Luis Cid;87284 wrote:

I cannot understand why anyone who has a serious interest in heraldry would object to paying $325.00 to the ACH to have a proper registration and publication of their arms.  Many people spend more on consumer items of marginal utility which are eventually discarded.  Published arms are a permanent mark and statement of one’s identity which are as intimately related to an individual’s identity as his surname - surely something that is worth spending a few coins on!

Spoken like someone who makes more then $7.60 an hour, 25 hours a week. That’s a good week. Next week Home Depot has me scheduled 22 hours. So $325 is basically a full paycheck.

The great thing about the USHR is it allowed people who can’t afford any other type of registration a place to register their arms. Unfortunately that site is no longer being maintained, and it’s owner seems to have disappeared.

I would suggest that adopting the orphaned registry would be a logical step for AHS, but AHS would probably have to start maintaining it, which the society does not seem to have the resources for. Of course, there’s nothing that says AHS couldn’t simply host the site so people could still access the registrations. And the idea is not feasible if you can’t actually get in touch with Michael Swanson.

Nick

J. Stolarz;87290 wrote:

Perhaps years down the line.  Besides, though I may be able to justify it, I’m not sure my wife would agree with my sentiments .

You and I should hang out more.

For me, it is neither a lack of desire, nor a lack of interest in heraldry - its just a simple lack of funds.  I’m not the Government, so I just can’t spend more than I make.  it’s just that simple.  In the US, I don’t think that heraldy has to be the realm of the rich and privelaged that it is elsewhere.

I’m only one vote on the board of governors, and the board can always be overruled by being voted out by the members, but I will totally oppose the AHS getting into the armorial registration business. This was a decision we made at the outset and I believe it was the right one.

We need to fill the niche we fill, not compete with the three other armorial registries that already existed in the United States before we were formed. We need to collaborate with the other heraldic institutions, not compete with them.

If you can’t scrape up the $100 to record your arms with the NEHGS, then just don’t record or register them. Registration gets you nothing, zip, nada, squat, bupkus!!!!!!!! Except maybe a greater chance of having your arms ripped off by someone else. If you’re a member of the AHS and have your arms in the members’ armorial, they’re just as much published and on record as they would be if you paid $350 to the ACH to go into their printed armorial, and certainly as much as if you registered them with another registry whose existence is only in cyberspace, such as the USHR. As a number of public officials have learned to their pain, once something is on the web, its on the web forever thanks to the plethora of groups, companies, etc, that regularly crawl through the web and archive what they find there.

If your concern is about your descendants being able to find out what your arms are, then print off a dozen copies of your achievement and mail them to all the relatives you can think of, or write a short pamphlet about them, self-publish it, and send it to the local public library, historical society, and genealogical society.

Two final points, to be taken for what they’re worth:

1. Those who can’t afford to pay a few hundred dollars to register their arms might reflect on whether it’s premature to be assuming arms in the first place. I would never tell you you can’t or shouldn’t, but even in our fairly egalitarian society the display of arms suggests that one has arrived at a certain level of standing in the world. I’m not saying that anyone must choose to pay for a registration; that’s a different question.

2. At the risk of breaking a little more china and being accused of stereotyping: I haven’t checked the archives for who has told us he has a tattoo of has arms and who hasn’t, but I gather that the bottom end price for a tattoo is roughly the same as what it costs to record with the NEHGS COH, and anything even halfway elaborate (like a coat of arms) quickly runs you above the Augustan Society’s price point and even beyond the ACH’s. So if (and I emphasize if) someone’s making minimum wage and has ink on his arms and legs, my sympathy for the plea that he can’t afford one of the existing American armorial registries is somewhat limited.

Tattoo free, fyi

steven harris;87292 wrote:

You and I should hang out more.

For me, it is neither a lack of desire, nor a lack of interest in heraldry - its just a simple lack of funds.  I’m not the Government, so I just can’t spend more than I make.  it’s just that simple.  In the US, I don’t think that heraldy has to be the realm of the rich and privelaged that it is elsewhere.

Well, even though I could afford it, and while my wife does think my interest in heraldry is cool…I can just see the look she would give me if I said I wanted to spend $325 so I could get my arms published in the ACH printed armorial.  Which, in the end, is something I would love to do.

I think most people I know see my passion for heraldry as a slightly strange obsession .

Joseph McMillan;87293 wrote:

We need to fill the niche we fill, not compete with the three other armorial registries that already existed in the United States before we were formed. We need to collaborate with the other heraldic institutions, not compete with them.

