With the expertise, I’ve come for guidance and advice of all of you in regards to my possible arms. I’ve been toying with a handful of designs for awhile and always seem to come back to one design. One of the charges I would like to use is a cardinal, but in my limited experience have not seen it used anywhere or mentioned. My question is if the cardinal is allowed and if so, if they may be an examples out there.
I lay my *very* rough (and quick) designs to the mercy of the members for guidance, suggestions, or errors.
#1: This is one I tend to keep coming back to. A thought was to put the mullets onto the chevron. (the sword would be gules by the way).
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b146/Snydercrew/blankshield4.jpg
(this is my try at blazoning….Argent, a fess chevron embattled gules; two cardinals close addorsed gules, beaked and membered tulles with face sable; three mullets, one and two, sable; sword point to base, gules.)
#2:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b146/Snydercrew/blankshield.jpg
(Per chevron argent and gules, three cardinals close in fess gules beaked and membered tulles, face sable; sword point to base, argent) (also thinking sword in Or)
Forgive the crudeness of these. I just grabbed some clip art from google and photoshopped something together for reference. Any thoughts or ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Yes, anything is allowed, although some things are better heraldic charges than others. Cardinals are, in my opinion, excellent, because they are distinctive.
I’m not aware off hand of any use of a cardinal as a charge on a shield, but they have been used in Virginia as supporters and crests:
Senate of Virginia (dexter supporter; devised by the College of Arms):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/Virginia_Senate_Seal.png
Prince George County (also by the College of Arms):
http://www.ngw.nl/int/usa/images/princege.jpg
City of Fredericksburg (crest; designed by Col Harry D. Temple, late of TIOH):
http://www.fredericksburgva.gov/uploadedImages/City_Council/General_Content/coat of arms.png?n=3319
I think both of the draft designs you give are a little cluttered. If you want to start from the upper one, I’d put two cardinals both facing dexter above the chevron, and one black star below it, and nothing else. If you prefer the per chevron division as in the lower one, I’d limit myself to two cardinals rather than three.
Also, the default position of a sword is with the handle down. Nothing wrong with showing it handle up, you should just realize it’s not the most usual arrangement.
Joseph McMillan;80584 wrote:
I think both of the draft designs you give are a little cluttered. If you want to start from the upper one, I’d put two cardinals both facing dexter above the chevron, and one black star below it, and nothing else.
I would agree w/ Joe. A nice start but too much going on. I would go basically the same way, except leave the cardinals facing away from each other. Save the sword for your crest.
Argent a chevron embattled Gules in chief two cardinals addorsed proper in base a mullet sable
I have to say I concur. Something was a little off, but I couldnt quite picture what it was. Extra sets of eyes always help.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b146/Snydercrew/shield5.jpg
Personally, I would prefer having the cardinals face in the same direction. My two cents…
I recall reading somewhere that traditionally when displaying your arms as a flag or banner, the animal charges appearing on your shield should always face the flag pole (i.e., they should face to the dexter, or left side of the shield) regardless of which way they normally face. If that is true, that means you essentially have two arms: one version with the cardinals facing outward in opposite directors, and the other with the cardinals facing in the same direction to the left. This may make for a potentially confusing situation for the casual viewer and even your descendants.
Admittedly, I am working from memory here, and there is no need for you to follow this ‘tradition’ - if indeed it is one.
In my opinion, it looks like two cardinals sitting atop a castle wall, one looking each way, on guard.
Typically (I think), your charges face dexter so they are looking into battle, facing the enemy, but I don’t believe there is a "rule". In this case the "on guard" look works, so why worry about what is usual?
My two cents.
I agree that the arms would have a more classic feel if both cardinals were facing to dexter. On the other hand, I can see some advantages to placingI them respectant (facing each other). That way they would more nearly follow the line of the chevron and could be larger, better filling the space available. It would also eliminate the (to my eye) awkward blank space between them.
Dohrman Byers;80590 wrote:
On the other hand, I can see some advantages to placing them respectant (facing each other). That way they would more nearly follow the line of the chevron and could be larger, better filling the space available. It would also eliminate the (to my eye) awkward blank space between them.
Good point as well Dohrman (I mean Father Byers)! 
Always good to get an artist’s perspective.
An additional point: for those who are opposed to heraldic innovation, martlets Gules would work well as faux-cardinals. But, as I said above, I prefer the cardinal itself.
On blazoning: I wouldn’t go into the excruciating detail of describing the face, legs, etc. "Cardinals proper" or even (in my opinion, but not in everyone’s) "cardinals Gules." Although you may want to clarify in the blazon that you mean the bird and not the prelate. Two African princes of the church would be an interesting charge, but not exactly what you’re going for!
I will add to the chorus ... I prefer the birds to both face dexter. Alternatively, I agree with Fr. Dohrman that respectant would fit the space better than addorsed for placement of the cardinals.
I wonder how it might look if the chevron were Sable and the mullet Gules.
Draw up all three versions, using standard clipart (for a level playing field); stick them on the fridge & leave them there for a month or so. If one eventually & consistently feels right , Bingo!—if not, back to the drawing board…
By the way, in case I’ve missed it—what’s the "story" behind your choice of charges etc?
The meaning behind everything is pretty straight forward. I was born and raised in Ohio where the state bird is the cardinal (along with Kentucky, Indiana, and several other states), so I use it primarily to represent where I am from. It is one of my favorite birds, along with my grandmothers, so there is a bit of personal desire to use them.
The chevron embattled I am using because of the meaning of "protection, faithful service" and being prepared for war and ready to fight. I was in the Ohio National Guard for 10 years.
The sword pointed base was to represent that I’ve put my arms down, but willing to pick them back up if needed.
The mullets are two fold, to signify my love of the sky and the universe as well as a more traditional meaning of being a noble person.
I’m really glad that I presented this to the public. It’s always nice to have fresh eyes, especially from experienced individuals, on things to present a new perspective. New thoughts and ideas are always a great thing.
Pretty nice, I think I still like them addorsed…
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd4/w3r3wolv3s/arms/shield6.jpg
werewolves;80601 wrote:
Pretty nice, I think I still like them addorsed…
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd4/w3r3wolv3s/arms/shield6.jpg
Mike had a good suggestion. Try all three options: facing outwards, facing inward and facing dexter. The last option has not been tried yet.
Snyder;80599 wrote:
I was born and raised in Ohio where the state bird is the cardinal (along with Kentucky, Indiana, and several other states), so I use it primarily to represent where I am from..
Always nice to met a fellow Buckeye! Born and raised in Cincinnati myself.
Yes, try all three. To me, addorsed looks like they’re mad at each other, and respectant looks like they’re conspiring! Not that there’s anything wrong with either, of course. A clean design in any case, say I.
