State-Level Heraldic Authorities

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
19 September 2014 09:02
 

On the status of cronistas in Spain.  All I know is what the Spanish government told the College of Arms in response to query:  that a cronista’s certification is a private act, not an act of the Spanish state.  Based on that official statement, the College of Arms stopped recognizing arms certified by cronistas as having the status of arms granted by a sovereign.

 
kimon
 
Avatar
 
 
kimon
Total Posts:  1035
Joined  28-03-2008
 
 
 
19 September 2014 09:06
 

Joseph McMillan;102782 wrote:

On the status of cronistas in Spain.  All I know is what the Spanish government told the College of Arms in response to query:  that a cronista’s certification is a private act, not an act of the Spanish state.  Based on that official statement, the College of Arms stopped recognizing arms certified by cronistas as having the status of arms granted by a sovereign.


I had heard of this before (probably from you) and was wondering if you know if there is something published on this. Also, was/is this applicable to the certifications by Cronistas like Vicente de Cadenas or only to those made by Floresta?

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
19 September 2014 12:17
 

kimon;102783 wrote:

I had heard of this before (probably from you) and was wondering if you know if there is something published on this. Also, was/is this applicable to the certifications by Cronistas like Vicente de Cadenas or only to those made by Floresta?


The whole issue had to do with certifications by Cadenas, who was still alive and kicking at the time. I learned about it from a post by Seb Nelson on rec.heraldry in 2006:


Quote:

The College of Arms has at times contacted foreign governments to ascertain the status of their native heraldic authorities. On 4 May 1981 Michael J. Robinson of the British Embassy in Madrid, Spain, wrote to John Brooke-Little, then Norroy and Ulster King of Arms: "In his letter of 3 February the Ambassador promised to write again as soon as we had been able to consult the Ministry of Justice in connection with your enquiry of 26 January about the validity of the ‘grants’ of arms made by the last remaining Spanish Chronicler King of Arms. I am now writing to say, in the Ambassador’s temporary absence on official tour, that the Ministry have confirmed to us that your understanding of the position is entirely correct and that (as they stated in their document dated 4 May 1979) all that the Spanish authorities (ie the Ministry of Justice) do in respect of Sr. Cadenas’ ‘grants’ is to authenticate his signature not his action. In confirming the above, the Ministry have again stressed to us that they neither approve, recognise nor attach any official value to Sr. Cadenas’ ‘grants’; and therefore the question in your paragraph 5 of their having to approve or acknowledge the Chronicler King of Arms’ actions does not arise. They have explained in this connection that under the terms of the Decree of 13 April 1951 and Sr. Cadenas’ own Letter of Appointment as Chronicler King of Arms, his ‘grants’ are privately issued documents with no official validity whatsoever. No official endorsement is given to his ‘grants’ of arms by any Spanish authority, either before or after issue. I regret the length of length of time it has taken us to extract this information from the Ministry.  But I think the Ministry’s position has now been made abundantly clear and trust that the information will be of use to you in connection with your dealings with your colleagues in Scotland and Ireland…"

On 31 March 1982 C. T. Humphrey of the British Embassy in Madrid wrote to Brooke-Little: "We have as requested consulted the Spanish Ministry of Justice about the validity of the Certificate of Arms issued to Dona Elva Sanchez y Lopez, of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, by the Spanish Cronista Rey de Armas. They have confirmed that even if Senora Sanchez were of Spanish origin, which they are unable to verify, the Certificate has no official value whatsoever. They have pointed out in this connection that, as stated in the first paragraph, line six, of the document enclosed with your letter under reference the Senora’s ‘arms’ are of new creation, so that Sr Cadenas was not certifying any ancient arms. The Ministry of Justice have again been most emphatic to us about the private nature of Sr Cadenas’ ‘grants’ of arms in the light of their earlier statements (Michael Robinson’s letter of 4 May 1981), which implies that they have no official validity and that none of them carries the endorsement of the Spanish authorities, still less that of the Spanish Crown."

