i would caution worrying about what others think about our level of sophistication etc. in my opinion i don’t think if the USA had an official heraldic office of some sort that all of the sudden the USA would appear to have more sophistication etc. i just don’t see that. people will judge us based on our actions and our attitudes in dealing with them and others and not on if we have one more government bureau.
i teach my student-athletes to own who you are and ignore what others think of you. so far it has served us well because we do what we do well and don’t care if we are as experienced, big, fast, strong, or even as good as these other comp football teams are. worrying about what others think of you will prevent you from doing what you can do, should do, or must do. just my opinion though.
Donnchadh;88359 wrote:
i would caution worrying about what others think about our level of sophistication etc. in my opinion i don’t think if the USA had an official heraldic office of some sort that all of the sudden the USA would appear to have more sophistication etc. i just don’t see that. people will judge us based on our actions and our attitudes in dealing with them and others and not on if we have one more government bureau.
i teach my student-athletes to own who you are and ignore what others think of you. so far it has served us well because we do what we do well and don’t care if we are as experienced, big, fast, strong, or even as good as these other comp football teams are. worrying about what others think of you will prevent you from doing what you can do, should do, or must do. just my opinion though.
My concern has never been for what others think or how they may choose to judge anyone else; but as a citizen of the United States, I feel that the country that I live in and which my ancestors helped to establish, could certainly use a healthy dose of added dignity and sophistication of a level on par with many of the European nations.
Caledonian;88361 wrote:
My concern has never been for what others think or how they may choose to judge anyone else; but as a citizen of the United States, I feel that the country that I live in and which my ancestors helped to establish, could certainly use a healthy dose of added dignity and sophistication of a level on par with many of the European nations.
(emphasis mine)
How would a "Federal Bureau of Heraldry" accomplish that? To be on par with which European countries? Because from where I stand, heraldically we are already on par with the vast majority of European countries. Are you saying that, Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, Poland, etc. etc. etc. are not on par with "many of the European nations"?
Like Joe says, heraldry != British heraldry
kimon;88365 wrote:
(emphasis mine)
How would a "Federal Bureau of Heraldry" accomplish that? To be on par with which European countries? Because from where I stand, heraldically we are already on par with the vast majority of European countries. Are you saying that, Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, Poland, etc. etc. etc. are not on par with "many of the European nations"?
Like Joe says, heraldry != British heraldry
I was referring to the heraldic authorities that exist in Ireland, England, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, etc.
Caledonian;88367 wrote:
I was referring to the heraldic authorities that exist in Ireland, England, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, etc.
Spain does not have a heraldic authority. The last Chronicler of Arms died in 2005 and has not been replaced (the Marques de La Floresta has jurisdiction only over municipal arms in Castille & Leon). Moreover, even while there were Chroniclers of Arms in Spain their certification was not a requirement.
Sweden does not have a government heraldic authority for personal arms only some private organizations.
Ireland’s heraldic authority is in legal limbo.
So, we’re back to England & Scotland. Who else is in that "etc."?
(for the record: I would love it if there were legal protection of arms in the US but, I don’t think a "Federal Bureau of Heraldry" is necessary)
Caledonian;88356 wrote:
I may not be the best judge of that, as my views on the subject are naturally biased; however something like an an official governmental office of heraldry would give the United States a bit more sophistication and dignity which I believe many of the country’s citizens (myself included) would be directly supportive of.
The level of sophistication will not dramatically rise because of the existence of a certain government bureau granting and securing arms.This can be only achieved by people who decide to live their life in a dignified way in harmony with truth and respect of certain values .
From the AHS page on Foreign Armorial Grants and Registrations I only count the following countries as having a government run heraldic authority for private arms:
<ul class=“bbcode_list”>
<li>Belgium</li>
<li>Canada</li>
<li>Finland (inactive since 1919)</li>
<li>Ireland</li>
<li>Kenya</li>
<li>Slovakia (will register arms only)</li>
<li>South Africa</li>
<li>Spain (inactive since 2005)</li>
<li>United Kingdom (College of Arms and Lyon Court)</li>
<li>Zimbabwe</li>
</ul>
Only 6 of those are European, one of each has had their heraldic authority inactive for almost 100 years and the other without any chance of backing a comeback, so really it’s 4. Europe counts about 50 countries.
Caledonian;88367 wrote:
I was referring to the heraldic authorities that exist in Ireland, England, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, etc.
Spain and Sweden have no real Heraldic Authority. The Swedes are actually quite similar to the American Heraldry Society, even being called "Swedish Heraldry Society," the major difference being that while AHS has a tiny fraction of US heraldry enthusiasts the Swedish version has almost everybody. Most Scandinavian nations and the Germans have similar arrangements.
Spain had official Cronistas of Arms somewhat analogous to the UK’s Heraldic Authorities. But nobody was ever actually required to get a grant from them; while their official title is usually translated as "Crown of Arms," "Chronicler of Arms" is not an incorrect translation; and there is currently no Cronista authorized to deal with individual arms. There’s a Marquis who is officially authorized to grant arms to municipalities in one of Spain’s sub-divisions, and also takes private commissions, but his official job is not really analogous to what the CoA, Lord Lyon, and Chief Herald do.
There just isn’t anyone on the European continent who has a role in personal heraldry similar to the one played by the Lord Lyon, Chief Herald, or English Kings of Arms.
@Denny
What I find most interesting about your argument is that you dismiss my basis for saying the government can register arms as a cop-out, and then say you wish the government would register arms.
You aren’t an easy man to agree with.
Nick
Aquilo;88370 wrote:
The level of sophistication will not dramatically rise because of the existence of a certain government bureau granting and securing arms.This can be only achieved by people who decide to live their life in a dignified way in harmony with truth and respect of certain values .
Small steps taken in the direction where you want to go are better than sitting where one is and saying it is useless to try.
Wage rates in Washington are, I venture to say, a tad higher than in Pretoria. If you staffed this hypothetical office with a single newly-hired GS-13—equivalent to an Army major—at the lowest step on the GS-13 payscale, earning the minimum amount of annual leave (4 hours per pay period), here’s how the math works out:
Salary $89,033
Benefits $26,710 (employer’s contribution to Social Security, retirement, health insurance, etc)
_____________
Total personnel cost $115,743
If this one person unassisted could handle all the work—receive the application, research for duplication, record the registration, and prepare and send a response to the applicant—while also performing any other duties associated with running such an office (financial reports, dealing with IT, taking care of his own personnel business with his boss, whoever that may be, then the office would have to take in $486 per day to break even ($115,743 divided by 238 working days [52 weeks times 5 days a week, minus 10 federal holidays and 13 days of leave]).
How long would it take one person to process one registration, assuming a serious effort is made to avoid duplicating arms previously recorded as having been used in the United States, and that any genealogical claims to previously existing arms have to be verified? One day? One week? Should we say three man-days on average? Let’s use that for the sake of argument. That’s almost $1500 per application.
And how many applications would one expect? My understanding is that the CHI processes only 20-30 applications a year, Lyon Court about 50, and the College of Arms around 100 or so. While the U.S. has almost five times as many people as the UK, it also has no tradition of people thinking they need to register their arms with the government, a strong tradition of people thinking this sort of thing is none of the government’s damn business (I’m in this group), and certainly no law forbidding people from bearing arms without registration, even in theory. At $1500 per application, you’d have to process 75-80 registrations a year to cover just the salary of a single person.
Start adding the additional personnel you’d actually have to have—no one runs an official heraldic office with one person—and the cost of supplies, utilities, office space, IT (none of which would be provided free in the U.S. system—all such support services are reimbursed by the using organization) and the price starts heading up to into Lord Lyon territory.
Maybe my numbers are wrong. Maybe you could do this with a GS-11 and no help and shave 30% off the personnel cost. Of course, you’d be constantly turning over your one person as people depart for jobs with promotion potential, but maybe you can live with this. We’re still talking well over $1,000 per registration, with no artwork—maybe a laser-printed certificate with a blazon. Are Americans really going to pay for that?
Joseph McMillan;88377 wrote:
Wage rates in Washington are, I venture to say, a tad higher than in Pretoria. If you staffed this hypothetical office with a single newly-hired GS-13—equivalent to an Army major—at the lowest step on the GS-13 payscale, earning the minimum amount of annual leave (4 hours per pay period), here’s how the math works out:
Salary $89,033
Benefits $26,710 (employer’s contribution to Social Security, retirement, health insurance, etc)
_____________
Total personnel cost $115,743
If this one person unassisted could handle all the work—receive the application, research for duplication, record the registration, and prepare and send a response to the applicant—while also performing any other duties associated with running such an office (financial reports, dealing with IT, taking care of his own personnel business with his boss, whoever that may be, then the office would have to take in $486 per day to break even ($115,743 divided by 238 working days [52 weeks times 5 days a week, minus 10 federal holidays and 13 days of leave]).
