This may interest some of you:
Order of Americans of Armorial Ancestry
633 South Columbus Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
202-210-1392 Lee_Perryman@hotmail.com
Membership is restricted to individual, age eighteen or over, of good moral character and reputation, provided he or she proves his or her descent from an immigrant American ancestor who was a settler in one of the thirteen original Colonies uniting to form the United States of America or in the United States who had a proved right to bear arms in the country of his or her origin. (Emphasis added).
Membership is by invitation only.
(Source: Hereditary Society Community, http://www.hereditary.us/list_o.htm)
The "Order" also has its own webpage at: http://www.hereditary.us/societies/oaaa/index.htm, but it would appear to be a work in progress.
It seems to be an amalgamation of the two old perfidies :( : "only granted [outside the USA] and imported arms are real ones" and "we may found an Order".
In reality, if you permit me a further comment, a son - or, indeed, daughter - of any American who assumed correct arms is an "American of Armorial Ancestry" and there is absolutely no need to link this with any pseudo-chivalric stuff.
A better pic of their order emblem:
seems that there are some supporters missing that belong to the other arms 
Shameless usurpers! Are all these national and royal arms used by proper permission? I bet they are not.
Michael Y. Medvedev;54417 wrote:
Shameless usurpers! Are all these national and royal arms used by proper permission? I bet they are not.
I think they’ve decided that if they change the colours, they are no longer anyone’s royal arms. "Turquoise, three crowns Or" isn’t any royal arms that I know of; neither is "Argent three fleurs-de-lys Or" nor the ones quartering "Gules, a castle Or" with "Argent a lion Or".
The American national arms, they seem to have correct; the Royal Arms of Queen Anne seem to have a golden lion on a yellow background for the Scottish quarters (why is it that companies that make such enamelled doo-dads always assume that the charges must be a metallic gold, and any painted colour will do for a background?). The Dutch ones appear to be bezanty rather than billetty.
If I see one on eBay, I might purchase it for its humour value, but otherwise….
Madalch;54421 wrote:
I think they’ve decided that if they change the colours, they are no longer anyone’s royal arms. "Turquoise, three crowns Or" isn’t any royal arms that I know of; neither is "Argent three fleurs-de-lys Or" nor the ones quartering "Gules, a castle Or" with "Argent a lion Or".
The American national arms, they seem to have correct; the Royal Arms of Queen Anne seem to have a golden lion on a yellow background for the Scottish quarters (why is it that companies that make such enamelled doo-dads always assume that the charges must be a metallic gold, and any painted colour will do for a background?). The Dutch ones appear to be bezanty rather than billetty.
.
The ones on the website probably are what they intend.
http://www.hereditary.us/societies/oaaa/img/indeximage.jpg
I am not sure I grasp the theme….
Sweden
The Netherlands
UK King George I. 1714 - 1801
France
Castile-León
Are these representative kingdoms from which colonial American Armigers immigrated or the mother countries of the American colonies?
Sorry- I guess I should have mocked the maker of the gong rather than the organization.
My apologies to anyone associated with the society, apart from the enamallist.
Interesting to note they did not include anything to represent Germany, which IIRC many, many early immigrants to America came from.
I remember seeing somewhere a proposal for the arms of the newly formed United States which featured quarters for various European countries, it was supported by Lady Liberty and that other Greek figure, Fortuna I believe was her appelation….
Anyone know or recognize what I’m talking about?
Cheers,
MohamedHossam;54424 wrote:
Interesting to note they did not include anything to represent Germany, which IIRC many, many early immigrants to America came from.
Cheers,
Germany did no exist in American colonial days. The Deutsches Reich started in the late 1800 from independent states. My German speaking ancestors immigrated in the mid 1800s and listed their country of origin as Holstein. Those arms would muck up the emblem.
1) I believe there may be a legal impediment to their use of elements of the Great Seal.
2) Yet another proof that anyone with a computer and access to the interent can "found" any type of "order" that they dream up.
:mullet:
Stuart;54426 wrote:
1) I believe there may be a legal impediment to their use of elements of the Great Seal.
:mullet:
From Title 18
Quote:
(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
Michael Swanson;54422 wrote:
The ones on the website probably are what they intend.
http://www.hereditary.us/societies/oaaa/img/indeximage.jpg
I am not sure I grasp the theme….
Sweden
The Netherlands
UK King George I. 1714 - 1801
France
Castile-León
Are these representative kingdoms from which colonial American Armigers immigrated or the mother countries of the American colonies?
