Family Crests?

Question

Does anyone know a good site where you can download free images of one's family crest/coat of arms. All of the sites I can find make you pay for even the image...

Answer 1

You almost certainly do not have a coat of arms for your own family. Not everyone with the same name is entitled to use the coat of arms which were originaly granted to the one man

with whom you share a last name,  I explain what it is necessary to do to discover if you are in fact entitled to display, or use a coat of arms. Incidentally a crest is part of the coat of arms, it is not something separate, it is the decoration on the helmet.

Here is the same answer I have now given on countless occasions.

First you have to prove with documentary evidence that you are descended from a man who was granted arms, and then apply for permission to legally use them, the rules are very strict and can be upheld in the civil court of any country. Just because you share a surname with someone who was granted the right to arms does not mean that the right is also yours. The Heraldic tradition varies slightly between countries, but in essence they are all the same.

In the first instance the grant of arms was/is made to one individual and inherited by his descendants who alone may bear or use his arms, they were passed equally to each of his sons, each one added their own mark of cadency to those arms. The eldest son added a label – a horizontal strip with three pendant drops (during the lifetime of his father). The second son added a crescent, the third son added a five pointed star, the fourth son added a martlet, the fifth son added a annulet, the sixth a fleur de lys, the seventh a rose, the eighth a cross Moline and the ninth a double quatrefoil, which were then displayed on their shields to distinguish themselves from each other and their father, the sons passed their arms, complete with their own cadences, on to their own sons, who then added a second set of cadences to distinguish themselves from each other, their father, uncles and cousins.

When a man died, his eldest son then had the right to bear his father’s arms without the differentiation marks, the eldest son’s children would then add only one set of cadency marks, instead of two, and so on down the generations, the brothers of the eldest son continued to use the arms with their own cadency marks, which were later passed to their sons in the same manner, It all got very complicated.

Daughters also inherited the right to display their father’s arms if there was no male heir, a daughter could pass her father’s arms on to her sons. Wives, widows and daughters had a courtesy right to display their husband or father’s arms, normally on a diamond lozenge.

The original achievement remained the same through the generations, enhanced by the addition of the various cadences, however, the arms of more than one family could also be included on one shield. If both the man and his wife had the right to bear arms, they could be displayed side by side, called impalement, or if mixed together to form new arms, it was called compounding. One method was quartering, where the shield was divided into quarters, then, for example, if a man had no sons, his daughter or daughters inherited his right to the coat of arms, if one such daughter married a man who also had a coat of arms, her arms could be impaled with his, or be displayed on a

small shield in the centre of her husbands arms, their sons would then seek permission of the Heralds to bear arms, with their father’s arms in two quarters and their mother’s

in the other two quarters. With time the coat of arms could include the arms of many families and became very complex.

Dating originally from before the advent of surnames, the arms were in effect a means of identification, much the same as a surname. With the establishment of surnames during the 12th. And 13th. centuries, those families who already had the right to bear arms acquired a surname to go with their arms, once surnames were established and became hereditary, new arms were granted to men with an established surname, so it can, I think, be argued as to whether or not arms are attached to a family, or the family surname.

Neither were they (or surnames) introduced by the Normans for taxation purposes. The Normans arrived in England some 100 or more years before the first heraldic arms or devices began to appear.

Heraldry in Europe developed and evolved during the 12th.and 13th. centuries (1100-1200) Heraldic arms were a personal device, possibly for military purposes, or simply a display of status or vanity, it can only be guessed at because, today, no one knows the real reason. At first, arms were displayed without authority from anyone, but gradually became controlled by the Crown, through Heralds, whereby, men who could prove their ancient use of arms by their family, were granted permission to continue displaying them. Total control finally came about in the 15th.century, when Richard III

in 1484, established what is now known as the College of Arms, it still holds the

authority to grant or withhold the use and display of arms.

A crest was normally an ornament on a helmet and it was included within the family’s achievement (coat of arms) but later became used separately, as decoration on plate and cutlery, stationery etc.

If it is possible to access a copy of Burke’s “General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales” first published in 1842, you can find out if any particular family was ever granted the right to bear arms. It is unfortunately a fact that very, very few people, other than extremely well documented lines of royalty, nobility, gentry or maybe wealthy landowners, traders or other persons of note, can prove a satisfactory link back to that period. Generally, if a family is entitled to display arms, they are most probably still aware of the fact, it is not something usually “forgotten”. Today there are two types of arms, “granted arms”, which are formally conveyed by a sovereign, state, or other body with the authority to do so, these grants have legal status under the law wherever they are recognised. And there are “assumed arms”, which can be designed and used by anyone but carry no legitimacy.

http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/comconsumerp...

Other countries have a broadly similar history of Heraldic rules and regulatory authorities.

Sources :-

Among others.

The College of Arms

http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/About/...

And the book by T.Woodcock & J.M.Robinson

“The Oxford Guide to Heraldry”.

Answer 2

Tebs gave you a very thorough and accurate answer.

A crest is only part of a coat of arms. Coats of arms do not belong to surnames.  They were and are granted to individuals and only the direct legitimate male line descendants can apply to claim one.  A female can if her father has no direct male line descendants.

Any of us can give you links to numerous peddlers on the web that sell them like they belong to everyone with a particular surname.  Actually, there might have been more than one person with the same surname that were each granted their own coat of arms, all different.  These merchants of deceit that sell them will not have all of them.  They don't need to in order to sell to people.  The only time they will have more than one is if more than one person with the same surname from different national origins were granted one.

Then they will have one of each and there might have been several of each.  Most people are not entitled to a coat of arms at all.

Now, if you are an American and you have any English lines that goes back to early colonial days in the American South, you stand a good chance of having more than one in your family tree. That doesn't mean you are entitled to any one of them.  It just means that after doing research you find more than one ancestor that were granted coats of arms and if you have a book printed or even published on your family history, it is quite legitimate of you to put pictures of your ancestors' coats of arms in your book.  It would not, however, be legitimate for you to put in your book those that were granted to persons. with the same surnames as your ancestors.

Some in the South have the one their ancestor brought over from England 300-400 years ago.  They aren't those little walnut plaques with a coat of arms and a family history mounted on them either.  As a rule, they don't display them.  Afterall, they aren't any good for buying groceries or even GASOLINE.  Walmart won't accept them as a credit card.

If this is a school project, please print off the two links I have under source and give them to your teacher. One is from the British College of Arms(they grant coats of arms) and the other is from the most prestigious genealogical society in the U.S, The National Genealogical Society.  Also feel free to give to your teacher what I have posted here.

The surname product business which includes coats of arms (misnomer family crest) is one of the biggest scams around.