How long would it take one person to process one registration, assuming a serious effort is made to avoid duplicating arms previously recorded as having been used in the United States, and that any genealogical claims to previously existing arms have to be verified? One day? One week? Should we say three man-days on average? Let’s use that for the sake of argument. That’s almost $1500 per application.
And how many applications would one expect? My understanding is that the CHI processes only 20-30 applications a year, Lyon Court about 50, and the College of Arms around 100 or so. While the U.S. has almost five times as many people as the UK, it also has no tradition of people thinking they need to register their arms with the government, a strong tradition of people thinking this sort of thing is none of the government’s damn business (I’m in this group), and certainly no law forbidding people from bearing arms without registration, even in theory. At $1500 per application, you’d have to process 75-80 registrations a year to cover just the salary of a single person.
Start adding the additional personnel you’d actually have to have—no one runs an official heraldic office with one person—and the cost of supplies, utilities, office space, IT (none of which would be provided free in the U.S. system—all such support services are reimbursed by the using organization) and the price starts heading up to into Lord Lyon territory.
Maybe my numbers are wrong. Maybe you could do this with a GS-11 and no help and shave 30% off the personnel cost. Of course, you’d be constantly turning over your one person as people depart for jobs with promotion potential, but maybe you can live with this. We’re still talking well over $1,000 per registration, with no artwork—maybe a laser-printed certificate with a blazon. Are Americans really going to pay for that?
I’m sure that many Americans who make use of heraldry would be willing to do so; I would and I’m certain that I’m not alone. And as heraldry is used by businesses and corporations, as well as civic entities, there is a fairly broad market. Certainly having ones arms officially recorded in a legitimate national heraldic register is preferable to having ones arms recorded by a body having no official government sanction or recognition.
kimon;88369 wrote:
Ireland’s heraldic authority is in legal limbo.
No it isn’t. The Irish Attorney General has given the OCHI the green light to grant arms, and a stunningly erudite and tightly argued article in the new issue of the HSS journal Double Tressure demonstrates that the entire brouhaha over the office’s legal status is the result of a gross misreading of the Irish constitution and disregard for recent Irish jurisprudence.
Joseph McMillan, "Legal Authority for Irish Arms," Double Tressure 34 (2011), 44-71.
Joseph McMillan;88381 wrote:
No it isn’t. The Irish Attorney General has given the OCHI the green light to grant arms, and a stunningly erudite and tightly argued article in the new issue of the HSS journal Double Tressure demonstrates that the entire brouhaha over the office’s legal status is the result of a gross misreading of the Irish constitution and disregard for recent Irish jurisprudence.
Joseph McMillan, "Legal Authority for Irish Arms," Double Tressure 33 (2011), 44-71.
ah!
My copy is still in the mail (Florida is a long state, takes a while to drive all the way down) - looking forward to reading the article.
I’m glad the OCHI issue has been finally resolved.
Joe, if we needed to set up a completely new office your numbers would be pretty much the end of the argument. But we don’t.
We’ve already got an office that can handle a couple more commissions a year. It’s called the Institute of Heraldry. It’s currently DoD-only, but it started out as Army-only, and there’s no reason it’s scope couldn’t be expanded again. It already has 32 employees, so adding 50-100 civilian CoAs a year probably wouldn’t be a problem.
And if it is, contractors do piece-work for the government all the time. I’m not sure you could get vellum and gold leaf from a private contractor for the $1,500 price you propose, but you could definitely get a lot more then a printout.
Nick
Nick B II;88391 wrote:
Joe, if we needed to set up a completely new office your numbers would be pretty much the end of the argument. But we don’t.
We’ve already got an office that can handle a couple more commissions a year.
So you want to put the Army in charge of personal heraldry? Hmmm.
Anyway, TIOH work is already done on a reimbursable basis. An organization I helped create once approached the Institute to design an emblem. As I recall, the price quoted was over $1,000, and that was more than 10 years ago.