MohamedHossam;56827 wrote:
They’re nice suggestions, but I’m not too sure about the middle one. The ‘cross’ of elks’ heads (especially the read ones) seems a bit occultish looking, plus with the direction of their heads it could even be seen as a swastika.
I quite like the middle one and hadn’t noticed the swastika possibility. It might work better with the heads cabossed.
Maybe, thinking of the hares elsewhere the field could be tierced in pairle and the heads (or full bucks) be tricorporate.
BTW the deer used don’t seem to be roebucks. That might be simply due to the availability of artwork, but the antlers are far too generous. Roebucks only ever have three points.
http://www.hampshirecam.co.uk/ws06/roebuck.jpg
James
James Dempster;56828 wrote:
I quite like the middle one and hadn’t noticed the swastika possibility. It might work better with the heads cabossed.
Truthfully I’m not a fan of caboshed. I can’t recall seeing any version of caboshed that I like.
Quote:
BTW the deer used don’t seem to be roebucks. That might be simply due to the availability of artwork, but the antlers are far too generous. Roebucks only ever have three points.
You are correct. For now I’m using generic stag artwork, but I’ll need to find "roebuck" art before I complete anything.
David Pritchard;56789 wrote:
While I run the risk of being accused of getting up on the wrong side of the bed, being grumpy or simply mean spirited, my first thoughts were that the arms represent Santa Claus’ Reindeer Ranch in Lappland. The arrow points North to his work shop, the quill refers to his list of boys and girls who have been naughty or nice, the eight dots refer to the Winter months in which he is at the work shop and the buck represents the reindeer that the ranch supplies for his flying sleigh.
Or the eight dots represent Santa’s eight reindeer! No one will ever accuse you of lacking imagination, David! 
Dale —
As I have been following these threads, I have the feeling that you are trying to include too much. If these arms are to be passed on to the little Roes that may come along eventually, maybe you should think about them. They may not share your passion for the bagpipes or for writing. What they will share, however, is the Roe name and a a mother named "White Wave." What about something as simple as Gules above a base wavy a roebuck trppant Argent, or perhaps Gules above a base wavy Argent a roebuck trippant Or.
Rowe: defn. A river that overflows its banks. Instead of the deer, a double water cant (wavy river under white crested), with a flood theme.
Perhaps: Azure, a fess crested counterwavy Argent, four demi-arrows palewise in fess, the first and third arrows Argent issuant from the fess and overall the other arrows counterchanged issuant from the fess base. Demi pine or fir trees instead of arrows might work better.
Dohrman Byers;56840 wrote:
Dale —
As I have been following these threads, I have the feeling that you are trying to include too much. If these arms are to be passed on to the little Roes that may come along eventually, maybe you should think about them. They may not share your passion for the bagpipes or for writing. What they will share, however, is the Roe name and a a mother named "White Wave." What about something as simple as Gules above a base wavy a roebuck trppant Argent, or perhaps Gules above a base wavy Argent a roebuck trippant Or.
Also remember that you don’t have to include all the symbolism on the shield itself. You have the crest and possibly a badge as well to design, which could be used to incorporate some of the other charges to which you feel tied.
Michael Swanson;56841 wrote:
Perhaps: Azure, a fess crested counterwavy Argent, four demi-arrows palewise in fess, the first and third arrows Argent issuant from the fess and overall the other arrows counterchanged issuant from the fess base. Demi pine or fir trees instead of arrows might work better.
Thanks for the suggestion. I have to admit to being a bit lost with this blazon. I’ll try to decipher it tonight.
If you would be interested in an arrow crest, I recently came upon some old correspondence with the RSA State Herald regarding a proposed design that we had worked out for my crest which consisted of arrows. This design proposal was of course before Gordon Macpherson of the CHA designed my ash tree badge from whence my crest was ultimately derived. I will hunt up the blazon if you are interested.
Dohrman Byers;56840 wrote:
As I have been following these threads, I have the feeling that you are trying to include too much.
I won’t argue with you there. It’s a tendency of mine that extends to my writing as well. My first drafts are usually too complex, with too many layers of meanings. And the time I spend revising is generally spent simplifying and refining. I guess it just the way my mind works—get everything on the table up front and then whittle down the choices.
Dohrman Byers;56840 wrote:
If these arms are to be passed on to the little Roes that may come along eventually, maybe you should think about them. They may not share your passion for the bagpipes or for writing. What they will share, however, is the Roe name and a a mother named "White Wave."
Here’s where I will disagree with you, respectfully. You’re right that anyone I may want to pass on arms to MAY not share my passions. But they also MAY not care about Roe family traditions either. Assuming I had the right to the arms I have been told were back in my family somewhere (gules three lambs paschal or), I wouldn’t really want to bear them, as I am not particularly religious. Had my father, whose hobbies and interests were markedly different from my own, designed arms for himself, I likely would have borne those proudly. My point being that it’s all a crap-shoot as to what they will consider important and what they won’t.
And on a complete tangent, there is significant doubt that there will be anyone to pass them along to. The four kids I do have all have the prefix step-, and unless my situation changes drastically in the next 5 years, this particular branch of Roe will end with me.
Dohrman Byers;56840 wrote:
What about something as simple as Gules above a base wavy a roebuck trppant Argent, or perhaps Gules above a base wavy Argent a roebuck trippant Or.
At the risk of sounding pretentious, something this simple just wouldn’t suit me. The arms that I tend to like the most are neither simple nor busy, but somewhere in the middle. And while these suggestions are good suggestions, they just wouldn’t fit me. Does that make sense?
David Pritchard;56846 wrote:
If you would be interested in an arrow crest, I recently came upon some old correspondence with the RSA State Herald regarding a proposed design that we had worked out for my crest which consisted of arrows. This design proposal was of course before Gordon Macpherson of the CHA designed my ash tree badge from whence my crest was ultimately derived. I will hunt up the blazon if you are interested.
I’m not sure I’d be interested in using it or not as I’m nowhere near thinking about the crest yet. However on a purely intellectual level I would be most interested.
Michael Swanson;56841 wrote:
Rowe: defn. A river that overflows its banks.
Out of curiosity, where did you get this definition?
dcroe05;56849 wrote:
Out of curiosity, where did you get this definition?
http://www.searchforancestors.com/surnames/origin/r/rowe.php
But also see this:
By all means, your arms must suit you.
If you are not likely to have descendants bearing the Roe name, then there would seem to be less reason to focus on "roe" cants. For my own arms, since I knew I would have no descendants (celibacy, and all that), I used a cant on my first name, which is more distinctive than my family name anyway.
Dohrman Byers;56870 wrote:
For my own arms, since I knew I would have no descendants (celibacy, and all that), I used a cant on my first name, which is more distinctive than my family name anyway.
Well now I can thank you not only for your advice, but also for supplying an answer to my own curiosity as to the origin of your arms. Though I am not nearly as well read as others on the subject, I cannot recall such a use of doors or their hardware in any other arms.
Dohrman Byers;56870 wrote:
By all means, your arms must suit you.
If you are not likely to have descendants bearing the Roe name, then there would seem to be less reason to focus on "roe" cants. For my own arms, since I knew I would have no descendants (celibacy, and all that), I used a cant on my first name, which is more distinctive than my family name anyway.
If the arms are being made for (or to honor) the father to be inherited by the children, then the surname may matter, whether one is a priest or childless.
