Family Coats of Arms: American Moneymaker (Debunking some of the myth)

For millions of people today, a Coat of Arms is synonymous with genealogy. Anyone who has ever typed their name into a search engine has no doubt discovered that there are hundreds of companies purporting to have their 'Family Coat of Arms' and the complete history of their surname. I almost wish that it were that simple, but to do that we would have to ignore the very reason those powerful symbols had meaning. Hopefully without over simplifying the subject I can offer a brief explanation as to why there is no such thing as a 'Family Coat of Arms.'

Heraldry is as old as warfare itself. Rival armies found it imperative to distinguish themselves one from another on the battlefield to prevent fratricide. Over the centuries, it grew from simple flags to elaborate tabards and crests and other vestiges; it evolved in pace with the machinations of war and civilization that spawned it. During the Middle Ages, a system of government called 'feudalism' was born. A hierarchy of nobles managed the realm from the king down to the serf in the field. A sort of caste system emerged that separated the noble from the common. Apart from the trappings of wealth and prestige, a symbol of rank was necessary to secure their station and set them apart from the rest of the populace. Thus the modern notion of heraldry was born, and it became inseparable from the caste that it represented. The Coat of Arms could eventually be seen in every aspect of a noble's life. It was displayed on his shields, banners, tabards, and even on his horse's trappings. On the battlefield, it helped prevent his comrades from mistaking him as the enemy, it also let his opponents know that he was a person of relative importance and worth a ransom if spared. Off the field, it represented his authority over his tenants and feed men.

A Coat of Arms was a title granted in the name of a sovereign power to an individual much in the same way a handgun license today is only valid for the person to which it was issued. In most cases, the Arms could be passed from the father to his eldest son. However, it was by no means a unique 'family' symbol. Any subsequent children who inherited lands or title from its bearer would have use an Armorial that had been visibly altered. It also evolved over the years. If a man were granted a new estate, he might modify his Coat of Arms to reflect it.

To this day, with the exception of a suit of full plate armor there is no other symbol more representative of knighthood than the Coat of Arms. The rank of knight was not bestowed on every person with the same surname, and the Coats of Arms were the exclusive right of their bearers. Many of those same concepts exist today and can be seen in various aspects of our everyday lives. Company logos and registered trademarks are inseparable from the products they represent. Practically every country in the world has some form of law to protect these symbols from duplicitous use. Other countries, chief among them is the United Kingdom, look upon the American enterprise of slapping a surname on a shield and selling it off as a 'family Coat of Arms' in the same way that we rankle at the Chinese making bootleg copies of Mickey Mouse merchandise.