Just to point out that there is no such thing as a 'coat of arms for a surname'. Many people of the same surname will often be entitled to completely different coats of arms, and many of that surname will be entitled to no coat of arms. Coats of arms belong to individuals. For any person to have a right to a coat of arms they must either have had it granted to them or be descended in the legitimate male line from a person to whom arms were granted or confirmed in the past.
Stan
Sorry Stan but in England and Wales the first part is inaccurate and the last is simply a myth perpetuated by the College of Arms to allow them to charge extortionate fees.
In England and Wales there is a prescriptive right to bear arms as long as they do not infringe the rights of other persons.
The very basis of the herald’s visitations relies on the fact that people could claim a prescriptive right to arms and the fact that the heralds recognized those arms as being legally held.
It has never been suggested that those men who used a coat of arms in the 13th to 15th centuries only did so by virtue of a grant of arms.
The truth is most simply assumed the arms by prescriptive right.
Yes some arms were granted by the sovereign through his/her authorised officers and some were granted to specific men for their lifetime only. Those are not the only way arms may be held as of a right.
In addition under English (& Welsh) heraldry unmarried daughter have a right to bear their father’s arms undifferenced. Sons may also use their father’s arms
This shows that arms do not simply belong to an individual or necessarily be descend in male line.
In the past arms though not belonging to a family did not belong to an individual but rather to the holder of the family lands.
I.E. a sort of halfway house between belonging to an individual and the land held by that individual. The individual almost having stewardship of those arms for his lifetime.
However this is complicated further by the fact that in early times a coat of arms could be assigned to another by its owner or indeed bequeathed in a will.
There are even cases where it can be shown that right of prescription takes precedence over a grant of arms.
E.G.
Sir Walter Mildmay obtained a grant from Gilbert Dethick, Garter, in 1554. In 1583 Mildmay produced some old family seals showing and earlier coat of arms. This earlier coat of arms was then restored, ratified and confirmed.
Cheers
Guy
