i agree with Andy that these are rather boring, uninspired arms. i also agree with him that one would think that the COA could do a better job all the way around for a future Queen of England.
Let me second the comments about the design of the arm’s themselves. Both of the bride’s parents were in the aviation industry before they started their own business, as was her paternal grandfather—yet no reference of that in the arms. That same grandfather was an RAF trainer in Canada during World War II—and since her husband will likely be King of Canada some day, a reference to that might have been nice if it could be done without a lucky charms effect. It looks like several of her paternal great-grandfathers were solictors. If a quick scan is correct, the Middleton’s are from Yorkshire and are a descendant from Edward III in a Yorkist line—yet nothing. All this from a quick google search, and I’m sure the possibilities are endless.
And this business about colors reflecting the colors of the Union Flag? How many times have we counseled people that you shouldn’t choose the "national" colors for your arms simply because you live in that country?
Frankly, very poor work by the professionals and it just goes to show that money doesn’t buy taste.
On first blush, the arms are innoffensive enough and will harmonize well with her future husband’s current and future coat. The references in the arms are likely the product of consultation between the family and the heralds with the family likely suggesting what was important for them to reference - and maybe the ancestors did not make their cut… The desire to reference three children is an understandable motive for parents but heraldically it is unfortunate. Some generations from now little Johnny Middleton will ask what do the three oak sprigs stand for and his dad will say that they stand for the very important fact that his g-g-g-g-granddad who also inherited a party supply business had two sisters one of whom married well and one of whom didn’t.
Looking at the arms a bit longer I think that the arms, I hope inadvertently, may make some reference to the family’s newness and their social advance.
George Lucki;82168 wrote:
On first blush, the arms are inoffensive enough and will harmonize well with her future husband’s current and future coat.
Perhaps this was the most important consideration. The arms have been designed so that the azure half rather than the gules, will be against Prince William’s arms in the marital coat - no colour bleeding into his azure 3rd quarter or his gules 4th quarter, and the gold chevron is sufficiently far down not to bleed significantly into his 2nd quarter.
The arms granted to Ms Rhys-Jones on her marriage to Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex some years ago show a similar careful arrangement of tinctures (also gules and azure with gold charges) so that they stand out when marshalled with the Earl’s.
Not inspired, but generally inoffensive—some might be tempted to ask if that refers to heraldry or religion, but I’m certainly too well mannered to say anything so gauche (if that’s how it’s spelled).
Perhaps a more charitable characterization might be "neither inspired nor offensive; but beautifully drawn, on time and on budget."
At a price of L4400 I would be surprised to see cost overruns… 
George wrote: "At a price of L4400 I would be surprised to see cost overruns… "
Hmmm…apparently the Canadians are a bit more careful with their civil & defense expenditures than others we could name…
Well, I rather like them. However, I am fond of oak….
I think they go quite well alongside Prince William’s.
Kathy McClurg;82112 wrote:
The arms were granted to her father which she and her sister are entitled to use as a courtesy. I haven’t yet seen her father’s achievement (assuming crest is there somewhere). Even the College of arms page only show’s Kate’s. That’s kind of disturbing - guess they are playing a bit to the press as well.
I’ve had a stab at putting forward a few heraldic options for the Middleton family:
My own beloved NPR perpetuated bad information regarding "how to get a coat of arms" on Morning Edition today. I’d call and leave a message on their comment line, but my rant would take more time than their misinformed segment.
EDIT: Just noticed that Fr. Guy posted a comment on the article online. Good on ya, Guy!
Not a bad story about how to get an English coatof arms. There is also a link from a comment by Pearl Duncan, an African American from Tribeca on her grant from the Lord Lyon. I thought that was neat (Of course I could quibble with NPR and Ms. Duncan but it is good to get the information out about arms. Guy’s comment was excellent about current US practice. Maybe someone can post a link to AHS.)
Kenneth Mansfield;82236 wrote:
My own beloved NPR perpetuated bad information regarding "how to get a coat of arms" on Morning Edition today. I’d call and leave a message on their comment line, but my rant would take more time than their misinformed segment.
EDIT: Just noticed that Fr. Guy posted a comment on the article online. Good on ya, Guy!
I’m on it…
They will be known as the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge
Not often I tip my cap to wikipedia, but I think they’re done a solid job of presenting the heraldry. A lot of people browsing the entry will get a solid understanding of the heraldry associated with the marriage.
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t11/Kelisli/RoyalWeddingCake01.jpg
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t11/Kelisli/RoyalWeddineCake00.jpg
Source: British Monarchy site on flickr.
Even the royal wedding cake had heraldic emblems/badges. The cake, in addition to having the royal badges of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales (top photo), it nicely combines the royal rose of England with the Middletons’ spring of Oak with acorns! Very nice touch.
