The International Association of Amateur Heralds

I would blazon it per chevron Azure and Gules a chevronel Or between in chief a mullet of 12 points and in base a chalice Argent. I think stating "middle chief" is redundant - since you aren't stating dexter or sinister, middle would probably be presumed.

Also, the color you used looks orange or tenné to me, but that may also be my monitor.

For what is worth, I agree with Chris, the chevron as illustrated would be a chevronel, if the chalice and mullet are the important points of the arms design, the chevron should be reduced in order to have the room to show the detail of those two charges.

And Jeremy, it looks red on my machine, so it probably is your monitor.

I would also agree that the charge in chief should indeed be mentioned first as it has, apparently, equal importance in the design.

I agree with Jeremy. The "middle chief" is redundant.

After a little additional thought, I would agree also, the position would default to middle chief, and therefore need not be stated.

Thank you all... and I reduced the width of the chevronel and made the mullet larger
"per chevron Azure and Gules a chevronel Or between in chief a mullet of 12 points and in base a chalice Argent"

Good job, best of luck with it..

I think the original was a much stronger design. The single chevronel does not look authentically heraldic to me. I think you can get around the tincture issue by simply making the chalice a color--blue would be best. And the silver star can legitimately over-lie both the blue and gold areas of the shield without offense. So I would suggest either:

Per chevron enhanced Azure and Or a star of twelve points Argent and a chalice Azure in pale, or

Azure on a pile reversed Or surmounted at the point by a star of twelve points Argent a chalice Azure.

(For that matter, the chevronel could be omitted without a tincture violation, and you could just have the shield per chevron Azure and Gules with the two charges as they are. But I think raising the partition line is better for suggesting light streaming down over the chalice from the star.)

JMcMillan wrote:I think the original was a much stronger design. The single chevronel does not look authentically heraldic to me. I think you can get around the tincture issue by simply making the chalice a color--blue would be best. And the silver star can legitimately over-lie both the blue and gold areas of the shield without offense. So I would suggest either:

Per chevron enhanced Azure and Or a star of twelve points Argent and a chalice Azure in pale, or

Azure on a pile reversed Or surmounted at the point by a star of twelve points Argent a chalice Azure.

(For that matter, the chevronel could be omitted without a tincture violation, and you could just have the shield per chevron Azure and Gules with the two charges as they are. But I think raising the partition line is better for suggesting light streaming down over the chalice from the star.)

Interesting thoughts.
The Chalice would need to remain argent or possibly gules... what if

Azure on a pile reversed Or surmounted at the point by a star of 12 points Argent, a chalice Gules.

Its for a Christian group that is using the Chalice to represent "the grail code" - the greatest commandment(s) Given by Christ. Azure would make no sense but Gules would represent the "Grail" as in the legendary cup that held Christ's blood

Unfortunately as most passover Chalices are silver - that is where we ran in to the problem, so maybe the answer would be

Azure on a pile reversed Gules surmounted at the point by a star of 12 points Argent, a chalice of the same.

Then again - the chevronel brings a distinct separation between the Azure and Gules when viewed from a distance.

decisions decisions... LOL!!

Thanks for the comments though, you have me thinking.

If thoughts are still open on this, how about an estoile of 12 instead of the mullet. Since estoiles are classified as celestial objects and are radiant, might give it a little more definition and if the chevronel stays how about wavy instead of plain??

Sorry, I know, more decisions..