South African Arms?

[Mike_Oettle]

Hi, Ethan – while it sounds laudable for a US citizen to go with a registry within the US, there is this to consider: these registries are all private, and have no co-ordination between them.
In the context especially of Scottish heraldry this means that if an applicant submits a design that is out of kilter with the rest of his clan, the register is likely to accept it as originally designed, and not bring it in line with traditional usage.
Granted, the only way of obtaining arms that are 100% in line with Scottish usage is to apply to the Lord Lyon. However, this is an expensive route to take, and the Bureau has two distinct advantages.
a) its fees are the cheapest for an official, nationally recognised register anywhere in the world, and
b) it does its best to follow the Stodart system where possible.
Granted, there could still be some overlapping with the usage of Lyon Court, but great efforts are made to avoid this.
The third plus is that (as mentioned under a) ) it is an official register, internationally recognised.
Finally, I have just noticed your query about age restrictions. I am unaware of any, but feel free to e-mail the Bureau at: heraldry@dac.gov.za
Regards,
Mike

[SlackerDrummer]

Unless you belong to some organization that requires your coat of arms to be registered with a government, there is absolutely no reason for an American to register arms with the South African Bureau of Heraldry. It doesn't afford them any more protection than assuming arms outright. It does provide you with a nice registration certificate, but for that cost I can point you to half a dozen professional heraldic artists who will produce an even better illustration.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

The primary function of a herald is the recording of arms in his registers; the devising of arms is a secondary function that kicks in when determining the apportionment of an heraldic estate (ie: cadency), or when someone reaches what used to be called "the port of gentry" ie: they need or want a coat of arms for purposes of identification or self-aggrandizement.

The "Catch 22" in heraldry is that heralds only recognize as valid those arms in their registers; the others, for all intents and purposes, do not exist.

Now every heraldic office sets its own standards as to what it will, or will not, record in its registers, and these standards often change. For instance, Lyon used to record arms emanating from Spain, but no longer does so, and the College of Arms does not recognize Canadian arms.

The reality of the situation is that no one office of arms is superior to any other (despite what they and their followers may tell you) and a registration by South Africa is no more, or less, valid than one emanating from Edinburgh or Ottawa. A registration of arms, usually referred to as "letters patent", is like the title to your car. It defines a species of property by year (date of registration) make (your name) and model (the blazon). Looked at another way, it is like a university degree. Does a degree from an Oxford College make one any smarter than someone with a degree from Bridgewater College in Virginia? No, but it may have greater snob appeal, and that's about it. Both, however, are of greater intrinsic worth than a "diploma" that "Bob down the road" may have printed on his desk top and given to you to impress the neighbors. The same applies to heraldic registrations.

So, if you want to register your arms, as opposed to merely hanging an heraldic picture on your wall, then your choices are pretty straight forward. If you do not qualify under the rules of Scotland, Canada, Ireland, or England, then your options are registration in South Africa or Spain.

[SlackerDrummer]

The reality of the situation is that no one office of arms is superior to any other (despite what they and their followers may tell you) and a registration by South Africa is no more, or less, valid than one emanating from Edinburgh or Ottawa. A registration of arms, usually referred to as "letters patent", is like the title to your car. It defines a species of property by year (date of registration) make (your name) and model (the blazon). Looked at another way, it is like a university degree. Does a degree from an Oxford College make one any smarter than someone with a degree from Bridgewater College in Virginia? No, but it may have greater snob appeal, and that's about it. Both, however, are of greater intrinsic worth than a "diploma" that "Bob down the road" may have printed on his desk top and given to you to impress the neighbors. The same applies to heraldic registrations.

Wow. The problem with that analogy is that there is an inherent difference between the knowledge obtained from going to college/university vs. not going to college/university. Therefore your analogy of various educational institutions is valid as it pertains to the differences among heraldic authorities. But if I understand you correctly, you are comparing the assumption of arms without the use of a professional herald to obtaining a fake degree printed by your neighbor down the street. That is absurd. I would agree with you if the quality in design of all assumed arms was far below the standards of those being produced by authorities, but they aren't. So the only real difference is that one is sanctioned by a sovereign or government and the other is not. In America there is no such authority, so the only option for the former is to seek that sanction from a foreign power, or from a private foreign entity such as the Spanish cronista. How utterly unpatriotic.