I agree 100% that AHS shouldn’t become an armorial registration.  AHS fills the niche that it needs to, and it shouldn’t spread itself too thin.  Affiliating with an armorial registry is another matter.

Joseph McMillan;87293 wrote:

If you can’t scrape up the $100 to record your arms with the NEHGS, then just don’t record or register them. Registration gets you nothing, zip, nada, squat, bupkus!!!!!!!! Except maybe a greater chance of having your arms ripped off by someone else. If you’re a member of the AHS and have your arms in the members’ armorial, they’re just as much published and on record as they would be if you paid $350 to the ACH to go into their printed armorial, and certainly as much as if you registered them with another registry whose existence is only in cyberspace, such as the USHR. As a number of public officials have learned to their pain, once something is on the web, its on the web forever thanks to the plethora of groups, companies, etc, that regularly crawl through the web and archive what they find there.

Getting your arms in a printed armorial I think in the end is the best option, but having an online armorial enables more people to realize that there are in fact printed versions of these armorials. As we’ve said before, there’s a lot of people who don’t realize that there are still printed records out there, that haven’t been published on the internet.  Having the online armorial helps them realize this.  Besides, I think a lot of people like to display their arms for a lot of people to see, and the internet is the obvious option.

Joseph McMillan;87293 wrote:

If your concern is about your descendants being able to find out what your arms are, then print off a dozen copies of your achievement and mail them to all the relatives you can think of, or write a short pamphlet about them, self-publish it, and send it to the local public library, historical society, and genealogical society.

Publishing my genealogy with heraldry is on my list

Joseph McMillan;87293 wrote:

2. At the risk of breaking a little more china and being accused of stereotyping: I haven’t checked the archives for who has told us he has a tattoo of has arms and who hasn’t, but I gather that the bottom end price for a tattoo is roughly the same as what it costs to record with the NEHGS COH, and anything even halfway elaborate (like a coat of arms) quickly runs you above the Augustan Society’s price point and even beyond the ACH’s. So if (and I emphasize if) someone’s making minimum wage and has ink on his arms and legs, my sympathy for the plea that he can’t afford one of the existing American armorial registries is somewhat limited.

I’m tattoo free

As a non American, I don’t feel I’m in a position to agree or disagree with much of what has been written here. I will however permit myself to say that my sympathies are very much with Nick B II and Joshua. In my opinion, and whether or not Michael Swanson was aware of it, his armorial register is also an archive, and armorial archives play an important part in keeping people from stepping on each others armorial identities. I’ve noticed members often refer to them. The more arms recorded, the more conflicts avoided or resolved. I’m now beginning to wonder if these archives are at risk of being consigned to oblivion. It would be a great loss if this where to happen, and I feel the AHS should be aware of this risk and make an earnest effort to ensure it doesn’t happen.

Richard G.;87303 wrote:

As a non American, I don’t feel I’m in a position to agree or disagree with much of what has been written here. I will however permit myself to say that my sympathies are very much with Nick B II and Joshua. In my opinion, and whether or not Michael Swanson was aware of it, his armorial register is also an archive, and armorial archives play an important part in keeping people from stepping on each others armorial identities. I’ve noticed members often refer to them. The more arms recorded, the more conflicts avoided or resolved. I’m now beginning to wonder if these archives are at risk of being consigned to oblivion. It would be a great loss if this where to happen, and I feel the AHS should be aware of this risk and make an earnest effort to ensure it doesn’t happen.

Agreed.  By having an online armorial, it helps prevent arms duplication by making the blazons searchable.  It’s all well and good that they’re in some systems like the Augustan Society or NEHGS, but if nobody can search the database easily, then it doesn’t do much good in preventing arms duplication.  Especially in a country like the United States where it’s such a heraldry free for all without any real authorities other than what we say here for the most part.

J. Stolarz;87306 wrote:

It’s all well and good that they’re in some systems like the Augustan Society or NEHGS, but if nobody can search the database easily, then it doesn’t do much good in preventing arms duplication. .

Sigh…you look in the published editions of the Augustan or ACH armorials. Failing that, you contact whoever keeps the records of the relevant register. So it may take a couple of months for an answer…life is short, but not that short.

I would note that there is no online or even printed way to check for duplication of English arms, only an incomplete one for the OCHI (nothing for old Ulster grants), and you have to pay for access to the online version of Lyon Register.

