We discussed Mr. Andriacco’s children. We decided that, if any of his children care to use his arms, the cross of the EOHS would be omitted from their achievements. In fact, we discussed the possibility of differencing their arms by the use of different crests and mantling. I also gave Mr. Andriacco an achievement of his arms, showing only the shield placed in front of the cross of the EOHS, as you have shown it, Claus.

So far, only one of Mr. Andriacco’s children has shown any interest in this project—his son (not the eldest), who is in the US Air Force. He, however, does not seem interested in bearing his father’s arms. In the design process, I proposed to Mr. Andriacco a more modern alternative to the rather conventional design he finally chose. This alternative focused on the cross of St. Andrew and the quill pen representing his career in journalism. It is this design which his younger son wishes to adopt.

http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/8061/andriaccomje.png

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I’m still working on a crest for these arms. Sgt. Andriacco has asked for something to represent his military service.

Interesting design!—certainly clean & simple.  How would you blazon the partition? —too low to be "per fess" but a little high to be a plain point.

Michael F. McCartney;81834 wrote:

Interesting design!—certainly clean & simple. How would you blazon the partition?—too low to be "per fess" but a little high to be a plain point.

Per base?

No such thing as "per base." It could be blazoned as Sable a base Argent, overall a quill pen bendwise sinister and in base a saltire couped all counterchanged. The format is vaguely similar to the arms of former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton:

http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/MacMillan-Armorial/Macmillan-Stockton.gif

which are blazoned Argent a Chief Or overall between three Open Books proper edged Or and bound Azure those in chief inscribed respectively in letters Sable "Miseres" and "Discere" and that in base also in letters Sable inscribed "Succo" and as many Mullets Azure a Lion rampant Sable, the "overall" referring to the charges, not the chief.

Here are the finished arms of the younger Andriacco. He selected a shield entirely different from his father’s, but I constructed the achievement in a similar way.

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8427/mjapng.png

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

St. Andrew’s cross is for "Andriacco," the quill pen for journalism. The younger Andriacco is in the US Air Force and asked for some references to that. For a crest, therefore, I used an eagle and decorated the mantling with an Air Force star (a mullet argent pierced gules). The airman’s specializations are in Public Affairs and Electronic Systems Technology. The Air Force badge for Public Affairs features a quill pen and a bolt of lightning, the latter also serving well to represent electronics—thus the lightning bolt in the eagle’s beak.

The arms of the younger Andriacco look great!

Dohrman Byers;81810 wrote:

So far, only one of Mr. Andriacco’s children has shown any interest in this project—his son (not the eldest), who is in the US Air Force. He, however, does not seem interested in bearing his father’s arms.

Although the designs are very pretty, I find it unfortunate that his son does not wish to use the arms. Heraldry, after all, is the use of hereditary designs on a shield.

Charles E. Drake;81864 wrote:

Although the designs are very pretty, I find it unfortunate that his son does not wish to use the arms. Heraldry, after all, is the use of hereditary designs on a shield.

I totally agree with Charles.  I’ve been hanging back from saying so for fear of igniting a firestorm, but I find the tendency for everyone to have a coat of arms that expresses himself or herself personally a depressing manifestation of the temper of the times.  Was it Tom Wolfe who described us as the "me generation"?

Charles E. Drake;81864 wrote:

Although the designs are very pretty, I find it unfortunate that his son does not wish to use the arms. Heraldry, after all, is the use of hereditary designs on a shield.

I agree. I guess I prefer that the next generation adopt a different coat of arms to abandoning the use of arms altogether; but it is a shame. Alas, one has little clout in these matters. Mr. Andracco’s elder son has begun to show interest in this project. I’m hoping for better luck with him.

A classic (well, heraldic) example of the difference between what I "can" do vs what I "should"...

...having said which, he’s within his rights.  Will be interesting to see what his other son(s), or the grandkids of each line, eventually decide to use (if they use at all).

And it may be an object lesson in adopting arms without prior consultation with one’s siblings/cousins/heirs.

Joseph McMillan;81865 wrote:

I totally agree with Charles. I’ve been hanging back from saying so for fear of igniting a firestorm, but I find the tendency for everyone to have a coat of arms that expresses himself or herself personally a depressing manifestation of the temper of the times. Was it Tom Wolfe who described us as the "me generation"?

One can be equally critical of the assumer whose design is too me-centric that it turns off the descendant or the descendent who wants to to go his own way. (I was trying to avoid gender specific language, but it just got too awkward.)

I think this is similar to some of what I was trying to say here.

Jay Bohn;81872 wrote:

One can be equally critical of the assumer whose design is too me-centric that it turns off the descendant or the descendent who wants to to go his own way.

Critical, but perhaps not as critical. The founder of the arms is by definition the parent of those who later inherit them, and respect for one’s father and mother has divine sanction.

But I agree that a person assuming arms should at least make sure the design isn’t so egocentric that his children are certain to disavow it.

Good news! Mr. Andriaccao’s elder son is perfectly happy to use his father’s arms. I suggested a slightly different crest, to distinguish them. Still working on that.

While of course Jr. is free to alter Sr.‘s crest, there is AFAIK no imperative to do to—keeping the heritage as is, would seem to be the more usual course.

I’m thinking of offering Dan Jr. several options.

1) Use his father’s arms (shield and cfrrest) differenced only by omission of the cross of the EOHS.

2) Use his father’s shield undifferenced but with a distinctive crest.

3) Use his father’s arms, the shield diffrenced with a label during his father’s lifetime, the crest either the same as his father’s undifferenced or also differenced with a label.

4) Use his father’s shield differenced with a label during his father’s lifetime and a distinctive crest.

I’m interested in folk’s opinions as to which of these they would recommend—or something I haven’t thought of.