Hello Folks,
Now that my arms have been added to the Members’ Arms page, and upon the recommendations of Joe McMillan and T.R. Griffith, I will take this opportunity to explain the evolution of my personal arms.
I really don’t know the history of the arms or if they were granted or assumed. I am not aware of a fully developed heraldic tradition in the Ottoman Empire…at least not in the western sense, until about the early 1800’s. My ancestry can be traced back to south-eastern Europe when it was part of the Ottoman Empire. The original “house” or family name was Kelisli, meaning of Kelis or from Kelis. Kelis is a small town that is a few kilometers east of Split in present day Croatia, on the Dalmatian cost. Back then it was a strategic part of the northern frontier of the Ottoman Empire. Unfortunately, names in the Middle Eastern traditions tended to be patronymic rather than adopting surnames such as in western traditions. This makes genealogic research such a difficult task.
In any case, my great great grandfather Hassan Musa i-Kelisli and his cousin Mustafa i-Kelisli were the first to immigrate to Egypt. They were in the service of the Ottoman Sultan and were sent with Mehmet Ali Pasha’s expedition to secure the Ottoman hold on Egypt. The arms he inherited and used were the plain shield ensigned with an Ottoman kavuk (hat or turban) displayed on a beylical mantle Gules doubled Ermine, alluding to his descent from an ancient Ottoman bey or chieftain. The Ottoman Sultans were known to bestow ermine and sable robes upon their nobles, after elevating their subjects to the rank and title of bey or pasha, with all their different grades. The signet ring that bears the familial arms and its wax impression can be seen below:
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t11/Kelisli/Family_Heraldry/KELISLI_Signet_photobucket.jpg
Family signet ring.
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t11/Kelisli/Family_Heraldry/KELISLI_wax_seal_photobucket.jpg
Wax impression.
Based on the signet ring, I commissioned Mr. Daniel de Bruin, one of my favorite artists to create the emblazonment below:
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t11/Kelisli/Family_Heraldry/KELISLI_arms_by_de_Bruin.jpg
Familial arms by the Dutch artist, Mr. Daniel de Bruin.
The Middle Eastern heraldic tradition had very few cases of differencing arms with cadency marks. Every now and then, cadet branches when they achieved something of merit, differenced their arms slightly, but that was not a common occurrence. Most of my family members who care to use arms, use the undifferenced familial arms.
However, when my paternal grandfather was created a Bey (of the first class) and was invested as a Commander of the Order of the Nile (1943), he differenced his arms by
1. Including a bordure Gules.
2. A coronet indicating his rank within the Egyptian nobility hierarchy (4th within the system of 5 nobility ranks with titles).
3. Supporters.
Egyptian titles of nobility were personal and based on merit. All descendants of a titled noble, became untitled nobles, as a courtesy. Only within the Khedivial and Royal House of Egypt were nobility titles hereditary.
The rendition below was created by another superb artist, Mr. Richard Crossett. He wanted to allude to the nationality of the bearer and his service in both, upper and lower Egypt. He did so in the compartment, which was his suggestion and creation. The compartment consists of: a grassy mound proper and rising above barry wavy Azure representing waters of the Nile River, and arising from the waters are stylized, in the ancient Egyptian artistic tradition, papyrus (Cyperus papyrus) and water lilies (Nymphaea cerulea) proper, the heraldic plants of lower and upper Egypt respectively.
Emblazonment of Brigadier Hassan Kamel Bey i-Kelisli by the American artist, Mr. Richard Crossett.
When I realized that I have no legal claim to any of my grandfather’s additaments, I dropped everything and replaced the coronet by that of an untitled noble’s coronet. However, when I eventually become a US citizen, the coronet will also have to go. I further differenced my arms (based on the strong recommendation of the South African Bureau of Heraldry) by adding a bordure compony Argent and Gules and a second crest.
In the second crest I chose to represent the family heritage and history. In my family, we had a few members who bore the rank and office of Alamdar (standard bearer), to which I alluded to by the two banners of the modern Kingdom of Egypt and The Khedivial standard. Several of my family members were proud to have served king and country in the court of the Khedivial and Royal family of Egypt (1805 – 1953). The highest rank an ancestor of mine ever achieved was the rank of Pasha (with the right to display two tughs or horse tail standards). The Ottoman kavuk is a kind of turban or hat that was worn by many of the high ranking civil servants in the Ottoman administration. It is also found on the head stones of many of my ancestors. It is also symbolic of the Ottoman roots of my family. The Fleur de Lis on top, was a charge common in both, French and Egyptian Mameluke heraldry. Most of my family members, past and present, were schooled in Catholic French institutions. I also chose it as a symbol due to its commonality in both Middle Eastern as well as western tradition…symbolic of one of my values or principles of bridging the ever widening gap between east and west.
