Quote Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown View Post
If tomorrow a new office of arms were to pop up in Mexico City, as a result of government initiative, it too would be regarded as "valid" by all of the other government-sponsored heraldic authorities.
But it wouldn't, Scott, and I'd think your own experience working for the Chief Herald of Ireland would bear that out. Look at the Sturm und Drang created by the refusal of the English College of Arms to recognize the CHI's grants, on any of a number of more or less contrived grounds, including:

- Irish arms are "only" burgher arms because the Irish constitution prohibits the grant of titles of nobility
- the CHI had no statutory basis--as if the English kings of arms do! As far as I know this refusal still stands, notwithstanding the Irish Attorney General's confirmation that the CHI now does have a statutory basis.
- the CHI will confirm arms on the basis of a mere 100 years of user, and never mind that Ulster King of Arms would do the same thing pre-1943.

Lord Lyon refuses to recognize Canadian grants because their descent is not tied to the surname.

Well before the last Spanish cronista died, the College of Arms stopped recognizing Spanish certifications of arms on the grounds that the cronista's certificates were private, notwithstanding that he was appointed pursuant to royal and government decrees.

The College of Arms refuses to recognize South African grants--so much for the excuse vis-a-vis the CHI that it had no statutory basis!

The College of Arms won't even recognize the validity of Lord Lyon's grants to persons domiciled outside Scotland.

So how is it possible to assert that every heraldic body in the world would immediately accept the validity of the actions of every other? It isn't even true within the United Kingdom!