BINGO! That is what I was thinking! Very nicely done Ben. I really, really like this one. :D
Also follow Guy’s advice. I should’ve thought of it and thank God Guy did because doing it this way allows you to respect your mom’s arms, while allowing for yours. Great suggestion Guy.
Also while you were not so sure about the white in both fields in a quartered arms I’d let the angst go. There are many arms that are quartered that are nice. In fact there is a Scottish one that is perhaps my favorite overall coat of arms of Scottish heritage - that of MacNaughton. (MacLean being a close third and MacLaine being a close second, but both of these do not have complete white fields like MacNaughton…). But, my point is that it is OK to have four fields of white in a quartered shield… it can be done and be OK - in fact good - and I think yours would be OK as well… in fact I can see it and when I can see it I can tell if I like it and I do.
So, please consider making the Foster arms as you have them here alone and then quartering these arms with those of your mother as they’re laid out in the above quartered arms.
Just my $0.02.
While i think the arms are fantastic, I am still confused. Are the original Foster arms, the arms of your father? or are you tring to relate them to some other foster Arms? Sorry I am just still confused
Ben Foster wrote:
Something like this?
I know that whole "If you don’t have anything nice to say…" bit, but I’ve really never been a fan of the quartered arms you’ve been using and I think this is a vast improvement, it looks wonderful (I think it looks okay with only one arrow but I can see what Dennis means)... I look forward to further deveolpment
FYI: The latest rendition is very close to the 2nd quadrant in AHS member’s D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton’s arms.
I just happened to spot it while looking at the members arms page today.
Ben,
What’s the reasoning behind the chevron? I kinda like the idea of the gules version by itself, but if you like the argent with sable horns better, why not leave off the chevron and have Argent an arrow fesswise between three hunting horns Sable? For some reason the arrows on the chevron don’t look right to me.
Just another idea. :mrgreen:
Take care,
Linusboarder wrote:
FYI: The latest rendition is very close to the 2nd quadrant in AHS member’s D’Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton’s
That’s because D’Arcy Bolton is quartering Fo(r)ster as well.
—Guy
I agree with Plilip—keep the Foster arms you now use (red field & all)—just the arrow in fess (fesswise?), no chevron—simpler, cleaner, less likely to run into duplication problems.
Guy’s suggestion re: the armorial pedigree is a great one!
Guy Power wrote:
That’s because D’Arcy Bolton is quartering Fo(r)ster as well.
—Guy
I guess i am very confused. Which Foster are they basing this on? Are they related somehow and I misted that connection?
Ben can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe Ben is assuming the arms like many do where they take the original arms and difference them accordingly. This way they can give a nod to the original bearer of the arms and yet not swipe them.
The red are nice too. But, I prefer the Argent myself. It is not unreasonable to difference the arms even more by simply replacing the Vert chevron with a Gules one. Even then, however, I’d keep the arrows or at least some other charge for difference. But, I like the argent field best. But, they aren’t mine and I don’t have to bear them forever…
Linusboarder wrote:
I guess i am very confused. Which Foster are they basing this on? Are they related somehow and I misted that connection?
Fosters and Forsters that can trace their ancestry to Forster of Bamburgh and Hundson are related. My ancestor, Richard Fo(r)ster is of the Hunsdon branch.
The use of the Forster arms by my ancestors has not been continuous in the colonies and later the United States. Moreover, while I am as certain of the pedigree as I can be from a genealogical (and now Y-DNA) perspective, my line is certainly not the "first house." My grandfather and great uncle used undifferenced versions of the original Forster arms. See Armorial de la Toison d’OrArgent, TO039 (1440) (A chevron between three stringed hunting-horns Sable). However, I feel that it is most appropriate to significantly difference these arms to avoid confusion, etc.
Ben Foster wrote:
Fosters and Forsters that can trace their ancestry to Forster of Bamburgh and Hundson are related. My ancestor, Richard Fo(r)ster is of the Hunsdon branch.
That’s what I was looking for. Thanks
Okay guys, working on a couple different options re differencing.
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/75/coa3hq4.jpg
I like the second one, with the vert field, better than the chief…. but that’s just one man’s opinion
I second Everett’s thoughts. On the first one have you thought about making the chief either Vert and changing the arrow to Argent, or changing the arrow to Argent on the Gules chief?
Still… I like the second one of the two.
OK, I guess I’m in the minority here, but I like the first one better.
Of course I have a natural affinity for sable charges upon an argent field.
Take care,