Post Your Granted, Assumed or Desired Arms

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Nicely done, and well thought out. If only all of my clients had been so thoughtful...

Out of professional curiosity, who was the painter?

[werewolves]

Great to see so many folks from the AHS here

My assumed arms done in the style of the Codex Manesse for fun. Link to the registration in my signature.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Great to see so many folks from the AHS here

My assumed arms done in the style of the Codex Manesse for fun. Link to the registration in my signature.

Cool... and nicely painted.

[piperdbh]

Speaking of heraldry, I recently discovered (through one of the online sites trying to sell me stuff) that my family's arms are "Gules; a tree or growing out of the base or." and the crest is a "beech tree ppr." No compartments, no fesses, no nothing else; just a red shield with a gold tree growing from gold ground. If I were to want to use these arms as my own, would I have to get written permission from whomever is the "Chief of the name", and, if there is no Chief, are the arms fair game for any and every yahoo who happens to have the same last name as me?

[FatherWilliam57]

MoR: Thank you! It was an interesting design process. I, like most novices, began with a "lucky charms" approach, but was quickly educated by the members of the AHS. (If anyone is interested in the development of this achievement from start to finish, you can check out this thread at the Amercian Heraldry Society website: http://www.americanheraldry.org/foru...ead.php?t=2797
The heraldic artist for this particular emblazonment was Mr. Barrie Burr of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

JSFMACLJR: MoR is quite correct concerning the crest and helmet. Since I am a Navy vet, I couldn't exactly go the "pacifist clergy" route, so I do indeed use a helmet in my achievement. As far as the symbolism of my crest, it is my intent that my three children will each inherit my shield and motto...it will then be up to them to each adopt a crest and badge of their own. (My "Americanized" version of differencing.)

WEREWOLVES: You really should show them a picture of your arms in tattoo form!

[JSFMACLJR]

JSFMACLJR: MoR is quite correct concerning the crest and helmet. Since I am a Navy vet, I couldn't exactly go the "pacifist clergy" route, so I do indeed use a helmet in my achievement. As far as the symbolism of my crest, it is my intent that my three children will each inherit my shield and motto...it will then be up to them to each adopt a crest and badge of their own. (My "Americanized" version of differencing:

Lord Lyon would not grant a crest to my late father, an Episcopalian priest, who had served in the Queen's Own Rifles, but rather granted a crest for his lay heirs. The crest was depicted on the Extract of Matriculation, but above his shield was placed the correct ecclesiastical hat.

[Cygnus]

Lord Lyon would not grant a crest to my late father, an Episcopalian priest, who had served in the Queen's Own Rifles, but rather granted a crest for his lay heirs. The crest was depicted on the Extract of Matriculation, but above his shield was placed the correct ecclesiastical hat.

That's very interesting, Sandy. I was under the impression that clergymen could be granted crests, but that they generally chose to display the corded and tasseled ecclesiastical hat instead.

That is good information to know!

[FatherWilliam57]

Lord Lyon would not grant a crest to my late father, an Episcopalian priest, who had served in the Queen's Own Rifles, but rather granted a crest for his lay heirs. The crest was depicted on the Extract of Matriculation, but above his shield was placed the correct ecclesiastical hat.

It is customary for Lord Lyon to do so in the case of Roman and Episcopal priests as they have a system in place which involves the use of the galero (color, number of tassels, etc). A system was devised in Germany for using the galero in the case of Lutheran ministers (in the 1980s, I believe), but it doesn't seem to have caught on. Although some Lutheran clergy have adopted the use of the galero in their achievements, I did not wish to "borrow" or "steel" the traditional aditaments of another denomination, hence the use of the demi-priest with a Luther rose on the chasuble. (Since then, another Lutheran pastor, after consulting with me, has made use of my little innovation, using a different tincture for the chasuble. Who knows? Maybe in a hundred years it will catch on for Lutheran clergy!) For a time, I did "flirt" with the idea of using a biretta and red stole in a similar manner as the galero, but gave up on that in favor of a standard crest and helmet. That train of thought can also be seen in the AHS thread I alluded to above.

Thanks for the interest!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Lord Lyon would not grant a crest to my late father, an Episcopalian priest, who had served in the Queen's Own Rifles, but rather granted a crest for his lay heirs. The crest was depicted on the Extract of Matriculation, but above his shield was placed the correct ecclesiastical hat.

How odd is that? Had your father inherited arms there would have been no question about his having a crest as an ordained priest. While I can understand that a petitioner may be granted certain heraldic additiments for his lifetime only (such as supporters for knights grand cross), I have never heard of a petitioner being granted any transmissible heraldic additiment that he was denied the use of during his lifetime.

Lyon is, of course, a law unto himself...

[FatherWilliam57]

Lord Lyon would not grant a crest to my late father, an Episcopalian priest, who had served in the Queen's Own Rifles, but rather granted a crest for his lay heirs. The crest was depicted on the Extract of Matriculation, but above his shield was placed the correct ecclesiastical hat.

Do you happen to have a copy of the actual grant? Does it specifically withthold a crest from your father? Or is it merely saying (or assumed) that he is entitled to both and that it is the galero that is being withheld from his descendents (by implication)? Read the document carefully. This could simply be a misunderstanding between something that is "permissive" and something that is "proscribed." He should be entitled to both; you are only entitled to his crest (unless you also happen to be an Episcopal priest).

Thank you, MoR, for clearing the cobwebs out of my mind on this with your post above.