Arms of Alexandre de Bournonville

Duke of Bournonville 1600-1656, count of Hénin, baron of Barlin and Houllefort, lord of Capres (1585-1656)

Blazon: Sable a lion rampant argent, armed, langued, and crowned or


Arms of Pendle Borough Council, England

Granted 1980

Blazon: Gules on a chevron argent between in chief two cotton sprigs slipped and flowered proper and in base a fleece or a lozenge between two cogwheels sable, a chief per fess enarched azure and vert

Crest: On a wreath argent and gules issuant from a Roman Corona Radiata or two lion’s gambs erect purpre armed and grasping a circlet of the third enfiling a spray of three roses argent between two like sprays of three roses gules, all barbed, seeded, and conjoined on one stem proper

Mantling: Gules lined argent

Supporters: Two stags each standing upon a broom, the head inward, all proper

Compartment*: Moorland with outcrops of millstone grit all proper

Motto: In unitate florescemus (In unity we shall flourish increasingly)

*Compartments are usually left to the discretion of the artist, not specified in the blazon.

Arms of Pfinztal, Germany

Granted 1974?

Blazon: Per fess, the first per pale or a bend gules and azure a cross gyronny argent; the second of the last, a mount in base azure


From The Blazon of Gentrie by Sir John Ferne (1586), p198-199

Blazon: Per saltire or on a bend azure a bendlet gules and of the second three palets argent

“This kind of partition is diversely blazed… the ancients called it Gyronny of four parts. The French blazoners call it, quarterly in bend, of such and such colors.”


Arms of Louis François de Boufflers

Duke of Boufflers 1695-1711 (1644-1711)

Blazon: Argent three molets of six points pierced 2 and 1 between nine cross crosslets 3, 3, and 3 gules


Arms of Arzúa, Spain

In use since at least 2005

Blazon: Azure two escallops in the dexter and sinister argent, in chief a molet of eight points or, in base a stone platform of the second


To this cause may be attributed the eventual decline of heraldry in England; because the ensigns were no longer simple, or the property unalienable, but were extended to a degree by which all the ancient and primary devices were exhausted, and the deficiency supplied by domestic and vulgar representations.

– From Inquiries into the Origin and Progress of the Science of Heraldry in England by James Dallaway, p460 (1793)