Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Family crest

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Family crest

    Just a quick question from a novice. Does every family have a Family Crest ? If so what is the best way of finding it ?

    thanks in advance

    james

  • #2
    Scrap that, I did a forum search and found stacks of info on the subject. thanks for looking

    Comment


    • #3
      There are plenty of companies online who will be happy to take your hard-earned pennies to give you "your" family crest. Whether or not what they give you is correct is another matter!

      Christine
      Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

      Comment


      • #4
        99.9% of "family crests" are not worth the paper/vellum they are printed on. Just having a surname doesn't entitle you to an armorial.
        Uncle John - Passed away March 2020

        Comment


        • #5
          And if you were entitled to one you'd know about it.
          ~ with love from Little Nell~
          Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

          Comment


          • #6
            As the others have said, coats of arms are only granted to an individual and are not in fact hereditary. On the death of the holder the eldest son then has to apply to the Heralds to take over the arms for himself. There is therefore no such thing as a 'family' coat of arms.

            Kate x

            Comment


            • #7
              I do wish people would stop stating that "coats of arms are only granted to an individual and are not in fact hereditary" and similar phrases, the advice is wrong.
              Under English heraldry "Coats of Arms" are hereditary.
              Since the start of heraldry in England the Achievement has been hereditary.
              What is more, more than one person may display the same achievement at the same time.
              There is no requirement under English heraldry to use differencing and all unmarried daughters may use their father’s achievement.
              Cheers
              Guy
              Guy passed away October 2022

              Comment


              • #8
                I do apologise!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Actually, looking on the College of Arms websites, they state in the FAQs that coats of arms belong to individuals and that "they must either have had it granted to them or be descended in the legitimate male line from a person to whom arms were granted or confirmed in the past." Implying that eldest sons do have to prove their descent, as would unmarried daughters. I still don't think I'm essentially wrong. I bow to your apparently superior knowledge on the requirements for differencing.
                  Cheers.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My understanding is that the arms descend to the eldest son by right of inheritance BUT NOT automatically.

                    In other words, the eldest son must make a claim to the College of Heralds. If he doesn't, the Arms lapse, if no one else makes a claim either.

                    OC

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      And a little bit of further reading shows that you're right on there being no 'requirement' to use differencing in English heraldry - the College do not demand that arms be differenced nor do they have a distinct set of rules for differencing unlike in Scotland, however making small changes to arms *has* been common practice for over 400 years, and younger sons may apply to the College to 'matriculate' their father's arms to use for themselves. Unmarried daughters may only use their fathers achievement if in a lozenge or oval.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
                        My understanding is that the arms descend to the eldest son by right of inheritance BUT NOT automatically.

                        In other words, the eldest son must make a claim to the College of Heralds. If he doesn't, the Arms lapse, if no one else makes a claim either.

                        OC
                        Not so that is Scottish heraldry, not English. In England there is no requirement for the Heralds to be involved, either in inhertited "Arms" or in fact the use of a unique Achievement.
                        A person may be granted an Achievement or by prescriptive use of "Arms".
                        The heralds themselves recognised this prescriptive use in the visitations.

                        The heralds like to make out they need to be involved because it makes them a lucrative income but legally there is no requirement for them to be involved.
                        Cheers
                        Guy
                        Guy passed away October 2022

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Daughters have to use a lozenge as women cannot use a shield, helmet or mantling even if they were granted "Arms" in their own right they would have to be displayed on a lozenge.
                          It should also be noted no woman (except the monarch) can inherit, use, or transmit a crest (the embellishment on a helmet) or a motto.
                          Cheers
                          Guy
                          Guy passed away October 2022

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            As this discussion is rightly concerned with factual accuracy we might point out that "crest" in the original posting is misleading. The crest is only a small part of the coat of arms; it is positioned above the shield.

                            Peter

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X