GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2003-12 > 1071681910


From: Renia <>
Subject: Re: COATS OF ARMS
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 19:25:10 +0200
References: <29.4d69aaab.2d11ad7f@aol.com> <1f7d40624c.tim@south-frm.demon.co.uk> <005901c3c4b0$50b60460$05530243@TERRY>
In-Reply-To: <005901c3c4b0$50b60460$05530243@TERRY>


Terry Mair wrote:

> Another problem with the "Mall-vendors" is that you cannot rely on them to
> even come up with arms associated with the correct name, when I was younger
> I fell for one of these vendor sales, I knew what the arms where supposed to
> look like and assumed they did to, yeah right! not even close.

That is the whole point of this discussion.

Renia


> Terry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: COATS OF ARMS
>
>
>
>>In message of 17 Dec, wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I think that the present day arguments on the Coats of arms are based
>>>on the fact that people resent the fact that they are told that they
>>>cannot have their own coat of Arms unless it has been granted to an
>>>ancestor in the dim and distant past.
>>
>>I think that it is in the interests of the mall-arms-vendors to
>>propagate this so that peoeple continue to spend money with them.
>>Anyone who has looked into armory themselves will rapidly find out that
>>you can have new arms made for you and, even, you can make them
>>yourself.
>>
>>Certainly the various heraldic authorities would not say this as they
>>would rapidly lose a nice little earner.
>>
>>--
>>Tim Powys-Lybbe
>> For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>

This thread: