Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
-
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 26 Jul 2012, 13:00
- Location: Germany
Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Do private officers of arms have legal status? or require any recognition?
- Edward Hillenbrand
- Posts: 202
- Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 01:42
- Location: Catskill Mountains, New York, United States
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Can you be more specific as to what you mean by "private Officers of Arm? I think this is a case of people misunderstanding due to our common language. I am thinking of some sort of private armed security. I am not sure if that is what you meant.
Ed Hillenbrand
"Tempus Fugit, Memento Mori"
Armorial Register - International Register of Arm
"Tempus Fugit, Memento Mori"
Armorial Register - International Register of Arm
-
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 26 Jul 2012, 13:00
- Location: Germany
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
A herald employed by a private person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Officer_of_Arms
- Chris Green
- Posts: 3628
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
- Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
One of our Scottish members can probably help here, John Duncan of Sketraw possibly.
For what it is worth, which is very little, I doubt very much whether there was ever an Act of Parliament legally entitling certain nobles to create Officers of Arms. However it is conceivable that they were at some stage individually granted Letters Patent giving that right. I would surmise that the status of the Scottish Private Officers of Arms in fact stems from tradition rather than law. Their status and duties seem to be anchored in the traditions of the clans concerned - Hay, Mar, Lindsay and Donald. Other equally important clans and their chiefs do not have the same tradition.
I think that the fact that when the post of Finlaggan Pursuivant was revived in 2005 after 500 years, Ross Herald was present representing the Court of the Lord Lyon, was the best evidence that Private Officers of Arms are "legal" in Scotland. The Wiki article uses the word "recognised" by the Court of the Lord Lyon King of Arms. Merely putting on a tabard and calling oneself "MacThingy Pursuivant" would not result in such recognition being forthcoming!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlaggan_Pursuivant
In England there are no Private Officers of Arms, but two of the Royal Pursuivants of Arms Extraordinary - Fitzalan and Howard - have titles which suggest that they are the Private Pursuivants of the Earl Marshal, the Duke of Norfolk. The current Fitzalan is in point of fact a Scot - Colonel Alastair Bruce of Crionaich. The Howard appointment is currently vacant having only been filled (also it seems by a Scot) once since its creation as recently as 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzalan_Pursuivant_Extraordinary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Pursuivant_Extraordinary
For what it is worth, which is very little, I doubt very much whether there was ever an Act of Parliament legally entitling certain nobles to create Officers of Arms. However it is conceivable that they were at some stage individually granted Letters Patent giving that right. I would surmise that the status of the Scottish Private Officers of Arms in fact stems from tradition rather than law. Their status and duties seem to be anchored in the traditions of the clans concerned - Hay, Mar, Lindsay and Donald. Other equally important clans and their chiefs do not have the same tradition.
I think that the fact that when the post of Finlaggan Pursuivant was revived in 2005 after 500 years, Ross Herald was present representing the Court of the Lord Lyon, was the best evidence that Private Officers of Arms are "legal" in Scotland. The Wiki article uses the word "recognised" by the Court of the Lord Lyon King of Arms. Merely putting on a tabard and calling oneself "MacThingy Pursuivant" would not result in such recognition being forthcoming!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlaggan_Pursuivant
In England there are no Private Officers of Arms, but two of the Royal Pursuivants of Arms Extraordinary - Fitzalan and Howard - have titles which suggest that they are the Private Pursuivants of the Earl Marshal, the Duke of Norfolk. The current Fitzalan is in point of fact a Scot - Colonel Alastair Bruce of Crionaich. The Howard appointment is currently vacant having only been filled (also it seems by a Scot) once since its creation as recently as 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzalan_Pursuivant_Extraordinary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Pursuivant_Extraordinary
Chris Green
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
- Chas Charles-Dunne
- Posts: 624
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 15:48
- Location: England - TL 80102 93862
- Contact:
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Ryan Shuflin wrote:Do private officers of arms have legal status? or require any recognition?
There are those who would argue that the College of Arms are private officers.
Regards
Chas
IAAH Fellow
Chas
IAAH Fellow
- Chris Green
- Posts: 3628
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
- Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
There are those who would argue that the College of Arms are private officers.
Enlighten us.
Chris Green
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
- Chas Charles-Dunne
- Posts: 624
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 15:48
- Location: England - TL 80102 93862
- Contact:
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Chris Green wrote:There are those who would argue that the College of Arms are private officers.
Enlighten us.
Lord Lyon is a civil servant; is paid a wage; and collects revenues for the Crown. Whereas the College is self financing and the monies it collects go to the Kings, Heralds and Pursuivants and to maintain the building and its fabric.
Regards
Chas
IAAH Fellow
Chas
IAAH Fellow
- Martin Goldstraw
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1400
- Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 17:27
- Location: Shropshire, England.
- Contact:
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Chas Charles-Dunne wrote:There are those who would argue that the College of Arms are private officers.
This is a misinformed view which entirely ignores the facts. Whilst it may be corret that the officers of the College are forced (regrettably) to be self financing it is none the less a fact that they do receive a poor stipend which has not kept pace with inflation since its inception. One only has to peruse the London Gazette to obtain undoubted proof that the officer are "of the Crown" and appointed by the Queen.
Publication Date: Thursday, 8 April 2010
Notice Code: 1108
Crown Office
House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW
1 April 2010
The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 1 April 2010 to appoint Thomas Woodcock, Esquire, LVO, Norroy and Ulster King of Arms, to the office of Garter Principal King of Arms, vacant by the retirement of Sir Peter Llewellyn Gwynn-Jones, KCVO.
- Chris Green
- Posts: 3628
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
- Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Lord Lyon is a civil servant; is paid a wage; and collects revenues for the Crown. Whereas the College is self financing and the monies it collects go to the Kings, Heralds and Pursuivants and to maintain the building and its fabric.
True. But "private" in this case means "not royal". The Pursuivants in question were appointed by the Chiefs of the four clans and bear their arms on their tabards. All other Kings of Arms, Heralds and Pursuivants in England and Scotland are royal appointments. How they are funded (or not) is not relevant. In fact their basic salaries are paid by the Crown (£49.07 for Garter down to £13.95 for a Pursuivant).
Chris Green
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
- JMcMillan
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 22:33
- Location: United States
Re: Legal Status of Private Officers of Arms
Chris Green wrote:Lord Lyon is a civil servant; is paid a wage; and collects revenues for the Crown. Whereas the College is self financing and the monies it collects go to the Kings, Heralds and Pursuivants and to maintain the building and its fabric.
True. But "private" in this case means "not royal". The Pursuivants in question were appointed by the Chiefs...
We're confusing our pursuivants here. Those referred to in Martin's post are Bluemantle, Portcullis, Rouge Dragon, and Rouge Croix.
Joseph McMillan
Alexandra, Virginia, USA
Alexandra, Virginia, USA
Return to “The Law and Lore of Heraldry”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests