Heraldic Beasts?

[davidlpope]

Thanks for the fascinating links.


Among the signers is one armiger whose claim is described as "English grant olf 1768 to the signer and other descendants of his grandfather". In fact, I am a descendant of that same grandfather (though not of the signer) - along with several hundred living cousins. In additional fact, I have a ring bearing those arms, inherited from my great grandfather. Now that we are in the Heraldry forum, does this entitle me to bear those arms? My guess is that nothing in US law prohibits it, but my conviction is that dozens of others are more entitled.

Can we have a three minute explication of matriculation for Americans?

Lucky you! If you can trace your surname ancestry (supported by sufficient proofs) to an individual who was granted those arms you should be able to matriculate them, or be granted a variation of them (some traditions requiring differencing of the arms, where only the eldest son inherits the undifferenced arms). If they are "English" arms, they would have been granted by the College of Arms. Please see the link below for more info. One note, however, is that the COA makes honorary grants of arms, rather than substantive grants, to Americans. That and the fees charged are quite pricey.

http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/About/08.htm

David

[Bugbear]

MacLowlife's arms were granted by Lord Lobster, then we ate him... Ate Lord Lobster that is.

I'm still sorting through a few articles to try to understand what all of this means. However, I'm not qualified to figure it out...

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

MacMillan of Rathdown’s categorisation of the College of Arms as a private institution is not entirely correct, since its officers are held to be part of the royal household.

Actually they are functionaries in the office of the Earl Marshal His Grance the Duke of Norfolk. The charter of their creation makes it quite clear that they are a private body.

To my knowledge the Spanish Cronistas were not regarded as belonging to the royal household, but I could be wrong on that point.

The last Cronista (don Vicente de Cardenas) was appointed for life by Franco, and for administrative purposes his function came under the authority of the Ministry of Justice. It is my understanding that the Marquis de la Floresta has, from time to time, functioned as the personal herald of His Majesty the King of Spain.

While the Lord Lyon is a judge within the Scottish judicial system and is paid out of the public purse, the other heralds of Lyon Court subsist on their fees and on their private means.
In this respect they are not too different from the officers of the College of Arms.

The major difference between the Lyon Court and the College of Arms, which is part of the Duke of Norfolk's household, is that the college grants "without the objection of the Sovereign" whereas the Lyon grants "with the authority of the Sovereign." Thus the Lyon is uniquely both an officer of State as well as the Crown. Likewise, unlike Lyon or the now defunct office of Ulster-- both of whom held their appointments directly from the Sovereign-- appointments to the college are at the discretion of the Duke of Norfolk. So, technically speaking, when the English heralds are present at a State function, they are there by command of the Earl Marshal. Lyon is present at the command of the Queen.

The other major difference is that fees collected by the Lyon go directly to the government, while fees collected by the college go directly to... the heralds themselves.

Now in the purely practical sense, there is very little difference between the heraldic function of the Lyon and the College of Arms. The major difference being that grants from the Lyon enjoy the full force of the law, while those of the College do not.

[Bugbear]

All Right, I have read over several things, though I'm sure nowhere enough, and have concluded that I am not in any way entitled to substantive arms. There is a four-hundred or more year old Precedent, as far as I can tell from the American Heraldry Society information, of non-substantive arms being assumed and used by individuals and organizations etc. in what is now the U.S. That information is covered in all the links Cajunscot has provided. And we all know about Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. constitution, not that I would be qualified to interpret it.

I think I have to retract my gripe in the original post against the youth group using pseudo-arms. As Cajunscot said heraldry is used in the U.S.

So... Would I design and asume arms? Probably not.

At least I'm a bit more aware of heraldry now.

[Mike_Oettle]

Hi, Bugbear – don’t give up after learning so much about the subject!
You don’t have to make an application to the Lord Lyon (or, for that matter, to the Chief Herald of Ireland).
I am sure one of the US registries will be only too glad to help you.
Not sure what you mean by substantive arms – the chances are good that you will be able to devise a variation on your clan arms that are sufficiently different for you to avoid the accusation that you are “stealing” someone else’s arms.
But at any rate I am glad you have a better grasp of the subject.
Regards,
ike

[Bugbear]

Hi Mike,

Not sure what you mean by substantive arms - the chances are good that you will be able to devise a variation on your clan arms that are sufficiently different for you to avoid the accusation that you are "stealing" someone else's arms.

To be valid, a grant of arms must be substantive. Generally speaking substantive grants are made by sovereign entities through the appropriate governmental department. Arms granted by the Lord Lyon and the Chief Herald of Ireland are substantive, as each of these offices are, ultimately, a branch of government. ...
...
As the current Spanish College of Arms lacks a substantive position vis-a-vis the Spanish government or crown, it functions more along the lines of a graphic design studio which then records their work-for-hire on behalf of their clients.

This was the origin of the term "substantive" in the thread. I'm still a little confused as to whom the substantive arms would be valid or invalid, but I assume it is to other heraldic authorities.

There are no clan arms or arms in the family in my case.

[Cygnus]

Bugbear,

If you are interested in acquiring "substantive" arms, you might consider contacting the Bureau of Heraldry of South Africa.

[Bugbear]

Bugbear,

If you are interested in acquiring "substantive" arms, you might consider contacting the Bureau of Heraldry of South Africa.

Don't worry, I know better. For me, there will be no arms: real or fake, valid, or invalid, substantive or non-substantive.

At best, I might some day have a trademark and stamp to press in the bottom of my sculptures., but I doubt it. Almost everything I make is for other artists to complete, and it is their name that goes on the bottom.

That's relating back to the original question with the signet rings etc, and not to say I won't have something placed on the ring I have, but it won't be arms or heraldry.

I needed to know what to avoid doing.

[Mike_Oettle]

Well, Bugbear, I still don’t follow your argument against adopting a coat of arms. Do you have a grudge against them?
All it need comprise is a shield with a (relatively) simple device on it.
A crest is nice to have, but by no means compulsory.
Crowns and coronets are only for those entitled to them, or those who love to show off (usually when they are not entitled to them).
The same goes for supporters.
I have designed several coats of arms, and it should not be too difficult to come up with one for you.
Rathdown has laid a great deal of emphasis on substantive arms, and for my liking I find that obtaining a grant, matriculation or registration is a great help in establishing your right to what you display.
But I have not so far registered my arms in Pretoria, and I am not legally obliged to.
Nor are you under such an obligation.
Let’s see what we can come up with.
Regards,
Mike

[Bugbear]

shoulders

Thanks Mike, but I think I should probably pass on the offer. If you have a public domain depiction or picture of a leaping or rearing zebra I could use as my avatar, I would be interested in that, though.

I don't have a grudge against coats of arms.

From the American Heraldry Society "Guidelines for Heraldic Practice in the United States" (Introduction, sect. 1.1):
"Note: Many systems of personal, family, and group symbolism which are more or less comparable to heraldry also developed in non-European cultures. These
systems are usually subject to their own customary rules and are not covered in these guidelines."

It is a graphic, symbolic representation of oneself like a name, and there are other systems for that in the U.S. I also sensed something from some of the armigers of the forum... Something a little like opening the oven door to check if the biscuits are done. I should pay attention to that...

As far as supporters etc., it understandably discourages the use of those symbols in the U.S. (2.2.1.1).