 

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
20 September 2014 03:59
 

So in an American context (and apparently also in Spain, but that’s their bag not ours) IMO it would be safe to say that the value of a Spanish cronista’s certification in this country would turn on & be limited to the quality of the design and the artwork, which is essentially how I think we would judge the merits of a home-grown assumption.  Also the certification would demonstrate use of the arms as of a specific date, but an American copyright - or posting on some website showing a date - would do the same, at least as long as the website survives.

There may of course be sentimental reasons for an American with some ancestral or personal affinity to Spanish culture to seek Spanish certification, but that would have no particular significance here - and certainly no legal significance - beyond that personal affinity.

 

Also (IMO, FWIW) as to Sr. Floresta’s certifications, the same would apply here, whatever legal differences there may be in Spain between his legal role vs that of Don Vicente.

 

And likewise any other foreign grant, certification etc., or for that matter anything from a non-governmental designer or artist, here or elsewhere.  If - or to the degree - the design is good and sufficiently unique, and/or the artwork is good, it has value here, regardless of the source; but recognizing that there may be a personal sentimental value to the individual or family based on the source, whether that’s one’s ancestral homeland or one’s favorite artist or whatever.

 

I think that is the general (if perhaps not unanimous) consensus among most American heraldistas; and most if not all of our foreign members & guests, even if they apply different criteria within their own country’s particular heraldic traditions and laws.  Those differing national traditions are a large part of the interest and challenge and richness of heraldry.

 

End of long-winded sermon, the ushers (or our treasurer) will now collect the offering…

 
Kathy McClurg
 
Avatar
 
 
Kathy McClurg
Total Posts:  1274
Joined  13-03-2009
 
 
 
20 September 2014 12:44
 

Love these discussions.  My arms are on my Kindle cover which means I carry them everywhere I go.  I find it a great ice-breaker to talk about heraldry to people who are even more clueless than I am.  I have had zero problems nor any embarrassment in the US regarding perceptions of legitimacy.  Except perhaps from people who "think" any location/jurisdiction outside the US has relevance WRT to US Heraldry (meaning a grant or assumption outside the US is just that - outside).  I have yet to find the 99.9% of US citizens who perceive my assumed arms to be something less than perceived official arms.  In fact, I haven’t found nearly that number who would know the difference without me explaining it.

Heraldry can only be reasonably discussed in the context of where and when.  Otherwise you get… heated discussions changing the "environment" of each point made… and although you may learn something of viewpoints and activities in a specific time and place, you really end up going in circles.  (Which I’ve done many times before realizing this).  It’s like one guy using a digital media to discuss and another using analog… not the best connection for understanding.

 

What I would really like to see is all of the currently active and reliable registries in the US go online with their standards published so a review/search could be done when people are designing their arms.  This allows an avoidance of usurping or having highly similar arms for those serious and also allows sharing of links of information while discussing heraldry (highly convenient - I can’t count the number of times I’ve linked AHS rolls of Presidents, early US and such on face book, e-mails and such).  Knowing they are business ventures, this is probably a dream world scenario.

 

I also would not object in any way to some ability to have the registries "feed" blazons to a central database (Library of Congress?, TIOH?, NEGHS, etc.) for the better preservation of the assumptions over time.  The US is really in it’s infancy as a developing heraldic geopolitical area. It springs from English, French, and Spanish influences at the beginnings of this country, but.. with many other very localized (even if just in one family) influences from other nations and the ability to honor ancestral nations through the adoption of some of these customs and a bit of combining of traditions (good and bad).  I think there’s value to having somewhere permanent for the information to be collected, displayed, reviewed, analyzed and maintained for historic purposes.  The work here with the AHS has been very well done, but I fear it’s a scratch of the surface when one wonders what the full content of the ACH, USHR, NEGHS, etc. hold…

 
Brad Smith
 
Avatar
 
 
Brad Smith
Total Posts:  182
Joined  12-02-2009
 
 
 
20 September 2014 18:08
 

Kathy McClurg;102788 wrote:

The work here with the AHS has been very well done, but I fear it’s a scratch of the surface when one wonders what the full content of the ACH, USHR, NEGHS, etc. hold…


Interesting point.  The problem with the aforementioned sites seems to be either cost for the armiger or an overwhelming workload for the person running the site.  I wonder how practical and time consuming it would be to have a site that only registers arms, rather than offering emblazonment services.  Might be a project for my retirement (many years hence).

