Ok, I meant to delete the old post with the old arms I designed (the one with the medal) but it ended up deleting the whole thread. I hope no one is bothered, if you may have been reading it or subscribed to it.

Well, in the meantime, here are the new arms I designed for myself, and after several modifications, I think they are the ones I would like to keep, and when my membership gets through, hopefully put on the site.

http://www.uploadfile.info/uploads/a15dd2ddde.bmp

And I thought I’d take a shot at blazoning it, so here goes nothing

Vert, on a fess argent, a crescent of the first, between three mullets of five points of the second arranged 1 and 2.

Crest: An Egyptian Mameluke helmet argent, ornamented or, with a Sharifan turban vert wound about it.

What do you all think? Everything correct now? Blazon and arms?

Oh wow, can you repost the thread again. I was just getting ready to respond.  If more people are interested in the thread, then let us continue discussing it on the public forum.  I saw the Sharfian arms of Hegaz and would love it if you repost that one at least.  You are correct, the crest above the mantle was that of a building which I believe was the headquarters of the Sharifs of Hegaz or Hijaz…you can say the Sharifian palace.

I very much like your current arms and the simplicity of their design, Mohamed.  Very nice job.

Regarding your "crest" - I would say you chose no crest and that is perfectly fine. You have a helm with no crest and a lot of ancient and modern arms represent their shield with a helm and no crest.  Very simple and elegant design.

Regards,

Hassan

Here ya go:

http://aes.iupui.edu/rwise/banknotes/hejaz/HejazP2-1Pound-(1924)-donatedrb_b.jpg

Regarding my arms, so there would be no need to blazon the helmet even? Although it is of specific shape and form? Or would I just blazon it as "The helm is..etc etc etc"?

Thanks, Mohamed.  Those are indeed the arms of the Sharif’s of Mecca, Hejaz or Hegaz.

MohamedHossam wrote:

Vert, on a fess argent, a crescent of the first, between three mullets of five points of the second arranged 1 and 2.

Crest: An Egyptian Mameluke helmet argent, ornamented or, with a Sharifan turban vert wound about it.

 

What do you all think? Everything correct now? Blazon and arms?

I am by no means an expert at blazoning, and Joe and others will correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think you need to say "arranged". I think just saying 1 and 2 is fine.  (Like the blazon here) Also, looking at This Blazon it seems you don’t even need to say 1 and 2.

I don’t think you need to say "mullets of five" because I think a mullet is considered to have five points unless noted otherwise. So I would say:

Vert, on a fess argent, a crescent of the first between three mullets of the second.

Also for the helm I would probably say : A Sharifan turban of the field wound about An Egyptian Mameluke helmet argent, ornimented Or

I hope someone with better blazoning skills can correct/confirm my blazons

Kelsi is right, you have no crest, but you can specify how you want the helm drawn. For example if you used a mullet argent for the crest (just an example) you could say for the crest:

On a Sharifan turban of the field wound about An Egyptian Mameluke helmet argent, ornimented Or , a mullet argent

Looks like your best work so far.  Very nice.

Thanks! Great to see that I was pretty close in the blazoning. Just an off question, but, a crest is not obligatory, right? I mean you can have just a shield, of course, but you can have a shield and distinct helm only, right?

MohamedHossam wrote:

Vert, on a fess argent, a crescent of the first, between three mullets of five points of the second arranged 1 and 2.

Crest: An Egyptian Mameluke helmet argent, ornamented or, with a Sharifan turban vert wound about it.

 

What do you all think? Everything correct now? Blazon and arms?

Again, there are many more knowledgeable people than myself but I would suggest two things…

First: I believe the blazon should read Vert, between three mullets of five points Argent, 1 and 2, a fess argent charged with a crescent of the First.

Second: I think what you have labled "Crest" would more appropriately called a "helm" a crest is usually attached to the top of the helm… you don’t necessarily have to use a crest in addition to your helm.  Even if you decided not to include a crest your helms is not the same…

You definitely need to blazon "1 and 2" because the default when a fess is between three charges is two and one.

But wouldn’t the fess, being an ordinary, be blazoned along with its charges first? That is what I recall reading in most books..though blazoning is prolly not my strongest pont

Daniel C. Boyer wrote:

You definitely need to blazon "1 and 2" because the default when a fess is between three charges is two and one.

Thanks for the clarification

MohamedHossam wrote:

But wouldn’t the fess, being an ordinary, be blazoned along with its charges first? That is what I recall reading in most books..though blazoning is prolly not my strongest pont

Vert on a fess between three mullets 1 and 2 Argent a crescent Vert.

This is the more-or-less favored modern style of blazoning in English, or the almost-English that blazons are written in.  You could, if you like, replace the last "Vert" with "of the field" or the now-mostly-obsolete "of the first."  But there are also many other ways it could be described, and any of them that reliably ensure an accurate emblazonment are acceptable.

Joseph McMillan wrote:

Vert on a fess between three mullets 1 and 2 Argent a crescent Vert.

This is the more-or-less favored modern style of blazoning in English, or the almost-English that blazons are written in.

Yes; it is important to note that while this is the "favoured" style (reflecting that the ordinary comes first in the pecking order, the charges it’s between second, the charges on it third) it is nothing approaching a "rule."  IMO one should stick with it unless for some reason doing so would cause confusion, or there’s some other compelling reason, but you certainly don’t have to.