Clan Ewing

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

A quick look at Collins SCOTTISH CLAN & FAMILY ENCYCLOPEDIA by George Way of Plean and Romilly Squire (now of Rubislaw) shows no recognized chief of the Ewings.

However, even if there was a chief of the Ewings, it would not be strictly necessary to obtain permission to display the crest on your sporran. What is not generally known is that, unlike arms, crests are not unique to a single individual. In addition to Ewing, the crest of a demi-lion rampant holding in its dexter paw a star is also used by twenty other families. So, as a strictly "historical" item there is nothing to prevent you from wearing the sporran.

However, since a crest (in and of itself) can not exist without a coat of arms, you may not "adopt it" as your crest unless you first receive a substantive grant of arms. You may do this by applying for a grant of arms from one of the following heraldic authorities: the Bureau of Heraldry in the Republic of South Africa; the Chief Herald of Canada; the Court of the Lord Lyon; the Chief Herald of Ireland; or (in exceptional circumstances) the College of Arms in London.

As part of that grant you may request as your crest the demi-lion on your sporran, as used by Alvares, Craig, Dillon, Elstob, Eurn, Frew, Gladhill, Henlock, Holburne, Hulburn, Inglis, Lamb, Lambe, Liddell, Lidell, Liddiard, Roberts, Stable, Starr, St. Lyz, and yes, Ewing.

[Dram]

A quick look at Collins SCOTTISH CLAN & FAMILY ENCYCLOPEDIA by George Way of Plean and Romilly Squire (now of Rubislaw) shows no recognized chief of the Ewings.

However, even if there was a chief of the Ewings, it would not be strictly necessary to obtain permission to display the crest on your sporran. What is not generally known is that, unlike arms, crests are not unique to a single individual. In addition to Ewing, the crest of a demi-lion rampant holding in its dexter paw a star is also used by twenty other families. So, as a strictly "historical" item there is nothing to prevent you from wearing the sporran.

However, since a crest (in and of itself) can not exist without a coat of arms, you may not "adopt it" as your crest unless you first receive a substantive grant of arms. You may do this by applying for a grant of arms from one of the following heraldic authorities: the Bureau of Heraldry in the Republic of South Africa; the Chief Herald of Canada; the Court of the Lord Lyon; the Chief Herald of Ireland; or (in exceptional circumstances) the College of Arms in London.

As part of that grant you may request as your crest the demi-lion on your sporran, as used by Alvares, Craig, Dillon, Elstob, Eurn, Frew, Gladhill, Henlock, Holburne, Hulburn, Inglis, Lamb, Lambe, Liddell, Lidell, Liddiard, Roberts, Stable, Starr, St. Lyz, and yes, Ewing.

Thank you. That clears quite a bit up for me. Just wanted to make sure I did things in a correct manner.

As far as arms are concerend I will not anytime soon be requesting a grant, as the expense is simply too much (maybe someday).

I contacted the College of Arms years ago, as one of my ancestors was a baron and I wished to see if the Arms were available. If I recall correctly the price to recieve his arms was approaching 3,000 USD or more.

I suppose if I had expendable cash it might be something interesting to hang on the wall, but as an American, born and raised (and it really having no meaning here), I could not justify that kind of out-lay. Perhaps when I retire or maybe I could take up a family collection!!!

[macwilkin]

I suppose if I had expendable cash it might be something interesting to hang on the wall, but as an American, born and raised (and it really having no meaning here), I could not justify that kind of out-lay. Perhaps when I retire or maybe I could take up a family collection!!!

This is an oft-repeated myth, that somehow arms have no meaning in the USA, which is simply not true. Think of all of the arms of cities, counties, states and even the "Great Seal of the Republic", not to mention that there are many private citizens who are also armigers, including our first President and a number of his successors:

http://americanheraldry.org/pages/in...n=Main.Notable

The US Army even maintains its own heraldic department to regulate the use of devices which are used by various units.

Time to but this old myth out to pasture.

T.

[Dram]

This is an oft-repeated myth, that somehow arms have no meaning in the USA, which is simply not true. Think of all of the arms of cities, counties, states and even the "Great Seal of the Republic", not to mention that there are many private citizens who are also armigers, including our first President and a number of his successors:

http://americanheraldry.org/pages/in...n=Main.Notable

The US Army even maintains its own heraldic department to regulate the use of devices which are used by various units.

Time to but this old myth out to pasture.

T.

Okay. Can I borrow $3,000.00 from you?

[macwilkin]

Okay. Can I borrow $3,000.00 from you?

