SO, I was looking for a blazon in the thread and didn’t find one.
Also, to prevent floating on the crest, Robert could go with "issuant’ from something (wreath of the colors, a wreath of some kind of white flower, etc.) a stag’s head sable.
alternatively, if he just used for the crest: A stag’s head sable.. would that unfloat and allow for the artist to do the mantling as suggested from the head?
Kathy McClurg;101011 wrote:
SO, I was looking for a blazon in the thread and didn’t find one.
Also, to prevent floating on the crest, Robert could go with "issuant’ from something (wreath of the colors, a wreath of some kind of white flower, etc.) a stag’s head sable.
alternatively, if he just used for the crest: A stag’s head sable.. would that unfloat and allow for the artist to do the mantling as suggested from the head?
In a crest (not on a shield) I would interpret "a stag’s head sable" as being issuant and in profile. The term couped could be used, but to me that’s superfluous since the cut line would be hidden by the torse anyway—unless the deer’s head was floating to make it visible. "From a wreath of the colors" would make the intent clearer, I suppose, but brevity is the soul of wit.
If brevity is really the soul of wit, what does a 90+ message thread say about the state of our collective wits?
My personal preference, FWIW, is to say "issuing from a wreath" or something similar, to emphasize/remind/inform the reader that the wreath is intended to represent a 3-dimensional circular object viewed from the side, around the base of a 3-dimensional object fixed to the top of the helmet, rather than a one-dimensional barber pole between the helm and an often-floating or barely attached, 2-dimwnsional crest. The knowledgeable reader will already know that, but most of the population may not.
Michael F. McCartney;101038 wrote:
If brevity is really the soul of wit, what does a 90+ message thread say about the state of our collective wits?
My personal preference, FWIW, is to say "issuing from a wreath" or something similar, to emphasize/remind/inform the reader that the wreath is intended to represent a 3-dimensional circular object viewed from the side, around the base of a 3-dimensional object fixed to the top of the helmet, rather than a one-dimensional barber pole between the helm and an often-floating or barely attached, 2-dimwnsional crest. The knowledgeable reader will already know that, but most of the population may not.
AKA…Novice’s like myself. Thank you Michael! 
You’re most welcome!
Kathy McClurg;101011 wrote:
SO, I was looking for a blazon in the thread and didn’t find one…
I saw this one being Per Chevron Argent and Chevronny of Six Sable and Argent, in Chief a Stag Courant Sable.
Blazoned that way turns the chevrons from a charge to an alteration of the field tincture and should completely do away with any conflicts with the Bladen arms. Robert, I don’t think you should worry about adopting the arms as is. I’m starting to see them associated with you anyway and I don’t think that is a bad thing.
As far as the crest is concerned, I am in agreement about it being issuant rather than erased. It just makes for a cleaner design. FYI - I wouldn’t even use "issuant" in the blazon, as Joe put it "a Stag’s head Sable" is all you’ll ever need.
Can I get some pure review on my stuff. I’ve come to the last of it looks. The finish is in sight…
So, this is what I have:
Shield: Argent a stag courant over three chevronelles sable.
Crest: A stag’s head sable.
OR
Crest: A stage’s head couped Sable.
Mantle: Argent and Sable.
Motto: Acta non Verba
Thoughts?
I like it, although should it be blazoned "chevronels" as opposed to "chevronelles" or would that even matter?
I vote again for "a Stag’s head Sable".
mjsmith;101658 wrote:
I like it, although should it be blazoned "chevronels" as opposed to "chevronelles" or would that even matter?
I vote again for "a Stag’s head Sable".
Thanks for your input!
Robert Blackard;101657 wrote:
Crest: A stag’s head sable.
OR
Crest: A stage’s head couped Sable.
What do you envisage as the difference between these two?
Since you’re canting on your name I think I would blazon the animal on the shield and crest as a hart, instead of a stag.
David Pope;101661 wrote:
Since you’re canting on your name I think I would blazon the animal on the shield and crest as a hart, instead of a stag.
Good point thank you.
Joseph McMillan;101660 wrote:
What do you envisage as the difference between these two?
Looking at it….and some Googling… They kind of say the same thing, this is from what I can tell. I guess it’s just depends on which one would looks more proper in the sense of Heraldry.
Robert Blackard;101663 wrote:
Looking at it….and some Googling… They kind of say the same thing, this is from what I can tell. I guess it’s just depends on which one would looks more proper in the sense of Heraldry.
Okay, just wanted to be sure.
"Couped" makes sense for a head charged on a shield, but not so much for a crest. If you want to show the head issuing from the top of the helm, as would be normal, I would just say "a hart’s head Sable" (agreeing with David on blazoning a canting charge).
That said, you may want to add some minor element to the crest so it’s less likely to duplicate someone else’s. Especially in monochrome, a stag’s/buck’s/hart’s head by itself is hardly distinctive. Maybe charge the neck with a small silver chevron, or make the antlers silver, or have it holding something in the mouth?
Joseph McMillan;101664 wrote:
Okay, just wanted to be sure.
"Couped" makes sense for a head charged on a shield, but not so much for a crest. If you want to show the head issuing from the top of the helm, as would be normal, I would just say "a hart’s head Sable" (agreeing with David on blazoning a canting charge).
That said, you may want to add some minor element to the crest so it’s less likely to duplicate someone else’s. Especially in monochrome, a stag’s/buck’s/hart’s head by itself is hardly distinctive. Maybe charge the neck with a small silver chevron, or make the antlers silver, or have it holding something in the mouth?
Tell me about it… While doing some research i found this http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~harney2/heraldry.htm
Harneys or Harnous of County Bedford (Check the picture) I really got to keep mine different…lol