cachambers007;96375 wrote:

Yes, I thought the smilely was sufficient to show that it was a joke.

Those were some truly horrible examples of heraldry. What is the origin of the first image, it seems too close to your own arms to be mere coincidence.

They’re all MacMillan arms.  The first one was granted to Gen Sir Gordon H. A. MacMillan as the newly-discovered head of the Laggalgarve line, but within about a year it was determined that he was the long-lost chief of the whole clan and received the dormant arms of MacMillan of MacMillan and Knap.

I’ve got the collection up on http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/MacMillan-Armorial/MacMillanArmorial5.html.

Whatever else they may have been, these cluttered arms should certainly have motivated the grantees to "do the research" and fill the empty chiefly shoes…

Joe’s attached compilation is both interesting and educational (and in some instances, nice armorial eye candy!)

It’s also IMO a good argument in favor of the American tradition (well, our Guidelines anyway) of not requiring differences where there’s a common bloodline.

http://www.archindy.org/archbishop/files/coat-small.jpg

Well, we now what what the archbishop has decided to do.

Could be worse.  Somehow, I’m sure.

At least the artist is competent.

Well, well another rather cluttered design. But at least it resembles Heraldry.