Family crest/ Coat of Arms?

Question

Hey all!

I have homework for tommorrow and I'm really stressed! I need to find my family crest/coat of arms so I can print it off and show it to my soc ed teacher ( social education ) My last name is Pryde.

Ps. I also would like a crest for last name Simpson cause my friend wants me to do hers cause her computer doesnt work!

Please If you can, Provide Links for both seperatly.

Lovee. =)

Katie

x

Answer 1

Print off the llinks Tebs gave you and give them to your teacher.  Just because someone with your surname was granted a coat of arms that doesn't mean it belongs to your family and that person is even related to you.

House of Names is a surname product peddler.  FamilyCrest is a misnomer for a coat of arms.  House of Names has the following in fine print:  "We encourage you to study the _________genealogy to find out if you descend from someone who bore a particular family crest.  No families, not even royal houses, can make sound claim to the right to bear arms unless a proven connection is established through attested genealogical records."

There might have been more than one man named Pryde that were granted coat of arms, all different.  No one peddler that sells them on the internet, at airport, in shopping malls, in magazines will have all of them. They don't need to in order to sell to the gullible.  Now if more than one person with the same surname from different national origins were granted one, House of Names will have one of each when in fact there might have been several of each.

Whenever you see one of those walnut plaques, tshirt, coffee mug, keychain etc with a coat of arms on it, frequently they are valid coats of arms.  What isn't valid is that they are sold like they belong to everyone with a particular surname and that isn't so.

I know there are some who do not like our telling people this. Don't know if they are in the pocket of a peddler selling coats of arms or if they have one of those keychains and don't want the whole world to know that the coat of arms on it probably was granted to someone not even related.

Feel free to print off what I have posted and give to your teacher.

Answer 2

Time to educate your teacher.  

Coats of Arms are NOT granted to families.. they belong to individuals.  

http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Faq.ht...

Q. Do coats of arms belong to surnames?

A. No. There is no such thing as a 'coat of arms for a surname'. Many people of the same surname will often be entitled to completely different coats of arms, and many of that surname will be entitled to no coat of arms. Coats of arms belong to individuals. For any person to have a right to a coat of arms they must either have had it granted to them or be descended in the legitimate male line from a person to whom arms were granted or confirmed in the past.

the College of Arms is the legal authority on the issuance of heraldry.  

source- 25+ yrs of research knowledge.

Answer 3

Katie, 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 just one man with whom you share a last name, you are welcome to print out this answer and give it to your teacher, and I will 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...

All 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 4

I found both, in color, on houseofnames.com

Use the "search" on the left-hand side of the page.

P.S.

Come on, people!

It's just a school project.

The teacher isn't trying get anyone knighted or send them off on a search for hidden family treasures.

She's only trying to make the course a little more interesting.

Besides, I doubt, the "coat of arms/family crest police" will be going to the school house to drag anyone away in chains.

Have fun with your project!!