I assume, of course, that you are talking about assumed arms (the equivalent of acquired knowledge) and not bogus "grants" (the equivalent of a bogus degree) given that there are no entities in the USA which grant arms. In the US there are only private registries, just like in Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, all of which have no official granting authority and in all of which citizens may freely assume arms.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

You have totally missed the point.

What I'm saying is this: In some jurisdictions registrations of arms are issued by government authority, and outside of their own jurisdiction no one government authority is superior to any other; however, they all are superior to registrations issued by groups established by private initiative. In other words, the value of a "registration" issued by a private body is about on par with one of those "college degrees" printed in your neighbor's garage.

This has nothing to do with the quality of the design of the arms -- and nowhere have I broached this subject. Nor does it have anything to do with people assuming arms, other than to suggest that those who may wish to do so, at least in the United States, generally have but two options if they want to record those arms in an official register: the South African Bureau of Heraldry or the Cronista de Armas in Spain. By the way, the Cronista is not a private body. It is a functioning bureau within the government of the autonomous region of Castile y Leon in Spain.

Finally, you said:

"In America there is no such authority, so the only option for the former is to seek that sanction from a foreign power, or from a private foreign entity such as the Spanish cronista. How utterly unpatriotic."

I wonder if you understand how utterly offensive this must sound to those American members of X Marks The Scot who have registered arms with the Lord Lyon, the Chief Herald of Ireland, the Chief Herald of Canada, the College of Arms in England, the South African Bureau of Heraldry, or the Cronista de Armas in Spain?

Are you seriously suggesting they aren't patriotic?

Now that is absurd.

[SlackerDrummer]

What I'm saying is this: In some jurisdictions registrations of arms are issued by government authority, and outside of their own jurisdiction no one government authority is superior to any other; however, they all are superior to registrations issued by groups established by private initiative. In other words, the value of a "registration" issued by a private body is about on par with one of those "college degrees" printed in your neighbor's garage.

So in your opinion arms registered in Der Herold or the Wapenregister are the equivalent of Billy Bob printing you a college degree? Really? You can't be serious.

This has nothing to do with the quality of the design of the arms -- and nowhere have I broached this subject. Nor does it have anything to do with people assuming arms, other than to suggest that those who may wish to do so, at least in the United States, generally have but two options if they want to record those arms in an official register: the South African Bureau of Heraldry or the Cronista de Armas in Spain. By the way, the Cronista is not a private body. It is a functioning bureau within the government of the autonomous region of Castile y Leon in Spain.

Except that the Cronista has no legal authority over personal arms. And foreign registration does nothing to protect your arms here in the United States, so registration is not even necessary, either official or an unofficial.

Finally, you said:

"In America there is no such authority, so the only option for the former is to seek that sanction from a foreign power, or from a private foreign entity such as the Spanish cronista. How utterly unpatriotic."

I wonder if you understand how utterly offensive this must sound to those American members of X Marks The Scot who have registered arms with the Lord Lyon, the Chief Herald of Ireland, the Chief Herald of Canada, the College of Arms in England, the South African Bureau of Heraldry, or the Cronista de Armas in Spain?

Are you seriously suggesting they aren't patriotic?

There are good and valid reasons to seek arms from a foreign source. The two that immediately come to mind are, first, an ancestral connection to the place and, second, the necessity of having arms that conform to the requirements of some organization that one belongs to (e.g. the Order of St. John and the like). In cases like those I emphatically do not believe that those persons are unpatriotic. If, however, they are seeking a grant or registration from a foreign entity because they have been hoodwinked into thinking that that is the only true and proper way to have a coat of arms, then what I am suggesting is that I am utterly perplexed by their behavior. I cannot think of anything like its equivalent that people would seek out from a foreign government because it is not available from our government especially when it is not necessary for the government to be involved for them to have it in the first place. Can you?

[davidlpope]

I cannot think of anything like its equivalent that people would seek out from a foreign government because it is not available from our government especially when it is not necessary for the government to be involved for them to have it in the first place. Can you?

Chivalric Orders? Peerages? Grants of arms from Ireland(Kennedy and Clinton)?

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

So in your opinion arms registered in Der Herold or the Wapenregister are the equivalent of Billy Bob printing you a college degree? Really? You can't be serious.

Those registers have no more official standing than does the American College of Heraldry. That's not opinion, it's fact. I don't know where you are coming from on this.

Except that the Cronista has no legal authority over personal arms. And foreign registration does nothing to protect your arms here in the United States, so registration is not even necessary, either official or an unofficial.