You don't need to. Some heraldic scholars believe that since America has no official heraldic authority like the Lyon Court or the College of Arms, American citizens may "assume" their own arms as long as they do not usurp someone else's achievement. This is still not a popular idea, and such assumed arms would never be recognised in the UK, but not all European nations heraldic customs are as strict as those found in the British Isles, especially Scotland.

You may also register your arms with other heraldic organisations, such as the Bureau of Heraldry in the Republic of South Africa, or the New England Genealogical & Historical Society's Committee on Heraldry.

T.

[Dram]

You don't need to. Some heraldic scholars believe that since America has no official heraldic authority like the Lyon Court or the College of Arms, American citizens may "assume" their own arms as long as they do not usurp someone else's achievement. This is still not a popular idea, and such assumed arms would never be recognised in the UK, but not all European nations heraldic customs are as strict as those found in the British Isles, especially Scotland.

You may also register your arms with other heraldic organisations, such as the Bureau of Heraldry in the Republic of South Africa, or the New England Genealogical & Historical Society's Committee on Heraldry.

T.

I am just kidding with you.

I may indeed attempt to register for my ancestors arms but that will be well in the future. For now I can live without my own arms.

Interestingly, my ancestor that had arms was not too keen on his American family. When that part of my family came to the U.S. he remained in Great Britain, my great Uncles were his brothers that came to the U.S.A.

Years later some of my family returned for a visit and I was told that they were less than welcome. Not sure what spurred this sort of reception but perhaps he wouldn't even want me to have his arms.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Indeed. For an American to apply to a foreign heraldic authority for their "permit" to use their coat of arms would be along the line of applying to the building authority of a foreign country for their permission to build and occupy a house here in America.

Your statement about permits doesn't make sense. If a citizen of the United States wishes to posses substantive arms then he or she has no option but to apply to one of the foreign heraldic offices for a grant of arms. Once the arms are granted how they are used is entirely one's own business, and no further license is required of the granting authority.

These various heraldic authorities exist as a means of collecting fees (taxes) for the governments that they serve.

Here you are totally wrong-- the fees collected do not cover the costs of the grants. With the exception of the College of Arms in London (which is a private body) the cost of maintaining an heraldic authority is borne by their national government, and is justified on cultural grounds.

In return they assume the authority of regulating the designs of coats of arms and make their determinations on who they believe to have the best rights to claim them.

Again, you are just plain wrong. Heralds do not assume any authority beyond that which is granted to them by the State or Government which maintains their office. A coat of arms is a species of property-- like a tea pot or a tombstone-- and it is the function of the heraldic authority to prevent frauds from misappropriating the heraldic property of those rightfully entitled to same.

Any pretence of authority over Americans (or any other nationality oputside their political sphere of influence) is absurd and fraudulent.

Wrong again. When someone applies for and receives a grant of arms they become subject to the authority of the granting body, regardless of their nationality or place of residence. That authority is implicit in the granting process.

In fact, on Irish grants, after stating the arms can be "advanced on shield or banner without the let or hindrance of any manner of persons whatsoever", the letters patent go on to say, "excepting always the authority of this, my office". In other words, whatever the state may grant (through its heraldic authority) it may also revoke. Both Lyon and Garter share this prerogative, as does every other granting heraldic authority.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Someone must be asleep at the wheel then, as literally thousands of representations of coats of arms are sold at profit to persons having no grant from any heraldic authority - a situation which continues with complete impunity on a daily basis though hundreds of heraldic bucket shops like this one worldwide. How many cases has any of these heraldic authorities prosecuted against such businesses who sell the armorial bearings of others to persons they are not registered to?

No one is asleep at the wheel. There is, however, a popular misconception concerning "bucket shops" and the duties (as opposed to the authority) of heraldic officers such as the Lord Lyon.

Something which you and a great many "armchair armorists" overlook is the fact that it is not against the law to sell a coat of arms as a decorative item. Nor is it against the law to display a coat of arms as a decorative item. It is, however against the law to use someone else's arms in business, or to ursurp them and pass them off as your own.

Basically what it boils down to is this:

It is up to the armiger to defend and protect his rights in the first instance. Only if an armiger complains to the heraldic authority will they take action. Now in probably 99 out of 100 instances the bucket shop will comply with the request of the armiger to "cease and desist". If they don't (and a few won't) then the heraldic authority may, if so requested, intervene. Usually when this happens the shop keeper rolls over. If he doesn't it may lead to civil or criminal prosecution as has happened recently in Scotland with a bus company displaying the Royal Arms on its coaches, and a company in Edinburgh churning out baseball hats by the thousand.