Sorry folks have not being following the thread and have just been playing catch up.
If I loose my wee bet well, it will be a good bottle of Whisky Without the ‘e’ Michael 
A good Malt dram for sure!
Here are the texts of the two decrees that govern the activities of Spanish chroniclers (cronistas) of arms, from the website of Damaso Ruiz de Clavijo, http://personal.telefonica.terra.es/web/ruizdeclavijo/LEGISLACION.htm
Quote:
<i><b>Royal Decree of 29 July 1915
Gaceta de Madrid, No. 212, 31 July 1915
Exposition
Sir:
Your Majesty’s Chroniclers of Arms, besides the palatine function entrusted to them, have since time immemorial issued certifications on matters of nobility, genealogy, and coats of arms, this faculty having been recognized by various dispositions emanating from the Royal Authority prior to the establishment of the constitutional system now prevailing in Spain. The said dispositions being null and without force, it is necessary, for the certifications issued by the Kings of Arms to have validity, to issue new provisions, which are: to provide that the said Chroniclers must prove their fitness before a competent Tribunal and obtain, upon payment of the appropriate dues, a diploma authorizing them to exercise their duties. It will also be an indispensable requirement that these certifications be authorized by the Ministry of Grace and Justice. Such is the object of the attached draft decree, which the undersigned minister has the honor to submit for the approval of Your Majesty.
Madrid, 29 July 1915
Sir, at the royal feet of Your Majesty,
(signed)
Manuel de Burgos y Mazo.
ROYAL DECREE
Upon the recommendation of the Minister of Grace and Justice, and in accordance with the advice of My Council of Ministers, I decree the following:
Article 1. Certifications on matters of nobility, genealogy, and coats of arms issued by the Kings of Arms who are declared suitable [for the position] in accordance with the prescriptions of this decree will have validity, always provided that they are authorized by the Ministry of Grace and Justice.
Article 2. The present Kings of Arms, and those who subsequently obtain such appointments, will prove their fitness to issue the certifications discussed in the previous article before a Tribunal presided over by the Under Secretary of the Ministry of Grace and Justice and comprising, as a board, a regular member of the Royal Academy of History, a notary of Madrid, an official of the Corps of Archivists, and a person of recognized competence in the subject matter, all named by the Ministry of Grace and Justice. The members who fill the first three positions will be proposed by the Royal Academy of History, the Governing Board of the Notarial College, and the Tribunal [something seems to be missing from the Spanish text at this point] an official of the Technical Corps of the Under Secretariat of the Ministry of Grace and Justice, with a voice and a vote, who will serve as secretary. This Tribunal will formulate the questionnaire and make all determinations relative to the fitness examination.
Article 3. Once their fitness to issue nobiliary certificates is established, the Kings of Arms will obtain, subject to payment of the appropriate fees, a diploma in the same form as that of the Guardians of the Bedchamber.
Article 4. The Kings of Arms will be personally responsible for the certifications they issue in the exercise of their duties.
Given at the Palace the twenty-ninth day of July, one thousand fifteen.
ALFONSO.
The Minister of Grace and Justice
Manuel de Burgos y Mazo
</b></i>
Quote:
<b><i>Decree of 13 April 1951
Boletín Oficial del Estado No. 123, 3 May 1951
Ministry of Justice
Decree of 13 April 1951 by which are regulated the functions that the Chronicler-Kings of Arms have come to carry out, by custom as well as law, including among others the issuance of certifications of arms, genealogy and nobility.
These functions were regulated by the Royal Order of 16 November 1747 (Novísima Recopilación, Volume XI, Title XXVII, Law 1), and later by the Royal Decree of 29 July 1915. The increase in the number of petitions of rehabilitation and succession since 1948, as a consequence of the reestablishment of the nobiliary legislation, suspended from 1931 until the said date, has led persons without certificates of qualifications to carry out the functions entrusted to the said Chroniclers. For the purpose of providing sufficient guarantees to the sensitive mission of these professionals, updating their functions, and adequately protecting the interests of those who consult them, upon the recommendation of the Minister of Justice and following the consideration of the Council of Ministers,
IT IS PROVIDED THAT:
Article 1. The certificate as a Chronicler of Arms may be obtained by holders of the licentiate in law or philosophy and letters, over the age of 21, subject to an examination of their qualifications. The [examination will be] convoked by an Order in which the conditions and requirements with which the aspirants must comply will be set forth.
Article 2. The examination will be taken before a Tribunal presided over by the Under Secretary of Justice and constituted, as a board, by a regular Academician of the Royal Academy of History, a notary of the Illustrious College of Madrid, a functionary of the Corps of Archivists, a practicing Chronicler of Arms, and the Attorney in Charge of the Section on Titles of the Ministry, who, with vote and voice, will serve as secretary. The members who occupy the first two places will be proposed by the Royal Academy of History and by the Ministry of National Education, and the others will be designated by ministerial order.
Article 3. The appointments [of the Chroniclers] will be made by ministerial order, and subject to the payment of the appropriate fees they will be issued with a certificate by the Ministry of Justice, without which they may not exercise their duties.
Article 4. The Chroniclers have the power to issue certifications of nobility, genealogy, and coats of arms. The Chroniclers of Arms’ certifications with the right of use [of the arms certified] will be valid only with the approval (visto bueno) of the Ministry of Justice. The Chroniclers of Arms will be personally responsible for the certifications that they issue in the exercise of their duties.
Article 5. The Minister of Justice is authorized to issue whatever clarifying and complementary dispositions are required for the execution of the present Decree.
Transitory Provision. Within one month after the publication of this decree, the present Chronicler-Kings of Arms will present their respective diplomas or appointments at the Ministry of Justice for the appropriate annotation, proof of seniority, and registration, without which requirements the said certificates will remain without any validity.
Thus I provide by the present Decree, given in Madrid the thirteenth of April, one thousand nine hundred fifty-one,
FRANCISCO FRANCO.
The Minister of Justice
Raimundo Fernández-Cuesta y Merelo.
</b></i>
The Council of State found in 1995 that only those appointed by the Ministry of Justice in accordance with these decrees has the power to issue certifications of personal arms; cronistas appointed by the regional governments (Castile & Leon, Asturias, Catalunya, etc.) have the authority to deal only with matters under the competence of the regional governments—specifically municipal and corporate heraldry. I can provide more on this based on some material I posted on rec.heraldry last Feb-March drawn from the Official State Bulletin, if anyone is interested.
(The Council of State subsequently issued an opinion in a separate case that the King has no intrinsic right to grant arms unless the parliament passes a law giving him that right.)
Very good, Joseph. That’s a wonderful translation of the two famous decrees. But i tell you a thing. The king does grant arms. The council of state only makes assesments and give opinions, and advice about how to interpret the law. Of course, if the King grants arms the parliament must approve, but this is just a mere formality. If he wishes it, no one will deny it.
With respect to Scottish titles, i am out of my class. But i said what i said because i read this in the webpage of Lyon:
"Foreign Countries. Arms are not granted to non-British citizens (though those of Scottish ancestry can apply to the Lord Lyon King of Arms for cadet-matriculations, as above described) Moreover even if not of direct armigerous descent, foreigners of Scottish descent can often arrange for a cousin in Scotland, or in one of Her Majesty’s overseas realms get arms established by the Lord Lyon King of Arms, and thereafter themselves to obtain a cadet matriculation. Each party is in such cases is supplied with an illuminated parchment".
Anyway, i can not give a lecture in scottish nobility. But sturzenegger is not British.
With respect to the Bet, who knows? The king might appoint Floresta after all, and i would have to emigrate to Scotland with the Wine and ask for shelter to Duncan, lol.
Charles E. Drake wrote:
I have a concern that the discussion on the Spanish College of Arms and the cronistas may be a little one-sided.
Unless someone has more recent Spanish legal information, there is, in my opinion, only one side to the question of the Marques de La Floresta’s standing to issue certifications of personal arms: he has none. That’s what the Spanish Council of State found in 1995, and thus far I’ve seen no evidence that anything has changed.
Quote:
The status of the cronistas has been discussed on various heraldry forums many times, and the situation with their status is somewhat more complex than posts in this thread would lead one to believe.
The status of the certifications of Cadenas may be a complex issue (I don’t really think so, but it’s arguable). That of La Floresta’s is not complex at all.
Quote:
Although certifications by Don Vincente were signed by the Spanish Ministry of Justice, I have seen copies of correspondence from officials within the Spanish government stating that the seal from the ministry only validated his signature, and that his actions were private.
The decrees still in force on the subject of Chroniclers of Arms specifically require all certifications issued by Chroniclers of Arms to receive the "buen visto"—which every dictionary I can find translates as "approval"—of the Ministry of Justice. The decrees say that the Chronicler is personally responsible for his certificates, but that doesn’t turn those certificates into purely private transactions. I think much of the confusion about the status of these documents grows out of the chronic inability of the British heraldic establishment to understand any form of heraldic regulation other than their own. They insist that the Cronista’s certifications must either be the equivalent of a grant of arms in exercise of some royal prerogative or a purely private transaction of no legal significance. As I read the Spanish law and the decisions of the Council of State, it is neither. The decrees on the Cronistas were issued to ensure that competent people certified by the Ministry of Justice were the only ones who could issue authoritative certifications of nobility, genealogy, and the right to particular arms. They were, in essence, licensed to perform this function, but only under the supervision (however nominal it may have been in practice) of an official of the Ministry of Justice. The "personally responsible" clause is essentially saying that anyone who disagrees with a Cronista’s finding must take it up with the Cronista (presumably by taking him to court, if necessary), not with the Ministry.
Quote:
Recent certificates issued by Don Alfonso have notarial signatures which attest to the same thing—validating his signature.
But the MOJ attestation of the licensed cronista’s signature is not only attesting that the signature is that of Don Vincente de Cadenas but also that Vincente de Cadenas is a licensed cronista.
Also, I have found myself troubled by the appearance online of at least one document by La Floresta with not only a notary’s stamp but an apostille as well. I won’t go into why, unless someone asks, but the appearance of an apostille on a document that’s not going to be introduced into evidence in a foreign judicial or similar proceeding sets off my B.S. alarms.
Quote:
However, even if one takes the lowest common denominator and believes that the personal certifications of arms by the Spanish cronistas are only private opinions or actions, they are the private actions of persons appointed by the Spanish government, or a provincial government, to carry out the same, or similar, activities, i.e. heraldry.
Apart from what I believe is the misunderstanding of the legal status of a licensed Cronista’s actions (see above), the problem with this argument is that the Spanish regional governments only possess the powers that are delegated to them by law. They aren’t like semi-sovereigns with reserved powers like US states. The regional governments were delegated the power to regulate only municipal and corporate heraldry within their respective regions, not to deal with matters of nobility, genealogy, and personal heraldry. The Council of State was very clear about this in rejecting La Floresta’s 1995 demand that the Ministry of Justice be compelled to grant him an examination for a cronista’s license under the 1915 and 1951 decrees.
Quote:
Both cronistas are/were highly learned, well respected, and considered experts in their field. Don Alfonso is widely published, involved with numerous chivalric and nobiliary organizations, and also has been called upon by King Juan Carlos for heraldic duties.
Irrelevant, your honor.
Quote:
The Spanish College of Arms is also a private concern, and any documents it issues would also be private, presumably with some notarial validation of the signature(s). In this case, however, and in contrast, since this is a new concern we know nothing of the individuals involved, specifically their competence, ethics, or backgrounds.
I think it would be important to answer these questions before spending money there as well.
Certainly. Excellent advice in any case.
Montferrato wrote:
With respect to Scottish titles, i am out of my class. But i said what i said because i read this in the webpage of Lyon:
"Foreign Countries. Arms are not granted to non-British citizens (though those of Scottish ancestry can apply to the Lord Lyon King of Arms for cadet-matriculations, as above described) Moreover even if not of direct armigerous descent, foreigners of Scottish descent can often arrange for a cousin in Scotland, or in one of Her Majesty’s overseas realms get arms established by the Lord Lyon King of Arms, and thereafter themselves to obtain a cadet matriculation. Each party is in such cases is supplied with an illuminated parchment".
Anyway, i can not give a lecture in scottish nobility. But sturzenegger is not British.
Each Lord Lyon is in the enviable position of deciding for himself the people to whom he will grant arms, and Luis has slightly misquoted what appears on the Lyon Court website: "Foreign Countries. Arms are not generally granted to non-British citizens." Most recent Lord Lyons have insisted that applicants have some tangible connection to Scotland if they are not domiciled there. They have differed over the necessary degree of connection, but certainly the ownership of substantial landholdings or of a feudal barony has sufficed in the minds of successive Lyons to bring petitioners within their jurisdiction.
Herr Sturzenegger is the owner of one of those much-discussed Scottish feudal baronies; he doesn’t hold a peerage title. For historical reasons, some feudal baronies were created under the name of earldoms and what-not. So what Sturzenegger owns is a feudal barony known as the Earldom of Arran. His grant of arms refers to him as the "Holder of the Earldom" because the term "Earl of Arran" would mean he is a peer, which he isn’t. The same issue doesn’t arise with ordinary feudal baronies, because the lowest degree of the peerage in Scotland is not "Baron" but "Lord of Parliament." So if a grantee of arms is called Baron of Whatnot, it actually tells the reader that he is not a peer.
<<Unless someone has more recent Spanish legal information, there is, in my opinion, only one side to the question of the Marques de La Floresta’s standing to issue certifications of personal arms: he has none. That’s what the Spanish Council of State found in 1995, and thus far I’ve seen no evidence that anything has changed.>>
I am conceding the Spanish legal issues, about which I am not competent to judge. I thought the arguments one-sided because they bordered on being defamatory against the cronistas, particularly Floresta.
<<Irrelevant, your honor.>>
It might be irrelevant from a legal standpoint, as you imply with the term "your honor," but from the standpoint of knowledge and competence, I think it is highly relevant. Given that all these certifications are private or unofficial documents, what remains is the quality of the content. From the perspective of the USA, in which any Spanish heraldic document would have no legal standing, the quality of the private opinion and the art work becomes relevant.
