Post Your Granted, Assumed or Desired Arms

[Harold Cannon]

MOR Thanks a whole bunch but I have some questions.

As for a blazon, based on what is seen, I think I'd consider:

ARMS: Or within a bordure gules a lion rampant defamed* sable brandishing with its dexter paw a broadsword proper overall on a chief gules within a demi-bordure or three Maltese crosses argent.

(*It may be that you have intended this charge to be a bear rampant, but from the way it is drawn it can only be interpreted as a tail-less lion. If it is your intent to display a lion, then it would benefit from the addition of a tail; if it is a bear, then it needs to be drawn as such, ie: muzzled.)

CREST: (on a wreath of the colours or and gules) upon a grassy mound a bear* statant erect supporting a lochaber axe with his forepaws his dexter hind foot resting upon a rock all proper.

(*Bears, to distinguish them from other animals, are properly depicted as muzzled unless blazoned to the contrary.)

You will note that Joe and I have taken a different approach to the blazon of the bordure. I have chosen to treat both bordures as ordinaries (one red, the other gold) to avoid the possibility of confusing Harold's livery colours with those of the chief of his clan. Were no such confusion to arise, then I would follow Joe's blazon, but would be specific as to the counter-change:

all within a bordure counter-changed in chief

to avoid giving the impression that the bordure was being used as a mark of cadency.

(IS THERE A WAY TO NOT HAVE TO MUZZLE THE BEAR AND WHAT DO YOU VIEW AS MY LIVERY COLORS? I THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE GOLD AND BLACK AND I DONT MIND THAT BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO CHANGE MY COCKADES TO LIVERY COLORS AND THAT WOULD KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE IN A WAY. ALSO THE BORDURE IS NOT A CADENCY MARK.)

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

MOR Thanks a whole bunch but I have some questions:
(IS THERE A WAY TO NOT HAVE TO MUZZLE THE BEAR AND WHAT DO YOU VIEW AS MY LIVERY COLORS? I THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE GOLD AND BLACK AND I DONT MIND THAT BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO CHANGE MY COCKADES TO LIVERY COLORS AND THAT WOULD KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE IN A WAY. ALSO THE BORDURE IS NOT A CADENCY MARK.)

Harold (and Cygnus)--

In heraldry, it's all about the blazon. So, if you want an unmuzzled bear, then you have to ask the question does the bear have his mouth closed, or is he snarling? Looking at the depiction it seems you want the bear snarling, so I would be tempted to blazon it as "... fangs bared, armed and langued gules" this would indicate to the painter that the teeth, claws and tongue of the bear would be red. (As far as gender is concerned, until the Victorian era it was quite common for animals so equipped to be blazoned as "armed, langued, and pizzled". The default was always red, unless the animal was red, in which case blue was most often used.)

Livery colours are (almost always) the first named metal (or [yellow] and argent [white]) and first named colour (red, blue, etc.). Depending on how your arms are blazoned your livery colours would be either yellow and black, or yellow and red. Since the bordure on your arms is not a mark of cadency, then the decision to blazon it depends on what you want for the "colours" on your bonnet. If, to show your allegiance to our clan chief you want to have yellow and black livery colours, then the bordure would come last in the blazon; if you wanted to have yellow and red livery (to match your kilt?) then the bordure would be treated as an ordinary, and it would be mentioned before the (black) bear.

Hope that answers your questions!

[Harold Cannon]

MOR you are awesome! Thanks a whole bunch!!!! I want the livery to stay gold and black so I will leave that the way it is. I will add the part about the claws and teeth too.
Please tell me what you think.


ARMS: Or a bear rampant Sable fangs bared, armed, langued, and pizzled Gules, brandishing a basket-hilted sword proper on a chief Gules three Maltese crosses Argent all within a bordure counter-changed in chief.

