Are all these coat of arms, and family crest sites legit?

Question

It seems like these sites have different ones so which ones are correct?

Answer 1

Ben is right.  They have a "family crest" for my Norwegian family, who  were dirt poor farmers back as far as I can find them.

Answer 2

In the strictest sense the answer is no.  There is an exception in Scottish heraldry concerning the Clans and Clan members.  The crest is centered in a belt showing allegiance to a particular clan or chief.  The crest and coat of arms and the achievements are still the property of the Clan Chief or in the case of a marticularated clan the Captain or designated head of the Clan.  It is only in this manner may one use a crest of a clan-inside of the belt any other usage of the crest is a violation of Scottish Law and is punishable by prison and forfieture of all goods and possessions with the nonbelted crest on them.  For more information on this please check with the Lords Lyon of Scotland and England (separate offices), the Chancellary of Canada or other heraldric college in any nation that has a tradition of usage here.  

It is possible to gain a grant of arms through petition of the Lords Lyon-you have to be able to establish an ancestor would have been entitled to a coat of arms and that you are a proper descendent of them.  The undifferentiated arms can only pass the the eldest child-younger siblings may be granted a coat of arms, but it will be different from the undifferentiated arms-in color, device or in some other manner.

Answer 3

A simple answer   NO!

Answer 4

I'll second the "NO" vote.   Coats of arms are very tricky things, and most people are not entitled to use them, even if they happen to have a name for which there is a commonly known coat of arms.  As for those companies which sell "family crests," we fell for that many years ago.  My husband's family name is Portuguese, and is actually the same as the name of a town in Portugal (originally, it probably had "de" in front of it, meaning "from" that town).  Anyway, the "family" crest we were sent was actually the town's coat of arms.

Answer 5

The original purpose of a coa was to help identify a helmeted (& hence not recognizable) fighter in battle. Feudalism was in vogue when coa's became commonplace. Armored fighters (knights) fought because they had an obligation to support their overlord in exchange for the fief they held. Fief holders could be poor but they had to be able to arm themselves & provide a horse. Members of the nobility could more easily meet these requirements. Thus most coa's belonged to nobility.

In modern times, heraldry varies from country to country. In some it has no status. In others it is regulated by a system of control much like the judicial system.

In England, a coa would easily be different for different people with the same surname. To legitimately use any coa in England you have to show that you are descended from the individual who registered those arms. In Scotland the matter is more controlled, refined & complicated.

A coa in Britain is thus the property of an indivdual & no one else can simply use it; such an act is like infringement of trademark in the US/Canada. In Britain, a coa had to date from before regulation or have been granted (in which case there would be a record of that grant.)

In France, the matter was rather different even centuries ago. At one point the king sold coa's to raise money. A wealthy merchant who had no feudal obligation could thus acquire a legitimate coa which could be passed down in the family.

In Poland, the same coa was carried by everyone in a given clan, & it would be the coa of the head of the clan. My guess would be that due to the era of communism in Poland, there is little heraldry practiced.

In Russia, the situation more nearly followed that in England but was stricter, I believe. More like Scotland, in that regard.

In medieval times, European troubadours fancifully attributed coa's to Muslims. I don't know if the Muslims actually observed any heraldic practices.

In the US, there is (or was) a self declared group that would register a coa, in imitation of the College of Arms in England. However, in the US, coa's are essentially meaningless, unless they can be verified to some other country with a heraldic tradition. In such a case they have historical meaning only.

Very nearly from the beginning of heraldic practice in Europe (~1200), Churchmen carried arms (club, mace, etc) & had coa's since they engaged in armored combat.

In the Catholic Church every Diocese has a coa & every bishop has an individual coa. The bishop's coa is joined in traditional heraldic fashion with the coa of his diocese. This is true even in Ameerica & would be practiced, I suppose, in every country where it is not prohibited by the Government.

If one reflects on the time before heraldic practice came under regulation, even in a strict venue such as Scotland, one must realize that knights simply assumed a coa that struck their fancy.

Consequently, in any country where heraldry isn't regulated, anyone who wishes may adopt a coa and display it. The practice would perforce be anachronistic.

Pre-medieval society perhaps used symbols & ensigns in battle but they were not inherited & so some do not consider this as heraldic practice.

"Yet another half-baked kerbside nugatory opinion for today!"

Answer 6

Well I think they are just trying to make money......our last names have been handed down from generation to generation...stands to reason if we all had family crest that would have been passed down too.......these people could tell you anything ...no way to know .....what can you do with a coat of arms or a family ch rest....that and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee...what-u-gona do have it tattooed on your A$$

Answer 7

No, they aren't all legit.  No matter what surname you give them, they'll come up with a CoA/Crest.  Truth be told, just because you have a surname, does not mean your family has a crest/CoA.  

My surname has a CoA, but it is not my family's CoA.  My family was not royalty and did not have one.  I would have no right to claim that CoA.  However, most of the sites would tell me that it's my family's CoA.  

Seems like many people want to be related to the famous/infamous instead of accepting who their ancestors really were and being proud of their accomplishments.