Calling cards

[macwilkin]

I shall grant that use of a professional designation for a personal card might not be the best form. I have noticed over the years, though, that the English frequently list their academic degrees in ways we here would never do.

As regards the Esquire, however, this nation is a Republic, so no one here legitimately has a personal coat of arms. Thus there can be no such implication.

Your second statement is incorrect; there are many American citizens who are armigers. The majority of them have received a grant of arms via a foreign heraldic body, such as the Lyon Court, the College of Arms (England), etc. Their arms are very much legimate and they have the patents to prove it.

T.

[JSFMACLJR]

this nation is a Republic, so no one here legitimately has a personal coat of arms. Thus there can be no such implication.

You couldn't be more wrong, my friend! I am an American citizen, and an armiger, bearing arms granted by the Lord Lyon King of Arms...who also granted arms to a certain former Secretary of State not too long ago, one General Colin Powell. Secretary Powell received the Letters Patent in his office, at the hand of Lord Lyon Blair himself. While he was Secretary of State, I might add.

You would do yourself a great service by following the advice of Cajunscot, and reading up on the use of heraldry in the USA.

[macwilkin]

You couldn't be more wrong, my friend! I am an American citizen, and an armiger, bearing arms granted by the Lord Lyon King of Arms...who also granted arms to a certain former Secretary of State not too long ago, one General Colin Powell. Secretary Powell received the Letters Patent in his office, at the hand of Lord Lyon Blair himself. While he was Secretary of State, I might add.

You would do yourself a great service by following the advice of Cajunscot, and reading up on the use of heraldry in the USA.

Not only General Powell, but a number of US Presidents, including Washington, were armigers. While most were not regular users, The General was quite the devotee of heraldry, and his arms may be found all over Mt. Vernon.

T.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I shall grant that use of a professional designation for a personal card might not be the best form. I have noticed over the years, though, that the English frequently list their academic degrees in ways we here would never do.

This practice is common on business cards in the United Kingdom as it notes the qualifications of the individual concerned. On social cards no such qualifications are needed-- unless one is "showing off", which is the height of bad form.

As regards the Esquire, however, this nation is a Republic, so no one here legitimately has a personal coat of arms. Thus there can be no such implication.

Here, I am afraid, you are just plain wrong. Many people in the United States are armigers, and there is nothing in the law which prevents a citizen of the United States from having a coat of arms. Actually there is a tradition of arms in the United States reaching back to George Washington, who was careful to use his arms whenever possible. More recent American presidents with arms include John F. Kennedy and William J. Clinton.

Now any lawyer worth his salt will tell you that "ignorance of the law" is no excuse. The same would apply to the lawyer who chooses to use "esquire" on his social cards-- once it was perceived that he was touting his trade he'd be marked down as a parvenu, just another jumped up social climber.

See, the thing is, social cards should be understated. It is assumed that the person you are presenting your card to is your social equal, and that he or she already knows all about you-- or, if they don't, discrete inquiry will be made. But for you to hand someone your card, pump his hand, and say "Howdy! I'm John Smith and I'm a lawyer" is just too vulgar for words.

And that includes the words on one's social cards.

[Peter C.]

On a business card, yes. On a social card, no.

The professional exceptions for social cards are Reverend, Father, & Rabbi preceding the name. Using Esq. after one's name (despite it's professional use by lawyers) implies one is an armiger (ie: possesses a personal coat of arms). While it is accepted practice in the United States that a lawyer will append Esq. after his name on a business card, it is gauche, in the extreme, to advertise, or put forward, one's trade, profession, or academic standing on a social card.

To quote the Oxford English Dictionary:- Esquire. a)Brit. a title appended to a man's surname when no other form of address is used. b)US. a title appended to a lawyer's surname.

Peter

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

To quote the Oxford English Dictionary:- Esquire. a)Brit. a title appended to a man's surname when no other form of address is used. b)US. a title appended to a lawyer's surname.

Peter

This is true in correspondence, but it does not apply to the correct usage of Esq. on social calling cards. (The OED is, after all, a dictionary, not a book of etiquette.)

[Raphael]

I would. When I was unemployed, I have cards printed out with my name and contact information for prospective employers.

[SFCRick]

I always carry cards

[macwilkin]

Clanfolk do not display the buckle and strap on their social cards as the cards are not the property of their Chief.

What about if the buckle & strap includes the designation An Cìrean Ceann-cinnidh?

T.

[Dall_Piobaire]

I think it is a great idea! In this age of "networking" with everyone having a facebook page, or my space, or even their own website it has probably become more common.

I think, for me, unless I represented a larger entity, I would go with a combo of personal/business, but that's just me.

A question, probably nit-picky. Is it, technically speaking, legitimate to use the clan crest on a business or personal card?
Not that one would get docked for it, but just curious.