Hello!  As someone new to heraldry, I need some help with a two-fold project.  I am working on two COA’s, one for myself and one for my mother.  I’ve been reading from this forum for several weeks now, focusing on those threads which dealt with the developement of new arms, including 1 or 2 from the archives.

I have already done the "postage stamp" test and the "fridge" test with each of them, which leads me to the most important test of all—the "forum" test.  (I thought that sounded better than "‘snicker’ test"!):D   So, here we go…

My Mom’s shield:  Per chevron reversed or and sanguine, in chief a lozenge of the second charged with a passion cross of the first, and if base three roses or, two and one, the lower twice as large as the upper two.

My Mom’s crest:  On a wreath of the colors is set for crest, a dog rampant or, tail displayed and langued gules.

My shield:  Argent, within a bordure azure an inescucheon of the second charged with a passion cross of the first.

My crest:  On a wreath of the colors is set for crest, a sphere azure fimbriated and in radiance or surmounted by a pair of wings displayed and addorsed argent.

How’d I do?

Quote:

I have already done the "postage stamp" test and the "fridge" test with each of them, which leads me to the most important test of all—the "forum" test. (I thought that sounded better than "‘snicker’ test"!) :D Much better Hickman. I’ve always hated that term… ‘snicker test’...

Quote:

My Mom’s shield: Per chevron reversed or and sanguine, in chief a lozenge of the second charged with a passion cross of the first, and if base three roses or, two and one, the lower twice as large as the upper two.

Very nice. I love Sanguine myself, so I’m jealous! I like everything except the designation of the bottom rose being ‘twice as large’. As an artist myself, I think you’d do better leaving up to the artist to render this way. Just tell him when you do it and he’ll work with you. No need to muddy up the verbiage of the blazon on that IMHO.

Quote:

My Mom’s crest: On a wreath of the colors is set for crest, a dog rampant or, tail displayed and langued gules.

What type of dog? A hound of some kind (greyhound, wolfhound, deerhound, etc) or a sporting dog (talbot, spaniel, etc) or something more specific? As an artist, my first question would be, ‘what kind of dog?’

Quote:

My shield: Argent, within a bordure azure an inescucheon of the second charged with a passion cross of the first.

Clean, simple and nice. However, why not blazon it simply: Argent, on an escutcheon Azure, a Passion Cross of the field, all within a border of the second.

Quote:

My crest: O a wreath of the colors is set for crest, a sphere azure fimbriated and in radience or surmounted by a pair of wings displayed and addorsed argent.

OK. I don’t know that I like the fimbriation, but it seems OK.

Quote:

How’d I do?

Very good.

This is why I came to you guys!  I am amazed at just how much I can learn from all of you! :D

Hickman wrote:

My shield:  Argent, within a bordure azure an inescucheon of the second charged with a passion cross of the first.

My crest:  O a wreath of the colors is set for crest, a sphere azure fimbriated and in radience or surmounted by a pair of wings displayed and addorsed argent.

 

Hickman,

Your shield is very nice and simple.  If I read your blazon correctly, and depending on the width of the space left between the bordure and the inescutcheon, the effect would be much the same as "azure within an orle a passion cross argent" (an orle being a type of bordure or frame inside the shield, i.e. not touching the edges).

As it happens, there is already a coat of arms, granted by the Chief Herald of Canada, with the blazon "azure an orle argent".  These are the arms of the Deputy Chief Herald of Canada, Dr. Claire Boudreau.  Have a look in the roll of the arms of the members of the Royal Heraldry Society of Canada, at http://www.heraldry.ca/top_en/top_rollx.htm.  Click on "B" in the alphabetic list and then on the arms of Boudreau.

Thus, all depending on the specific artistic representation of the different elements, the addition of the cross might just make it look a brisure or a cadency mark added to the original arms - and a connection to the arms of Dr. Boudreau could be taken to exist.  For example, if I were to depict Dr. Boudreau’s arms on the basis of the blazon, I might have made the orle somewhat wider than it is in Gordon Macphersons’s brilliant representation, which would probably bring the effect closer to the bordure-and-inescutcheon effect.  One might say that, as it is, the orle in this specific representation is closer to a tressure, the diminutive of the orle.  But again, in the end this all depends on the artist.

In any case, just something that you might like to consider as you move ahead - since after all, you would surely want your coat of arms to be distinctive.

Good luck!

I dunno, Sunil…I think an inescutcheon is much smaller than the area inside an orle. More like this:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g29/PaddyW_photos/escut.jpg

It’s a nice design, although if I saw it on the street, I’d assume it to be ecclesiastical.

Patrick Williams wrote:

It’s a nice design, although if I saw it on the street, I’d assume it to be ecclesiastical.

I would as well

Patrick, I agree that the area is much smaller with an escutcheon.

Let’s look at the member’s arms page of Steven B. Madewell: http://www.heraldrysociety.us/MemberArmPages/membersarms.php?page=Madewell

In this design we see the smaller shield with more space - enough to place an orle of martlets. So, I think Patrick is right in that the area of the escutcheon is smaller than using a simple orle.

Now I can see how it would look like an ecclesiastical coat to be sure, but many of those older ecclesiastical coats can go both ways (especially older Anglican/Episcopal arms that bear simple crosses). So, I agree it can bee seen that way, but I think it can also be seen as an individual’s arms.