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
20 September 2014 18:10
 

Dito what Kathy said, except I don’t know how to get my arms on a Kindle cover smile

And so long as we’re discusing non-governmental collection & consolidation of assumed arms, let’s not forget the oft-dismissed SCA which for all of it’s peculiarities is likely the largest collection of assumed arms in the USA.  They also have (or had - no recent contact) an excellent on-line armorial, easily searchable for charges etc. Whether they would be willing to allow others to use that program, I can’t say.

 

It would IMO need to be separate from their database, to meet both our needs and theirs; and also IMO we would need some sort of moderators or screening to avoid being swamped with junk from the heraldry mills or their unsuspecting clients.  Maybe require that submissions first go thru or be vetted by one of the existing reputable heraldic organizations? (Same considerations if we/someone devised our own system.

 

Ah well, likely just a non-governmental version of The Dream… and it occurs to me that we already had the USHR but no way to keep it going… sigh…

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
20 September 2014 18:58
 

Brad Smith;102792 wrote:

Interesting point. The problem with the aforementioned sites seems to be either cost for the armiger or an overwhelming workload for the person running the site. I wonder how practical and time consuming it would be to have a site that only registers arms, rather than offering emblazonment services. Might be a project for my retirement (many years hence).


The hard part is the research to verify that the arms you register don’t duplicate others.  There is no single comprehensive database to check against.

 

I wouldn’t say, however, that the fees are that exorbitant.  And they keep out the riff-raff.  smile

 
liongam
 
Avatar
 
 
liongam
Total Posts:  343
Joined  19-02-2006
 
 
 
21 September 2014 06:41
 

I would say to Joe’s posting of a day or so ago that cuff links are a rather tasteful way of displaying one’s arms or crest.  Likewise wearing a nicely engraved signet ring with either arms or crest engraved upon it.  Both will display one’s arms/crest in rather a understated and traditional way.  What is best avoided at all costs is a blatant or ‘in your face’ use of one’s arms.  One must use a certain decorum when using one’s arms.  You must not have the charge of being a parvenu levelled at you (generally by individuals ignorant of the art and science of heraldry).  I, myself, would avoid wearing a blazer with my arms emblazoned (no pun intended) upon its pocket.  This would be a little bit too much!  Personal heraldry is best used in a subtle way.  As we all know, heraldry developed first and foremost as a method of identification.  Whether we lived in the late 12th century or are living today in September 2014, this is still the case.  Personal arms being the very essence of the identification of an individual or family should be employed and should not be hidden from view just in case you upset someone’s sensibilities or offend some egalitarian.  That is their loss.  As I say, as long as one uses one’s heraldry in a sensible and understated way all should be well.

John

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
21 September 2014 08:15
 

liongam;102797 wrote:

I would say to Joe’s posting of a day or so ago that cuff links are a rather tasteful way of displaying one’s arms or crest.


I agree completely. The "a little over the top" comment had to do with the specific context of wearing them to a white tie ball. Not that I have occasion to go to such events very often—or ever—but in principle I’m an adherent of the plain mother-of-pearl or plain gold cuff links faction when it comes to gentlemen’s evening dress.

 
snelson
 
Avatar
 
 
snelson
Total Posts:  464
Joined  03-06-2005
 
 
 
21 September 2014 13:44
 

A useful addition to any universal database of personal arms used by Americans would be the blazons certified by Don Vicente.  Details of many of the arms he certified (including the arms of Americans) were published in a series of volumes titled Heraldario español, europeo y americano.  I think volumes 1 to 6 can be (partially) viewed on Google Books:

Vol 1: http://books.google.com/books?id=rUCX7Lh6LToC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=Heraldario+español,+europeo+y+americano&source=bl&ots=wv6NpMr9zL&sig=2hQ-A0gINtl8WJaJAisGrW5EboM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EwQfVP_rOcGzogTZoIGICg&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Vol 2: http://books.google.com/books/about/Heraldario_español_europeo_y_americano.html?id=Om1N8qfBj-8C