All I can say is that the Cronista de Armas is quite obviously acting within the scope of his office when registering arms. If he wasn't, he would be removed from office. Further, a foreign registration may provide a degree of protection to arms in the United States as they would prove prior use of the arms in more than one country. But the bottom line regarding defending one's arms from usurpation is this: with the exception of Scotland it is up to the armiger, not the office of arms that has registered those arms, to sue anyone who infringes his rights.

There are good and valid reasons to seek arms from a foreign source. The two that immediately come to mind are, first, an ancestral connection to the place and, second, the necessity of having arms that conform to the requirements of some organization that one belongs to (e.g. the Order of St. John and the like). In cases like those I emphatically do not believe that those persons are unpatriotic. If, however, they are seeking a grant or registration from a foreign entity because they have been hoodwinked into thinking that that is the only true and proper way to have a coat of arms, then what I am suggesting is that I am utterly perplexed by their behavior. I cannot think of anything like its equivalent that people would seek out from a foreign government because it is not available from our government especially when it is not necessary for the government to be involved for them to have it in the first place. Can you?

I find it not in the least perplexing that an American gentleman interested in bearing arms would look to Europe, or elsewhere, for some sort of legal validation of those arms. Is it necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I think that is a question that only the individual can answer. I think, however, that you are off the mark when you suggest that those applying for foreign registration have been somehow "hoodwinked". It has been my experience that those individuals who come to the table seeking arms are, by and large, fairly cognizant of their options regarding registering or not registering their arms; likewise they are aware of the limitations as far as applying to external heraldic authorities. Most of all they know that arms do not exist in a vacuum.

Typically an American might fall under the jurisdiction of the Lord Lyon (if of provable Scottish ancestry), or the College of Arms (provided one can find a British armigerous ancestor in the direct male line) or, if neither of these apply, then one falls under the jurisdiction of Spain. This is a result of the decision of Pope Alexander VI in 1493 which divided the recently discovered lands in the New World between rival claimants, Spain and Portugal. This effectively made all of what is now the United States part of New Spain, and it is what gives Spanish Cronistas an imperial mandate to record arms throughout North and South America, with the exception of Brazil (which ended up being Portuguese) and Canada, which has its own heraldic authority. This "imperial" Spanish mandate is no different, although much less restrictive, than that exercised by the Lord Lyon, or Chief Herald of Ireland, or the College of Arms.

What I can not fathom is why anyone would get upset over someone deciding to register their arms with an external government agency when none exists in the United States? If there were no U.S. Patent Office, would someone be a fool, or unpatriotic, for registering their invention in a foreign country? I think not.

[SlackerDrummer]

Chivalric Orders?

The real ones or the fake ones? Either way, that may be a fair comparison. It is certainly something some Americans seek out from foreign entities. But, on the other hand, not a fair comparison because we don't have them. We do, however, have the ability to assume and have arms. So if people think they have to go outwith our borders to obtain arms the same way they have to go outwith our borders to be a member of a chivalric order, they are mistaken.

Peerages?

Unless inherited, is that even something that an American could obtain? Perhaps as a gift, but surely not as a commodity.

Grants of arms from Ireland(Kennedy and Clinton)?

I don't think you can compare it to itself.

[SlackerDrummer]

What I can not fathom is why anyone would get upset over someone deciding to register their arms with an external government agency when none exists in the United States? If there were no U.S. Patent Office, would someone be a fool, or unpatriotic, for registering their invention in a foreign country? I think not.

I am not upset that people do it. I am upset by the insistence that it's necessary and that arms not registered with an "official" authority are somehow substandard. If registering with a foreign government were necessary on any sort of global scale, then why don't Scots with grants from Lyon register their arms in South Africa? Why don't Englishmen with grants from the College of Arms obtain additional certifications from the Spanish Cronista? Because it isn't important that they do so. And the same goes for the arms of Americans. There is proof that I designed my coat of arms when I did and that I have been using them as a personal cognizance since they were assumed and I do not believe that any court in this country is going to give more weight to a foreign registration than to that evidence if it ever came down to identity theft, which is about the only thing I can think of where the usurpation of arms might actually have some legal recourse in the USA, simply because it is "official".

If I went to the SABH today and registered your arms, Scott, (which I could) you could take your confirmation from the CHI to prove that you used the arms first. Likewise, if you went to the SABH and registered my arms today (which you could), I could use my registration with the USHR to prove a date certain of my use of them. And neither your confirmation nor my registration has any legal standing in South Africa.