Sunil, good eye on Dr. Bordeau’s arms. And if it were not an escutcheon and simply an orle, as the good doctor’s are, I could see your point. But, the escutcheon is smaller and the Argent of the field more visible and with the addition of the Passion Cross I think it qualifies as sufficiently different. Now if it were an orle instead of an Argent field with an escutcheon and border I’d agree totally.

This whole idea, however, brings up something that has bothered me for some time. Obviously in more ancient days there were families in different countries whose arms would inevitably be the same as the others and there was no desire on the part of either to infringe upon the other. So, in that regard I look at arms from different nations being OK to be like other arms.

However, given the ever decreasing size of the planet we live on and in particular this little cyber world we live in here I think it is best to actively seek to avoid another man’s arms even from another country.

Good catch Sunil.

I’m glad that—at least apparently—these arms are not already assumed, but now that I see an actual rendering of them, I’m inclined to agree.  They do look ecclesiastical.  I’ll look at different crosses and see what else "pops out" at me.

Perhaps if the beams of the cross were wider…

Hickman (you know, if you signed your posts with your first name we could call you that), if you make the beams wider, then it will look like the Greek flag supended in the middle of your shield.

This is a very simple and elegant design as it sits, but is probably too simple to be unique. And the problem with crosses is that they’re probably the single most popular charge. Passion crosses, in particular, have that ‘ecclesiastical’ look, although a single cross of any style will, too. I am not trying to dissuade you, arms are an extremely personal matter, I’m merely pointing out some issues.

As you can no doubt tell from reading other threads here, we are very much into simple, elegant and unique whenever possible. But also keep in mind that these will be your arms and hopefully your children’s. If this design speaks to you, then adopt it. You’ll read a lot about the refrigerator test here, and let me endorse it heartily. Print out the little rendering I did for you and put it on your fridge. See how you feel about the design in a week, a month, etc.

And whatever arms you eventually choose-welcome to our society!

No, it does indeed look too much like that of the clergy.  That would be a good thing—if I were a member thereof.

Perhaps:  Argent within a bordure azure an inescucheon of the second charged with a passion cross in between a pair of wings displayed and addorsed argent?

Patrick, thanks for letting me see the rendition via your post. My "fridge test" drawing is only as good as its artist—namely me.  But I did notice something.  In my drawing, the passion cross isn’t touching the edges of the inescucheon.  What would these look like?

Also, am I breaching protocol by signing in under my last name?  I most certainly don’t wish to offend those who are so eager to help!

No, there is no breach in protocol. I am a staunch egalitarian and just like to use first names whenever possible: an equal amongst equals thing.

As to the wings, you’ll have to tell us more about what you mean. Your blazon is contradictory in that addorsed means placed back to back, used especially of wings lying close to a creature’s back so putting a cross between them…and, frankly, that’s way too much Argent, at least for my tastes.

Patrick I agree. I was caught off by that blazon as well. I also agree it is not only too much Argent, but it is too much design on the inescutcheon IMHO.

Hickman, try to use either a different cross on the inescutcheon or another single charge in relation to the cross (interlaced with a ring, or a coronet, or simply charged with a single charge of some kind like a rose or crescent or whatever you’d like that’d fit in the center point of the cross). Using the cross and wings is a little much even when turned the right way IMHO.

You guys are right.  That would be too much argent on the inescucheon.  I thought about a Greek cross, but it would still look too ecclisiastical.  Besides, the only thing about me that’s Greek is my first name (Stephen).  Perhaps I didn’t do the "fridge test" long enough.

Hey!  How’s this sound:  Azure a passion cross between two olive branches argent?  My first name comes from the Greek "Stephanos", which means "crown/garland", and olive branches were used as such!  This would make my arms canting!  :cool:

And maybe you did, Hickman. If the first design grabs you, then don’t let anyone dissuade you, buddy.

I like the olive branch idea, but i might find a way to work them in proper.

What significance are you going for with the designs you have chosen? You seem pretty solid in your want for a passion or greek cross? could you possibly use a moline cross or fleury cross?

If so i might recommend

Argent between two olive branches proper, on an escutcheon Azure a Moline Cross of the field, all within a border of the second.

If you would prefer a passion or greek cross maybe something like:

Paly Argent and Azure between two olive branches proper a Passion Cross of the field.

Just some suggestions

The passion cross is (big surprise) a symbol of my faith.  It, therefore, (IMHO) should be at the "heart" of the shield.  But I would like the cross to not be depicted as an ordinary on the inescucheon—just as a simple charge.  How would that be blazoned?

I’ve been thinking about the first design, and I do like it alot.  Wouldn’t a smaller inescucheon make it seem less ecclisiastical?  And how would the artist know what size to draw it?

The overall appearance that I was going for is a shield-shaped "bull’s-eye", which is basically the function of the shield in actual battle (as opposed to the helmet, breastplate, etc.).  Blue and white are my favorite colors.

As for my mom’s design, maroon is her favorite color, and gold accents it better, IHO, than white.  The chevron reversed reflects the direction of God’s love—towards us.  The passion cross (again, as a charge on the lozenge) symbolizes her faith.  The lozenge alludes to the old (antiquaited?) tradition of a woman’s arms being borne on such a loznge, and therefore symbolizes her feminimity with boldness.  The larger rose represents herself and the two smaller roses represents her two sons.