Meghan Markle: Coat of Arms Discussion

[Curbside]

I'm cracking up over the coat of arms featuring yoga poses and stiletto pumps.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by tatianacressida

Coat of arms have become do blasé, like whatever, with anyone being able to get one. It’s as easy as signing up for a social media account, and therefore, begs the question: what’s the point? It’s nothing special, nothing worked for or even difficult to acquire. What’s easy to obtain, is it really worth anything?

Well, clearly it means something to the royals. Otherwise, they wouldn't have so many. I don't know if all members of the royal family have one or just the HRHs over 18?

[wyevale]

What’s easy to obtain, is it really worth anything?

The reason Heraldry has survived, near these THOUSAND years, is its flexiblity, and ability to adapt to changing circumstances. If it had merely been about identification on the Battlefield, it would have died out in the late 1400;s when [for the most part] 'Knights in Armour' ceased to be 'major players'.
But its prestige has 'lived long', and to this day it remains desirable, as a mark of family notability, service to the Crown, the Nation or the community.

[Rudolph]

In theory anyone can have a coat of arms but in practice that’s not the case. People are refused. You need to provide your CV.

Meghan’s father clearly qualifies. The only fly in the ointment is the arms go through the male line. Thomas jr, Meghan’s estranged brother would inherit the family’s coat of arms.

[Humbugged]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

In theory anyone can have a coat of arms but in practice that’s not the case. People are refused. You need to provide your CV.

Meghan’s father clearly qualifies. The only fly in the ointment is the arms go through the male line. Thomas jr, Meghan’s estranged brother would inherit the family’s coat of arms.

They might go the same route they went with Birgitte,DoG who got hers on her own

[Lady Reem]

Originally Posted by Osipi

With Tom, Sr's choice of lifestyle of the not so rich and famous and more along the line of a simple life, I don't see him really putting much stock into having a British coat of arms. Meghan, herself, probably has just cause to believe that should the Markle "family" be granted a coat of arms, she would right off the bat realize how her half siblings could misuse it and try to profit off of it as this has been their modus operandi since the tabloids discovered their penchant for having big mouths and dollar signs for eyeballs.

I'm going to go with Meghan just granted one on her own like Birgitta and have it intertwined with Harry's and that will be the coat of arms passed to their children and leave the "Markle Monsters" completely out of it. Wisest choice in my book.

I’d bet my soul on this being the case, there’s just no other way around it. The paternal sides of both Sophie Wessex, and the Duchess of Cambridge are reasonable people.

It is rather unfortunate but the same can’t be said with the Markle scenario.

[FashionMaven]

Originally Posted by Lady Reem

[/U]
I’d bet my soul on this being the case, there’s just no other way around it. The paternal sides of both Sophie Wessex, and the Duchess of Cambridge are reasonable people.

It is rather unfortunate but the same can’t be said with the Markle scenario.

After catching up on the Markle foolishness on Meghan's paternal side, I'm forced to agree.

What's really sad about this is that if Samantha and her brother had behaved and not made national embarrassments of themselves, the CoA could have been granted to their father, which would have meant they could have used it.

I think it's probably a foregone conclusion that it's Meghan who will get the CoA.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by FashionMaven

I think it's probably a foregone conclusion that it's Meghan who will get the CoA.

I genuinely hope so.

[burbankstorylady]

Originally Posted by wyevale

The reason Heraldry has survived, near these THOUSAND years, is its flexiblity, and ability to adapt to changing circumstances. If it had merely been about identification on the Battlefield, it would have died out in the late 1400;s when [for the most part] 'Knights in Armour' ceased to be 'major players'.
But its prestige has 'lived long', and to this day it remains desirable, as a mark of family notability, service to the Crown, the Nation or the community.

