Surfing through rec.heraldry, I found this thread from 1996 or thereabouts. FWIW, I still use these arms; though for my sibling and posterity, I have abandoned the notion of cadency marks within the family (though my brother still has the silver signet
ring and full-color armorial mug I gave him decades ago with the crescent).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 1:59:11 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

Surfing through rec.heraldry, I found this thread from 1996 or thereabouts. FWIW, I still use these arms; though for my sibling and posterity, I have abandoned the notion of cadency marks within the family (though my brother still has the silver

signet ring and full-color armorial mug I gave him decades ago with the crescent).

I remember those days. Does the site or mirror site still let new readers post their arms? We could use some young blood and more people, period, around here....

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

I think the rec.heraldry Roll of Arms is still functional..

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 1:59:11 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

Surfing through rec.heraldry, I found this thread from 1996 or thereabouts. FWIW, I still use these arms; though for my sibling and posterity, I have abandoned the notion of cadency marks within the family (though my brother still has the silver

signet ring and full-color armorial mug I gave him decades ago with the crescent).

Which kind of fits with those who point out that even in England, one of few places that emphasize that "arms belong to people, not family names", the so-called rule is honored more in the breach, than in the observance.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, 9 October 2018 02:40:57 UTC+1, 3ARwun wrote:

On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 1:59:11 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

Surfing through rec.heraldry, I found this thread from 1996 or thereabouts. FWIW, I still use these arms; though for my sibling and posterity, I have abandoned the notion of cadency marks within the family (though my brother still has the silver

signet ring and full-color armorial mug I gave him decades ago with the crescent).

Which kind of fits with those who point out that even in England, one of few places that emphasize that "arms belong to people, not family names", the so-called rule is honored more in the breach, than in the observance.

I beg to differ. As eldest son and heraldic head of my family, I am entitled to allow my younger brother to bear my coat of arms without difference if I want to. That does not however allow some unrelated Howarth to do the same. My arms are personal
and do not belong to the family name. I may decide how they should be used. But I’m not sure how I would defend them -- perhaps under the common law tort of passing off, even if the Court of Chivalry has fallen into desuetude.

As a matter of interest, one of the earliest grants of arms by a herald, one by Roger Leigh, Clarenceux, was made in 1440 to the grantee himself, his heirs, “and his assigns” (Wagner, ‘Heralds and Heraldry’ (1956) p 74).

Peter Howarth

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 9:40:57 PM UTC-4, 3ARwun wrote:

On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 1:59:11 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

Surfing through rec.heraldry, I found this thread from 1996 or thereabouts. FWIW, I still use these arms; though for my sibling and posterity, I have abandoned the notion of cadency marks within the family (though my brother still has the silver

signet ring and full-color armorial mug I gave him decades ago with the crescent).

Which kind of fits with those who point out that even in England, one of few places that emphasize that
"arms belong to people, not family names", the so-called rule is honored more in the breach, than in the
observance.

In most systems all descendants of the armiger can use the CoA, but entire names? Even the local equivalent of Smith?

Don't think anybody did that.

Nick

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 8:44:51 AM UTC-5, Peter Howarth wrote:

I beg to differ.

no need to beg, Americans respect the right of people to have a different opinion.

As eldest son and heraldic head of my family, I am entitled to allow my younger brother to bear my coat of arms without difference if I want to. I may decide how they should be used.

And if you did, without insisting on a cadency mark, you would be example number two, as McCartney was example number one, above.

As a matter of interest, one of the earliest grants of arms by a herald, one by Roger Leigh, Clarenceux, was made in 1440 to the grantee himself, his heirs, “and his assigns” (Wagner, ‘Heralds and Heraldry’ (1956) p 74).

and that would possibly be example number three. (thank you for that, btw, I was unaware of the Clarenceux example and found it interesting.) Another example of an armigerous family refusing to insist on cadency marks is found on http://powys.org/
Heraldry/family_arms.html making example number four.

But I’m not sure how I would defend them -- perhaps under the common law tort of passing off, even if the Court of Chivalry has fallen into desuetude.

That would be an interesting case, which many would like to see. I would actually wish you success in such an endeavor. Interestingly, McCartney might would have more legal rights, and ability to enforce them, because of the protections he has in his
region of the US. Ironic, and interesting.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)