The final form my personal arms took can be seen on the Members’ Arms page. The emblazonment is that on my South African Bureau of Heraldry certificate.
Due to my being limited to 4 images per message, below is a ring I commissioned the German master engraver, Mr. Udo Stenger, to produce. I must say that I was very impressed and satisfied with the quality of work and the cost associated:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/KKM-1.jpghttp://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/KKM-2.jpg
Signet ring engraved by Mr. Udo Stenger.
Great thread Hassan. Wonderful work. Thanks for sharing it with us.
Wow. This is terrific stuff. Thanks for posting it!
Hello Kelisli,
Your arms and rings are certainly wonderful.
Kelisli wrote:
(1)...All descendants of a titled noble, became untitled nobles, as a courtesy…
(2)...When I realized that I have no legal claim to any of my grandfather’s additaments, I dropped everything and replaced the coronet by that of an untitled noble’s coronet…
(3)...However, when I eventually become a US citizen, the coronet will also have to go....
1 & 2 do not lead me to believe that (3) is a correct statement. Surely if you are genealogically authorized an untitled noble’s coronet you should maintain it even after you become a US citizen. You have a proven reason for bearing a coronet; however, if I were to adopt one, it would be incorrect since I have no right. You, however, have the right.
The full achievements of your arms should include the coronet; otherwise, you are short-changing your genealogy.
—Guy
Fascinating! Thanks for providing the info.
Guy Power wrote:
if you are genealogically authorized an untitled noble’s coronet you should maintain it even after you become a US citizen. You have a proven reason for bearing a coronet; however, if I were to adopt one, it would be incorrect since I have no right. You, however, have the right. The full achievements of your arms should include the coronet; otherwise, you are short-changing your genealogy.
I disagree somewhat, since US law does not recognize any titles of nobility. The holding of a title or status of nobility is considered incompatible with the status of US citizen. So even if Hassan is currently an untitled noble, he would be required to renounce it upon becoming a citizen and thus lose the "right" to bear a coronet.
Thanks Hugh for the explanation. That is my understanding as well. The US Constitution does not allow for any such "title" or status. As a matter of fact, with all what I have read on this forum, I would have preferred for my helmets to be the simple tilting helmets, but oh well…live and learn. For any new commissions, I will make sure that they contain tilting helmets instead 
Cheers,
Hassan
In my opinion, Hassan is quite correct to renounce the coronet and barred helmet along with his noble status when he takes the oath of citizenship.
It’s still entirely appropriate for him to honor his ancestors by displaying their arms in their full glory, on library paintings, for instance. He just shouldn’t display them as his own—on a bookplate, say, or engraved on newly acquired silver, or on notepaper.
BTW, I’ve taken the liberty of cropping and slightly reducing the photos of the Stenger seal ring—the file was so large it was taking forever to load, even over my DSL connection. Hope that’s not a problem.
Thanks Joe, by all means. I appreciate your doing that. It helps everyone. Thanks for all your guidance as well. You have been very helpful and I truly appreciate it.
Cheers,
Hassan
Hugh,
Hugh Brady wrote:
...The holding of a title or status of nobility is considered incompatible with the status of US citizen. So even if Hassan is currently an untitled noble, he would be required to renounce it upon becoming a citizen and thus lose the "right" to bear a coronet.
I am not sure. From what I’m reading (8 USC §1448; 8 CFR 337.1—see link in next quote), it seems to me that naturalized citizens must renounce (1) inherited titles, and (2) orders of nobility; Hassan is an untitled noble. And even if he has to renounce, he should still be eligible for a coronet—blood is blood—there is no provision that trappings of nobility must be excised.
Quote:
The U.S. cannot grant titles of nobility, and foreigners who are naturalized must renounce all titles [emphasis added], but there is nothing that prevents a U.S. citizen from inheriting a title from abroad and using it as he pleases, unless it leads him or her to pledge alliegance to a foreign power, a case which could be grounds for loss of citizenship. Examples of US citizens holding British titles include the 5th Earl of Wharcliffe (Richard Alan Montagu Stuart Wortley, of Cumberland ME; his eldest son is viscount Carlton), and Sir John Dunbar, Bt, who was succeeded in August 1993 by his son Sir Michael Dunbar, 14th Bt, a colonel in the US Air Force.
If Hassan in fact must renounce an untitled nobility, it seems an American-born son or grandson could inherit the untitled nobility.
