Quote Originally Posted by cajunscot View Post
Many chiefless clans still have "clansman's badges" available today; the Buchanans, for example. What is your source for the crest you are going to use? Remember that the buckle & strap denotes that you are not the owner of said crest, so any use of a crest without might still be considered usurping arms of the "rightful" owner. I would follow Rathdown's advice in this instance.



Since Paul is in a country with a legitmate heraldic authority (The Lyon Court) which tends to frown on individuals assuming arms (just ask Donald Trump!) then this would probably not be the best advice. Granted, it is just a tattoo, and as Rathdown stated, it would most only bring an upraised eyebrow, but it is good to know the conventions of the "gentle science" of heraldry.

Regards,

Todd
Although it is a crest and it says a family name - how would they know who it actually belongs to?
Also - if the person who it did belong to (if it ever did) died more than a certain number of years ago and it wasnt renewed doesnt it then not non longer belong to them? I realise this is a concept of copyright but thought it might be similar...
From the rough design you could argue that my tattoo isnt actually the family crest... the colours are quite different and the objects within it have been manipulated.