Just a thought on Kenneth’s design: Omit one of the acorns, and you can omit the three mullets—letting the three acorns represent the three siblings. Then the tree could be enlarged to fill the shield.
I like Kenneths design, if you eliminate the bear, and keep the tree with the stars.
J. Stolarz;82292 wrote:
I don’t really think it’s right for a person to design a coat of arms, for a paternal ancestor that has been gone for hundreds of years…
I would say I agree with Mr. Stolarz view in that I am also not comfortable personally to design a coat of arms for an ancestor (paternal or otherwise) without definite grounds to believe that ancestor would appreciate such (in honor of or otherwise).
You all should know me, right, wrong 
I will let more experienced people take over.
Dohrman Byers;82331 wrote:
Just a thought on Kenneth’s design: Omit one of the acorns, and you can omit the three mullets—letting the three acorns represent the three siblings. Then the tree could be enlarged to fill the shield.
I like this idea, Father!
If you’d like to keep the blue, Jesse, you could add a blue border.
J. Stolarz;82336 wrote:
I like Kenneths design, if you eliminate the bear, and keep the tree with the stars.
But the bear in front of the base of the tree is what gives it the Spanish feel. Did you even look at the primer I posted earlier? 
I don’t really care what kind of "feel" it gives if it doesn’t look good . With the bear there it looks way to cluttered.
J. Stolarz;82343 wrote:
I don’t really care what kind of "feel" it gives if it doesn’t look good
With all due respect, I think you’re not taking the whole of heraldry into consideration and are taking a rather naive approach when you say it doesn’t look good. From a graphic design point of view, I can see where you might be coming from, but heraldry and graphic design are not one in the same (though there are certainly overlapping principles).
I think graphic design takes a strong role in heraldry. Lets all travel back to the old subject of how arms are supposed to be recognizable from a long distance, which is why you should keep them simple and uncluttered. Like a well designed logo, a well designed arms is simple, and recognizable from long distrances.
I think saying my approach to heraldry is "naive" is taking things a bit far. My approach to heraldry may be different than yours, but as we’ve seen on this post alone, we all have different opinions about how you should design your arms. I’m not claiming in the slightest that I know more about heraldry than you, not by a long shot. That being said, who wants an arms that looks bad? I’m sorry, but the visual aspect matters as much as the meaning. We’re always telling people that "simple is better", and to eliminate most of the things they want to put on their shield, but then we get wrapped up in tradition and what some people did in the past…or culturally. Forgetting that even though it may be traditional, it simply may not look good. I think it’s a good thing to give a nod to your ancestry, or the country where your surname has origins, but not at the risk of ending up with arms other people will look at, and raise their eyebrow. Your symbolism could be impeccable, and your layout can be traditional, but who really cares if it looks bad?
My initial reaction to Mr. Mansfield’s placement of the bear in front of the tree was "wow, that is brilliantly and obviously Spanish flavored!"
Mr. Stolarz reaction seems to have been, "You’ve got your chocolate in my peanut butter!"
Both reactions are probably appropriate.
I also like the Father’s idea of possibly using the acorns to represent siblings in number and eliminating the stars.
JBGarrison;82346 wrote:
Mr. Stolarz reaction seems to have been, "You’ve got your chocolate in my peanut butter!"
:rofl:
JBGarrison;82346 wrote:
I also like the Father’s idea of possibly using the acorns to represent siblings in number and eliminating the stars.
That idea, I do like as well.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I like the tree/acorn (3 as Father suggests) and the bear.
Although I see the Spanish Heraldry bent (I did peruse the primer), My very limitted knowledge makes me think "civic heraldry" when I see this shield. I’m not sure if that’s inexperience (probably) or valid in some way, so I’m just mentioning it.
Kathy McClurg;82348 wrote:
My very limitted knowledge makes me think "civic heraldry" when I see this shield. I’m not sure if that’s inexperience (probably) or valid in some way, so I’m just mentioning it.
You’re maybe thinking of the arms of Berwick-upon-Tweed which in this, their latest (CoA rather than LC) version are of similar form. Also an argument against "proper" beasts and plants, especially on fields of two colours. It’s a bear and a wych-elm BTW.
http://www.civicheraldry.co.uk/berwick.JPG
James
I will say Kenneth’s design is superior to that one haha. The design that Kenneth proposed, bear and all, isn’t bad. I was merely saying in my opinion the bear clutters it up, and it would be better off without the bear as a charge. If you still wanted to keep the bear, bump it up to the crest.
I have to agree that the design, while nice, looks a bit cluttered to me. Perhaps it is because the bear is in front of the tree? What if the bear were next to the tree instead?
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e221/pblanton/Carrasco1.jpg
(Sorry for the clipart look.)
Take care,
My concern with Kenneth’s design is that it’s beginning to look too Spanish for me. Ironically, at those heraldry shops where you can buy your family’s coat of arms the "Carrasco" on is a wild boar standing in front of an oak tree. It looks very similar. http://www.houseofnames.com/nameresults.asp?item=JPG-1001-300&surname=carrasco&origin=SP
But then, looking a little more, the city of Madrid’s arms are almost identical as well, except it looks like an apple tree instead of an oak. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Escudo_de_la_Villa_de_Madrid.svg
I fell like going in this route is losing any kind of distinction I was hoping to have. However, perhaps with the stars on top that can help differentiate. I was also thinking about possibly having an enbattoned chief of Azure with white mullets.