Yes, it has always had utilitarian purposes. On the shield and horse in battle, or on the carriage when one went to town for the Season and everyone would know you were from the family of Sir Whatsit, Baronet or what have you. Today, I think it's mostly favored for commercial use-- or in this case, for the royal family tradition, to check all the boxes one needs to check to marry someone in, and perhaps for some occasions, to have on the livery worn by the footman. Otherwise, I think of the shop owner having it above the door, or the Middletons putting it on their Jubilee products.
It's a business nowadays. "Get your coat of arms! Refer a friend and get half off!"

[Rudolph]

Except that’s not the case. The College of Arms doesn’t explicitly state what the requirements are for a coat of arms. It gives examples but that’s it.

I’m a university graduate, served in the military and am a resident of both Canada and The United Kingdom. I guarantee you I wouldn’t get a coat of arms based on just that.

[Osipi]

One place we're going to see a lot of coat of arms is when Harry and Meghan marry in St. George's chapel. Each Knight of the Garter has their coat of arms hanging there.

https://www.royal.uk/order-garter

[Pranter]

I'm starting to be glad this wedding is at St George instead of the Abbey.


LaRae

[wyevale]

It's a business nowadays.

It has been a 'business' for HUNDREDS of years..
James 1st & V1 was flogging off 'ennoblement' [and therefore 'armorial achievements'] from at least 1604.
What has changed is the breadth of the 'pool' of those who may be considered by the College of Arms...

I would have thought most people [especially Americans] would be delighted at this more 'meritocratic' development, rather than perceive it as a 'devaluation' ?

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by FashionMaven

After catching up on the Markle foolishness on Meghan's paternal side, I'm forced to agree.

What's really sad about this is that if Samantha and her brother had behaved and not made national embarrassments of themselves, the CoA could have been granted to their father, which would have meant they could have used it.

I think it's probably a foregone conclusion that it's Meghan who will get the CoA.

I hope so! I think it made much more sense for Michael Middleton to receive his own CoA than Thomas Markle because the Middletons are on site (so to speak), are very involved in William & Catherine's lives (before the couple even married), and are even invited to Sandringham & Balmoral by the Queen. Meghan doesn't have that same relationship with her own family (father included) and in any case they live thousands of miles away. The Markle family's relationship with the BRF - or even the UK - will always remain tenuous.

[Pranter]

Myself I have no burning desire to see England throw off their tradition of titles. IMO in this day and age if someone doesn't like living under the form of government and social system in the U.K. they can move almost anywhere else. It won't be England if they don't have what makes them ...them.


LaRae

[Gawin]

Yes, I hope Harry and Meghan end up with a title too & I can't wait to hear what it will be on the wedding day. Very clever of the Queen to wait until then to announce it instead of beforehand.

But I'm not sure about her father getting a Coat of Arms. As someone else pointed out, who knows what her half-brother and half-sister would display it on.

[Pranter]

I assume it's possible for the Queen to grant a coat of arms to Meghan directly...avoid that whole issue of Tom, Meghan's half-siblings etc.


LaRae

[Curryong]

Yes, I believe that's what will happen at the College of Arms, as occurred with the Duchess of Gloucester.

[Gawin]

Ah, so the precedent is there. Do you if that was because the Duchess of Gloucester's father wasn't a British citizen and didn't live in the UK, just like Meghan Markle's father?

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Gawin

I hope so! I think it made much more sense for Michael Middleton to receive his own CoA than Thomas Markle because the Middletons are on site (so to speak), are very involved in William & Catherine's lives (before the couple even married), and are even invited to Sandringham & Balmoral by the Queen. Meghan doesn't have that same relationship with her own family (father included) and in any case they live thousands of miles away. The Markle family's relationship with the BRF - or even the UK - will always remain tenuous.

Tom Senior is not a British citizen. Why would he want a coat of arms?

Originally Posted by Gawin

Ah, so the precedent is there. Do you if that was because the Duchess of Gloucester's father wasn't a British citizen and didn't live in the UK, just like Meghan Markle's father?

Agree. It makes no sense for someone foreign, with no allegiance to the crown, being granted a coat of arms, not so?