I’m guessing they’re the arms of European rulers who once controlled parts of America. The Swedes had a colony in Delaware, the Dutch Manhattan, etc.
Russia and Hawaii are missing, but if the Order was founded in 1903 neither Alaska nor Hawaii was a state, so may not have been counted.
Nick
MohamedHossam;54424 wrote:
Interesting to note they did not include anything to represent Germany, which IIRC many, many early immigrants to America came from.
And that’s an example of why this sort of design, cobbling together arms from various countries, doesn’t work. I have ancestors who came from Switzerland and settled in British American colonies in 1735. In fact, a lot of Swiss came to America in the 1700s, and yet no Swiss arms. Oh well.
I would like to correct a few misapprehensions and add a little information.
Quote:
2) Yet another proof that anyone with a computer and access to the interent can "found" any type of "order" that they dream up.
Actually, the OAAA was founded in 1903, long before computers and the Internet.
Quote:
Membership is restricted to individual, age eighteen or over, of good moral character and reputation, provided he or she proves his or her descent from an immigrant American ancestor who was a settler in one of the thirteen original Colonies uniting to form the United States of America or in the United States who had a proved right to bear arms in the country of his or her origin. (Emphasis added).
The bylaws specify that one have a proven descent from an American ancestor who settled on or before 4 July 1776 in the territory that became the 48 contiguous states and had a proven right to bear arms in the settler’s country of origin. This also explains why Russia and Hawaii are not included.
Quote:
I have ancestors who came from Switzerland and settled in British American colonies in 1735. In fact, a lot of Swiss came to America in the 1700s, and yet no Swiss arms. Oh well.
That the insignia does not depict Swiss arms is not an impediment to a descendant of a Swiss armiger joining, provided the membership criteria are met.
Quote:
I’m guessing they’re the arms of European rulers who once controlled parts of America. The Swedes had a colony in Delaware, the Dutch Manhattan, etc.
I suspect that is correct, although I cannot find this in writing.
Quote:
It seems to be an amalgamation of the two old perfidies : "only granted [outside the USA] and imported arms are real ones" and "we may found an Order".
In reality, if you permit me a further comment, a son - or, indeed, daughter - of any American who assumed correct arms is an "American of Armorial Ancestry" and there is absolutely no need to link this with any pseudo-chivalric stuff.
I don’t believe this organization commits the first perfidy, for it endorses the work of the COH of the NEHGS and also the ACH, both of which allow "new" arms. Restricting membership to a specific group of early American armigers is not the same thing as denying Americans the right to assume arms.
The second perfidy is also a non-starter, for calling an organization an "Order" does not mean that it claims to be a chivalric order, i.e. The Order of the Elks or the Order of the Arrow. As far as I can determine, no one claims the OAAA is an order of chivalry.
I agree, however, that many, if not most, American hereditary societies have pseudo-chivalric aspects. The hereditary society is almost a uniquely American phenomenon. There are many reasons for this, and they are perhaps off topic for this forum.
Quote:
seems that there are some supporters missing that belong to the other arms…
I think they’ve decided that if they change the colours, they are no longer anyone’s royal arms. "Turquoise, three crowns Or" isn’t any royal arms that I know of; neither is "Argent three fleurs-de-lys Or" nor the ones quartering "Gules, a castle Or" with "Argent a lion Or".
The insignia of the order was recently redesigned because of the "discovery that previous insignia design was not proper and consistent in its depiction of various items…"
The tinctures were corrected and the supporters and crest removed from the British arms to create parity with the arms of the other nations depicted. Input on the changes was received from respected heraldists including John Shannon, Duane Galles, and Henry Beckwith, all of whom, are I believe, members of the Order.
Quote:
And that’s an example of why this sort of design, cobbling together arms from various countries, doesn’t work.
I would have to concur, for a design of this nature would not have been my choice were I starting from scratch. I suspect that view is shared by some of the gentlemen mentioned earlier.
Kind regards,
/Charles
Charles E. Drake;54450 wrote:
I agree, however, that many, if not most, American hereditary societies have pseudo-chivalric aspects. The hereditary society is almost a uniquely American phenomenon. There are many reasons for this, and they are perhaps off topic for this forum.
/Charles
I think this would be a neat discussion. Perhaps those interested parties could talk about this phenomenon on rec.heraldry. It would certainly be more on point than all the spam that has recently appeared. :D