Regards,
—Guy
*edited by member*
Well, here’s a short and incomplete answer to that one, Denny:
Foreign titles usually (not always) allude to a fealty to the government that grants them. So when a foreign noble naturalizes in the USA, they give up the titles along with their loyalties to those governments.
Schwartzkopf and other Americans who are given knighthoods, etc. are not asked to swear loyalty to a foreign government and are allowed by our government to accept them as a courtesy.
Now, if an English baronet, for instance, naturalized in the USA, he or she would have to disavow the baronetcy, but after they naturalized and were American citizens, their native government could (if it chose) grant them the title again, which they could accept as a courtesy and that would be just fine.
I know it sounds weird, but that’s how it is.
As to kids: a noble who naturalizes in the US must not only ‘stop using the title’, they must ‘disavow’ it…give up any and all claim to it. Which would also (at least technically) include the right to pass on a hereditary title to their children. Of course, another government might see it differently and choose to extend the title to these children, who could, if they chose, accept them as a courtesy (as long as they did not have to swear allegiance to that government) without endangering their status as a US citizen.
*edited by member*
It is quite true that people who are already American citizens and not employed by the government may inherit or even accept titles of nobility as they wish. It has always struck me, however, that it is at least devious for a new citizen to play this game or encourage his offspring to do so, and at worst a violation of the provision of the oath in which he says he is taking his obligations "without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion."
"Order of nobility" in the naturalization laws doesn’t mean something like an order of chivalry that has a formal organization. An "order" in this sense means (as the Oxford English Dictionary says) "a rank of the community, consisting of persons of the same status (esp. in relation to other ranks higher or lower); a social division, grade, or stratum." In principle, we don’t legally recognize the existence of such social categories in the United States—remember something about "all men are created equal"? Part of the naturalization process is that the new citizen is supposed to buy into the value system that underpins our political system. The former foreign noble and now U.S. citizen is being required to acknowledge that he’s no better than anyone else, whatever he may have been in the old country.
Regarding Schwarzkopf, etc., Patrick is pretty much on target, except for the fact that only the UK has the business about knighthoods and so forth being honorary. That has to do with how the UK defines the limits of the royal prerogative to bestow honors (it cannot be exercised on people who are not HM subjects), not with the US position of the acceptance of foreign titles. It doesn’t matter if the order/decoration/title is honorary or not, from the US point of view—what matters is that the foreign government isn’t giving officers and employees of the US government goodies without the consent of Congress. And Congress long ago passed a law giving blanket authorization for the acceptance of such awards subject to rules to be established by the heads of various departments and agencies.
Why is the acceptance of titles, etc., by US citizens not a problem, but the retention of them by new citizens is? Because when a foreign state gives someone a title, it does not change that person’s status or give them any additional rights here in this country. Congress saw the matter differently when it came to someone who was previously titled or otherwise noble—they were concerned that such people might believe that they could import their status into their new society, and that was not acceptable.
By the way, in strict nobiliary terms, Hassan is not an untitled Ottoman/Egyptian "by the grace of God." His status derives from a grant to his ancestors by the Ottoman Sultan and the Egyptian King. The formula "by the grace of God" is reserved to those who hold their titles not from a higher authority but by divine right—kings and such.
As for Hassan’s kids, what they do in some other country that recognizes noble status is up to the laws of the country concerned. There’s nothing that would require Belgium to recognize their Ottoman-derived status whether Hassan renounces his titles on acquiring US citizenship or not. In fact, the UK has a standing policy dating back to George VI, I believe, that it will not officially recognize any more foreign titles of UK citizens—people with foreign titles applying for UK citizenship have to sign a statement acknowledging that they understand this. None of it has to do with the sins or merits of anyone—it has to do with how each sovereign country chooses to deal with the subject of noble status and rights.
Finally, Hassan himself shouldn’t use the heraldic trappings of an untitled Ottoman noble once he becomes an American citizen because once he becomes an American citizen he will not be an untitled American noble. He will have renounced that status. That seems so obvious to me that I’m having a hard time understanding why it’s even an issue.
Guy Power wrote:
And even if he has to renounce, he should still be eligible for a coronet—blood is blood—there is no provision that trappings of nobility must be excised.
The heraldic part isn’t a question of law—the law says he has to renounce the nobility; as we all know all too well, US law doesn’t concern itself with heraldic trappings. But the same logic that says that if Guy Power is not a British earl he shouldn’t use the coronet of a British earl would hold that if Hassan Kamel is not (any longer) an Ottoman/Egyptian nobleman, he shouldn’t use the coronet, etc., of an Ottoman/Egyptian nobleman.
