is it an accurate reproduction of the Fojnica armorial. I replaced the original armorial image only because it was cropped poorly, it is hard to make out the details such as the Moores' heads and because the colours no longer represent their original intent, thus making for a poor image overall. [tk]XANDERLIPTAK12:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Dear Alexander, you have made a nice attempt at reproduction of the Fojnica armorial, but your file (attempt) did not respect the coat of arms of Bosnae in the Fojnica armorial. The Moores' heads in the Fojnica armorial are black, as well as the crowns, they are smaller. I expect that you are very well aware that the coat of arms pretty much doesn't exist if there is no blason (textual description) of the depiction (the picture of the coat of arms). The image which I supplied doesn't need to be a current version, and it is desirable that it is not a nowdays depiction. The depiction is contemporary because the Bosnian kingdom never used that coat of arms but the personal arms of King Tvrtko (this is the prefered version of the story). Bosnian Kingdom was then (before the Ottomans) a feudal kingdom in which nobles had a coat of arms and we do not exactly know what was the CoA of Bosnian Kingdom, and we cannot know if it even existed.
The depiction is to represent Fojnica armorial, not a Dutch map representation 300 years later. The armorial predates King Tvrtko I. Also, coats of arms existed long before blazons and the size of the crowns do not matter, so saying that the original version had them smaller is a meaningless point. For one that argued over the crowns being a bit taller, you sure want to ignore bigger discrepancies. Lets go over differences that matter, then. The original uses an ancient crown, while the Dutch a ducal coronet. That is a major difference. The original uses a saltire couped embatteled counter embattled, while the Dutch only has the saltire embattled. The star on the inescutcheon is to be white, no gold as shown on the Dutch version. Another thing, the Dutch version is not contemporary. Contemporary means made at the time, and 300 years after is not the same time period. Also, I am not certain why you changed the Austro-Hungarian arms for Bosnia, but the one that was up was superior both artistically and was more complete. [tk]XANDERLIPTAK22:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Pogonia
Coat of arms of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1889–1918)