CREST: [On a wreath of Or and Sable] Upon a grassy mound a bear statant erect supporting a Lochaber axe with his forepaws, his right hind foot resting upon a boulder all proper.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

MOR you are awesome! Thanks a whole bunch!!!! I want the livery to stay gold and black so I will leave that the way it is. I will add the part about the claws and teeth too.
Please tell me what you think.


ARMS: Or a bear rampant Sable fangs bared, armed, langued, and pizzled Gules, brandishing a basket-hilted sword proper on a chief Gules three Maltese crosses Argent all within a bordure counter-changed in chief.

CREST: [On a wreath Or and Sable] Upon a grassy mound a bear statant erect supporting a Lochaber axe with his forepaws, his right hind foot resting upon a boulder all proper.

Harold, thanks for the kind words.

I think the arms and crest work very well. I should point out, however, that the use of a bordure as a sub-ordinary charge (not a mark of cadency) is highly unusual, especially in Scottish heraldry; indeed I am of the opinion that it is the present practice of the Lord Lyon to only grant bordures as a mark of cadency.

Certainly the arms are every bit as striking without the bordure, and the same visual effect could be achieved by using a tressure counter changed which would allow future generations to be represented by bordures as marks of cadency. This change of charges is entirely your call.

As I have said elsewhere, at the end of the day you are the only person who has to be happy with these arms.

[davidlpope]

MOR you are awesome! Thanks a whole bunch!!!! I want the livery to stay gold and black so I will leave that the way it is. I will add the part about the claws and teeth too.
Please tell me what you think.


ARMS: Or a bear rampant Sable fangs bared, armed, langued, and pizzled Gules, brandishing a basket-hilted sword proper on a chief Gules three Maltese crosses Argent all within a bordure counter-changed in chief.

CREST: [On a wreath of Or and Sable] Upon a grassy mound a bear statant erect supporting a Lochaber axe with his forepaws, his right hind foot resting upon a boulder all proper.

Just a suggestion:

What about:

Or a bear rampant Sable brandishing a basket-hilted sword Proper and on a chief Azure three Maltese crosses Or

It's a bit simpler, but still retains enough in common with the chiefly MacMillan arms to show an obvious connection...

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Just a suggestion:

What about:

Or a bear rampant Sable brandishing a basket-hilted sword Proper and on a chief Azure three Maltese crosses Or

It's a bit simpler, but still retains enough in common with the chiefly MacMillan arms to show an obvious connection...

I think this is a reasonable suggestion, but to truly "tie in" to the chiefly arms of MacMillan either the crosses or the bear (or both) would have to be changed to reflect a sense of the continuity of clanship and community:

(1) or a bear rampant sable etc. [and] on a chief gules three mullets argent

(2) or a lion rampant sable etc. [and] on a chief gules three Maltese crosses argent.

A closer connection to the chiefly arms would, as you have pointed out, be achieved if the chief were azure, and doubly so if the argent Maltese crosses were replaced by three mullets of the same tincture.

[WVHighlander]

Scott,

Hey, he is a "Bad News Bear" he has to have an attitude. Besides to traditional meanings of a bear in heraldry which apply to my particular military career and my family's philosophy it is a sly hommage to my beloved better half. As the joke throughout the family goes the rules of the house are

1. Don't Wake the Bear
2. Feed the Bear
3. Don't poke (tickle) the Bear

And yes she is the Bear. LOL

I am liking this design much better than others I have toyed with. So we will see. Of course my hope of hopes is to get a CoA officially from Lord Lyon or the College of Arms, that order of preference. (No offense to my English cousins.)

[Chas]

Hi John,

I really should have checked this forum first, before I foolishly spent the morning devising four possible new crests. I now see that you have Mr MacMillan on the case. I am quite sure that he will be able to give you more than enough advice.

I have no problem with you personally, John, but I have been able to answer for myself quite adequately for at least the last 40 years. Especially posts that are addressed to me. I have never felt the need nor the desire, to have others speak for me.

Respectfully

Chas