Joseph, obviously it is worth waiting, but lets think of the average person.  Most people aren’t willing to wait months, just to find out if somebody already has a blazon or not.  Besides, is there something wrong with making things as easy as possible for people, or do you just want to make it difficult?

Amen to that!

Welcome to the new world! Its technology based. If you don’t jump in and run with it you WILL be left behind!

Not to mention why would I want to pay $325.00 for not even a half page article to be printed in a book that will set on a shelf and collect dust! Whereas a searchable database, on the other hand is more user friendly and considerably more apt to be used! I’m sorry if this offends someone but this is the world we live in!

One quick question.  It says on the USHR website ...

Quote:

All registrations are published as blazons (descriptions) on this website. A drawing of registered arms is published if the armiger (owner of the arms) purchases a certificate. A bound compilation of registrations is sent to the LDS Family History Center in Utah and to the Library of Congress.

Does anybody know if he actually has done this or not?  Obviously it’s a good idea to help there to be a permanent record of the arms in question.

harold cannon;87314 wrote:

Welcome to the new world! Its technology based. If you don’t jump in and run with it you WILL be left behind!

Not to mention why would I want to pay $325.00 for not even a half page article to be printed in a book that will set on a shelf and collect dust! Whereas a searchable database, on the other hand is more user friendly and considerably more apt to be used! I’m sorry if this offends someone but this is the world we live in!

It seems to me there are 2 issues here:

1. You want to be able to search as many blazons as possible online to, among other reasons, prevent possible duplications.  Likely impossible, as a complete database would have to span the globe and several centuries of historical records in numerous languages.

2. You want your blazon to be findable by others (so they don’t duplicate your arms) and by your future progeny (so they will use your arms).  While a registry makes this easier, it’s going to be nearly as easy to post your arms and blazon anywhere online and rely on search engines to seek them out.  Anyone concerned with using their own family’s arms, or worried about usurping someone else’s, will at least punch something into Google.

I’m with Joe on this one.  And on the issue of delay, there’s a reason that granting authorities often take years to finalize things.  Intentional delay (like the oft-mentioned "fridge test" here) give everyone involved time to be sure about their choices and their research before committing to something we all hope will only be done once.

Everything in this world is being brought up to modern standards, so why should heraldry be the exception to this.

In all honesty, how many people have searched for a year before using your arms? There are so many variables in this problem that it can’t be handled on a global scale. That’s why I’m more concerened with just heraldry in the United States. As I am an American born and bread I am not concerened with other countries heraldry. I’m sure with all the countries that grant heraldry that there have been some duplications in the world.

Actually there are very few countries who grant arms through an heraldic authority. By and large the tradition has always been that arms are assumed and it’s up to the prospective armiger/herald to do the research - assuming of course they know where to look.

What concerns me and perhaps one or two others here and now, is whether an American register of over one thousand names and blazons is now defunct and at risk.

Richard G.;87321 wrote:

Actually there are very few countries who grant arms through an heraldic authority. By and large the tradition has always been that arms are assumed and it’s up to the prospective armiger/herald to do the research - assuming of course they know where to look.

Yes, exactly.

Quote:

What concerns me and perhaps one or two others here and now, is whether an American register of over one thousand names and blazons is now defunct and at risk.

1.  It’s not at risk.  Even if the website is taken down, there will be lots of copies archived by Google, Internet Archive, and others.  Once something’s on the web, it’s on the web forever…somewhere.

2.  Even if it were at risk, let’s not get overdramatic.  The USHR has only been around since 2005.  Many if not most of the arms in the registry were added by Michael Swanson on his own from historic and other sources.  Just go to the letter A.  There are 41 arms on that page.  Here are 14 of them:

- President John Adams

- President John Quincy Adams

- Isaac Addington (died 1715)

- State of Alabama

- Albion College

- America magazine

- Mary Mansbridge Apthorp (died in the 1700s)

- Catholic Diocese of Arlington

- Associator (badge designed by Benjamin Franklin in 1747)

- Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta

- Adams House, Harvard

- United States of America

- Yale School of Architecture

- Yale School of Art

Are we to suppose that the arms of these people and entities will be lost if the USHR disappears?

Another five (Aberle, Anselm (both of them), Archer, and Argueta) are also registered with organizations that publish rolls of arms on paper.  That’s almost half of the arms indexed under "A" that can be found fairly easily whether the USHR exists or not.

I’m not at all deprecating the value of Michael’s work in accumulating information on pre-existing arms and putting them in his register, but people need to get themselves some small paper bags and breathe into them slowly.