<<Certainly. Excellent advice in any case.>>
The strength of the attack on Floresta sets off my alarms, for I suspect the new Spanish College may consider him competition. That is why I raised the question of who was involved in that enterprise.
Kind regards,
Charles
Correct, but if you read this link about the lyon court in the heraldry society of scotland, you will see that i did not misquote anything, I just copied and pasted from this source:
That’s the site of the Heraldry Society of Scotland and it doesn’t match exactly with the official source. Check the direct link to Lyon Court, www.lyon-court.co.uk.
I openly admit i do not like Floresta. No problem with that.
Quote:
That’s not a Spanish Grant. It is a regional "certification of arms" signed by some civil servant of Castilla y Leon. The signature is "Castilla y Leon".
The King of Spain’s signature is in the lower right hand corner.
http://members.lycos.co.uk/verysleepy/spanishgrantsmall.jpg
http://members.lycos.co.uk/verysleepy/spanishgrant.jpg
Here is an example of Juan Carlos’ signature:
The King signs many documents, and not all of them in person. You also can buy pictures of the King with his signature in a corner shop, and that does not mean you have got an autograph from him.
I do not know the exact nature of this document, as i can not read the spanish text. There might be many plausible explanations for this. If i could read, i would tell you exactly what this is about.
Anyway, i am getting tired of attacking Floresta. I am getting hot, and i do not want to spit what i know about him. It has been proved beyond doubt that his certifcations are as good as others, and that he uses his position of Cronista of Castilla y Leon to do strange things. That is all.
If the king appoints him as Cronista i will emigrate to Scotland, will try to be adopted by a Scot, and i will ask Lyon for a grant of arms, lol.
Yours aye
Montferrato wrote:
.....i will emigrate to Scotland, will try to be adopted by a Scot, and i will ask Lyon for a grant of arms, lol.
Luis,
You do not need to be adopted by a Scot. Becoming a permanent resident within Scotland will qualify you to petition for a Grant of Arms from the Lord Lyon. If you do not want to be a resident, just purchase enough land suitable for a house.
Yes, I know you are not being serious.
—Guy
This thread is becoming more and more interesting, a lot of legal issues involved. As a recap:
1. I believe that today there is not an appointed official in the Kingdom of Spain to carry out the functions of “Cronistaâ€. If there was an error about having two “Cronistas†that error was solved in 1995. After the death of Cadenas y Vicent nobody holds the office of “Cronista Rey de Armas del Reino de Espanaâ€.
2. H.M. Don Juan Carlos I, has the right to grant arms.
3. Since there is not a “Cronista del Reino†under the legal provisions and statutes any registry or certification is an act between private parties.
4. Certainly the quality of the private opinion and the art work becomes relevant.
5. A Notary Validation has a different reach in Spain that the one we are used in the U.S. A notary is not only certifying the authenticity of the signatures but that the act, contract or declaration does not violate the public law (as opposed to the private law). A notarial Act has a privileged position if it were to be used as proof. Notary in Spain (and most of the legal systems derived from the roman system) are lawyers (they hold an academic degree in law to be exact).
6. "El desempeño de este cargo no será remunerado" means that he does not get any salary, not that the service will be free.
As per the signature in the document and considering the document is dated 1992 would it be possible that the King had called Ceballos-Escalera for heraldic duties and at that time, in good faith, Ceballos-Escalera was considered a “Cronista†with similar duties than Cadenas y Vicent?
As a final thought, I dislike Ceballos-Escalera as well but it does not mean his certifications are a scam and if I have access to some sample of the SCA’s artwork probably I’ll be more than willing to registry my arms with them.
Regards
Aurelio
Luis,
I decided to follow my own counsel and check into the Spanish College site.
<http://www.spanisharmorial.com/>.
I find from "who is" that it is registered to one Luis Fernando Castro.
I note on this site the disclaimer:
"Please note that we are an organisation which provides legal advice and carries out legal procedures on behalf of our customers. This means that we do not sell noble titles. Our services are of a very different nature. We offer assesment and help in nobility matters, but we are not providers of noble titles."
I wonder how this aligns with the services of another site, Europea Nobility, at <http://www.europeannobility.com/Terms-of-Business> which seems to offer the sale of titles over the signature of a person similarly named to you? This latter site is registered to one L F Castro Valle.
In view of your stated expertise in peerage and nobility, I am sure you can enlighten many of us about a subject in which there is great interest.
Regards,
Charles
Quote:
I do not know the exact nature of this document, as i can not read the spanish text. There might be many plausible explanations for this. If i could read, i would tell you exactly what this is about.
This document shows the arms of the Count de Latores granted by the King of Spain in 1992. You can see the document in "Heraldos y Reyes de Armas en la Corte de Espana", Prensa y Ediciones Iberoamericanas S.A., Madrid, 1993.
