How to Interpret the Heraldry

Heraldry Inheritance and the New World

Sons inherit their father's arms not equally but by law of cadency. Each adds to his inherited arms a particular token indicating his order among the sons from the oldest to the youngest. On the father's death the oldest son drops his mark of cadency to be taken up by his oldest son, and he assumes his father's insignia.

There are three ways in which a coat of arms may be modified:

by adding a shield of pretense
by a process known as quartering
by changing the label as inherited by sons (see Cadency)

A woman's right is always inherited. (see Women in Arms)

While America was under English rule there were some general regulations or customs on the right to bear arms which the colonists should follow. Apparently, colonial governors made no effort to compel citizens to abide by these laws and as a result the later colonists did pretty much as they pleased about displaying anything that struck their fancy. Some residents were descended from gentle and noble families and were entitled to bear arms, others were not. But as they grew in wealth and social prestige those who weren't entitled desired to obtain arms. Some of these people really tried to trace descent form an armigerous ancestor, but others simply appropriated any design that was pleasing or that seemed significant in their situation.

At the end of the 17th century this illegal use of arms was helped along by an obliging carriage painter of Boston named Gore. Mr. Gore. He created arms for the Boston socialites of the day, and eventually he made a roll of arms which is completely without authority. However, it is
useful today in showing what families were then claiming for right to use arms.

About a century later a Mr. Cole performed similar services throughout New England. The work of Mr. Cole has even less authority than Mr. Gore's, but his influence has been even more widespread and therefore more disastrous in its results.

During the 18th and 19th centuries, the wholesale assumption of arms reached huge proportions. Most persons took them without the shadow of a claim. Some Americans then believed (and some still do) that the bearing of a surname the same as that of an armigerous family entitles them to use the same arms. However as stated before, a coat of arms belongs only to the person to whom it was granted, and to those who can prove direct descent through the direct line from that person.

Because of the American interest in heraldry, the New England Historic and Genealogical Society of Boston has created a committee on heraldry. It is the committee's function to investigate and establish the right to certain American families to bear arms and it has published a roll of authentic coats of arms. However, such registration has no legal right nor any meaning other than that in the committee's opinion such arms are rightfully used by certain families. The committee accepts all coats where descent is proved from a grantee of arms or from a family that has used them from mediaeval times. It also accepts arms that it can be proved is the first comer to this country used them. But if it can be shown that such user was without the right, the arms are removed from the list. This committee is as close as we can come to anything like the English College of Arms.

Unless you have a coat of arms that is registered as a trademark in the Patent Office, there is no government authority which can prevent any other individual from using it. Moreover, there is no law by which you can obtain a coat of arms. Since our government does not require coat armor, it has become a matter of custom that we use heraldic insignia only from personal choice, and in so using it we should abide by the laws governing its use in the country in which our family originated. Therefore, since most of us who go digging for ancestors are of English origin, we should follow the English law covering the use of coats of arms.

Actually, few American families are entitled to bear arms since the arms belongs only to the person to whom it was granted and to his direct descendants. Other persons of the same surname, no mater how closely related, have no right to it unless they descend from the original owner. Consequently, the right to bear arms in this country is limited to those comparatively few families who can show direct descent from an arms bearing ancestor.

Learn about Women Displaying Costs of Arms