Mr. Ademicael, I like your design a lot. Dispersing the mullets and removing the hurt seems like an improvement because while the original design looked great to me visually, it seemed to almost border on a bit of usurpation of the state flag. I guess it was too uncomfortably close of a match to me.
EDIT: I should add on a separate note, that I’m with Mr. Berntsen on using the Tudor Rose as a crest. Again, while it looks great visually, it just seems like a slight usurpation. :D
Andemicael;83823 wrote:
I was thinking, why not write out 1914 to turn it into a phrase instead of a date?
I quickly threw this together to help visualize some of the various ideas here:
Looks good. What color is that eagle? Also, the red/gules is an important color, so we’d swap out the blue/azure for it.
Jeffrey Boyd Garrison;83824 wrote:
Mr. Ademicael, I like your design a lot. Dispersing the mullets and removing the hurt seems like an improvement because while the original design looked great to me visually, it seemed to almost border on a bit of usurpation of the state flag. I guess it was too uncomfortably close of a match to me.
EDIT: I should add on a separate note, that I’m with Mr. Berntsen on using the Tudor Rose as a crest. Again, while it looks great visually, it just seems like a slight usurpation. :D
The US Army Institute of Heraldry’s coat of arms also makes use of the Tudor rose. I’ve also seen it referred to as a "heraldic" rose, which sounds pretty generic to me.
hey dh, the eagle is supposed to be gules.
Here it is reversed:
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h161/blackgas/coat7blue.jpg
Though it loses the connection to Tenn. a bit
Perhaps the division could instead be a red embattled chevron, dividing a blue base from a white chief. It could be embattled with six on both sides (instead of 12 on one side as it is now), which would make it stand out better at a distance and at small sizes.
Like so: ( i did these quick, so the embattlement might not be numerically correct, but you get the idea.)
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h161/blackgas/coat7-2-colors.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2588/5787616299_89c2f8891b_z.jpg
I think this is the best design so far…Very nice!
dhjohnson;83827 wrote:
The US Army Institute of Heraldry’s coat of arms also makes use of the Tudor rose. I’ve also seen it referred to as a "heraldic" rose, which sounds pretty generic to me.
The Tudor rose is a particular heraldic rose. It is essentially a double rose, one Argent seeded Or atop another Gules barbed Vert.
The rose depicted in the crest above is not just any heraldic rose but the specific one known as the "Tudor rose".
dhjohnson;83827 wrote:
The US Army Institute of Heraldry’s coat of arms also makes use of the Tudor rose. I’ve also seen it referred to as a "heraldic" rose, which sounds pretty generic to me.
The TIOH website explains that the Tudor Rose was chosen specifically as a reference to the ruling Tudor dynasty which was on the throne when America was first founded.
A "Heraldic Rose", AFAIK, refers to the particular stylized floral design. Tudor, York, and Lancaster Roses refer to specific colors (Red/white, White, and Red, respectively) that were armorial badges of those particular families.
David Pope;83830 wrote:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2588/5787616299_89c2f8891b_z.jpg
I think this is the best design so far…Very nice!
+1
I would make the halo Or, but other than that, this one is right on. Really nice, Andemicael.
If anything, we’d probably be up for doing something like this:
http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=70&pictureid=1062
If we do, how would the blazon change?
Per chevron inverted embattled with twelve battlements Argent and Gules in chief a (haloed?) eagle’s head erased Gules in dexter, middle, and sinister base a mullet Argent???
dhjohnson;83840 wrote:
If anything, we’d probably be up for doing something like this:
http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=70&pictureid=1062
If we do, how would the blazon change?
Per Chevron reversed embattled of twelve battlements Argent and Gules in chief an Eagle’s head erased Gules beaked and haloed Or and in base three mullets two over one Argent.
dhjohnson;83840 wrote:
If anything, we’d probably be up for doing something like this:
http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=70&pictureid=1062
If we do, how would the blazon change?
Per chevron inverted embattled with twelve battlements Argent and Gules in chief a (haloed?) eagle’s head erased Gules in dexter, middle, and sinister base a mullet Argent???
This is very nice!
Rather than "twelve battlements," wouldn’t it be "twelve merlons"? The whole partition line represents a crenelated battlement. The solid, square projections are merlons, while the spaces between them are crenels.
Dohrman Byers;83848 wrote:
Rather than "twelve battlements," wouldn’t it be "twelve merlons"? The whole partition line represents a crenelated battlement. The solid, square projections are merlons, while the spaces between them are crenels.
I think merlons may be correct but have heard differing opinions.
I found a blazon that described an embattled line as a "battlement of three battlements". Merlon would be more accurate, though.
Not to belabor the point to death, but the Tudor Rose especially unslipped and rendered "proper" as seen in this thread so far is actually THE badge worn by retainers of the Tudors. It’s been apropriated later as a symbol also of England. Regardless of what the TIOH puts out, I would caution against the use of this particular rose by itself as a crest as it will surely draw fire (if the troop is okay with this, then that’s probably not a problem). 