 

Vol 3: http://books.google.com/books?id=UzaPoKpSoGsC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=Heraldario+español,+europeo+y+americano&source=bl&ots=EmfmppdBLp&sig=HL1IO4xX7E4gdXNpRCdnUGNzUig&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TAcfVPqzBNDZoATVvYCACw&ved=0CCIQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=Heraldario español, europeo y americano&f=false

 

Vol 4: http://books.google.com/books/about/Heraldario_español_europeo_y_americano.html?id=aKrw-oLfflEC

 

Vol 5: http://books.google.com/books/about/Heraldario_Español_Europeo_y_Americano.html?id=MtDUYBedM6UC

 

Vol 6: http://books.google.com/books/about/Heraldario_Español_europeo_Y_Americano.html?id=lh_OqD9Msp0C

 

I bet somebody could cull-out the Americans over the course of a single rainy afternoon.  These volumes include the arms of some very noble characters, as well as some riff raff:  wink

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
21 September 2014 14:08
 

Great find, but too bad Cadenas didn’t identify individuals instead of merely surnames. Some of them may be obvious, but others might tend to perpetuate the "arms of surnames" fallacy.

 
snelson
 
Avatar
 
 
snelson
Total Posts:  464
Joined  03-06-2005
 
 
 
21 September 2014 14:57
 

Quote:

Great find, but too bad Cadenas didn’t identify individuals instead of merely surnames. Some of them may be obvious, but others might tend to perpetuate the "arms of surnames" fallacy.


Agreed.  At least in some instances he listed the American city or cities that the armiger’s family resides or resided in.  I can imagine that if an American wanted to design and adopt arms unlike any other arms already in use in his or her immediate vicinity, he or she might find this a helpful resource.  Although, to be fair, I can’t imagine that Mr. or Ms. Ruizmonte from Los Angeles would need to fear anyone copying their arms! :D

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=Om1N8qfBj-8C&pg=PA208&lpg=PA208&dq=Ruizmonte+Heraldario+español,+europeo+y+americano&source=bl&ots=PtXhuDoSX-&sig=L5bfH-uiEb4lT7z5_1xVXFN4HaY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4xwfVK-WCdjnoATupILYAg&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Ruizmonte Heraldario español, europeo y americano&f=false

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
21 September 2014 23:14
 

IMO there are two quite distinct aspects or uses for research tools like the Spanish registrations posted by Seb (many thanks!)

One is to determine who a given design belongs to, in which case Don V’s book doesn’t give as much as we would need.

 

The other is merely to show that a given design is already spoken for & thus not available for assumption by others designing new arms, in which case Don V’s book is quite sufficient and most useful!

 

And for the latter purpose, I don’t agree that we would want to sort out only those certified to Americans.  I know that traditionally uniqueness has only been considered mandatory within one’s own nation or jurisdiction; but IMO this is an outdated notion, especially here where our countrymen, and often even our near neighbors, come from every corner of the world.  Our Best Practices IIRC, and our frequent design discussions here, have never sanctioned intentional duplication of arms, foreign or domestic, or duplication which should or could have been avoided by exercise of due diligence.

 

Absolute purity is of course not possible, but where we have available information such as Don V’s printed books on line, we shouldn’t distinguish between arms used here vs. Spain or elsewhere.

 

Preaching mainly to the choir I hope, but IMO worth restating occasionally for the rest of the congregation, even at risk of boring the choir.

 
kimon
 
Avatar
 
 
kimon
Total Posts:  1035
Joined  28-03-2008
 
 
 
22 September 2014 11:02
 

Sometimes I feel like there is a higher standard put on assumed arms vs. granted arms.

You’ll never see, for example, the CoA or Lyon check (or even care) if the arms to be granted are in use anywhere else in the world. They only check in their own jurisdictions and their own list of grants and call it a day. Why should those assuming arms go through extra hoops to see if their arms to be are in use anywhere else?

 

For the record, I’m in favor of a universal database of arms to be used to check blazons against to make them universally unique. It’s a pipe dream, especially considering that even copyrights aren’t like that (which have billions of dollars to support it).