Imagine discovering that the crest on your ancestor’s shield tells a story far richer than the one you see on your favorite mug. In a world where heritage is just a click away, the hunt for a family coat of arms is more popular than ever. Online "heraldic shops" (bucket shops) cater to this curiosity, selling coats of arms by surname—usually stamped on souvenirs. It’s tempting to believe these offer a direct line to nobility. As a public historian who studies heraldry, I’ve watched these myths flourish—when in fact, the real stories behind these symbols are even more fascinating.
Heraldry from the Middle Ages goes beyond last names. It is a detailed, legal, and personal system of identity. Studying it reveals a story more complex and unique than any generic "family crest." In this article, we’ll break down a coat of arms into eight main parts and show why these symbols differ from popular belief. You’ll see the important difference between a personal achievement and the idea of a shared "family crest."
1. The Main Event is the "Coat of Arms," and It's on the Shield
A common mistake is confusing "family crest" with a shield. The shield is the true identifier; the crest is decorative.
By Unknown author - Public Domain
The shield was the primary surface for armorial designs, shaped by the needs of medieval battle. Early shields, like those at the Battle of Hastings and the First Crusade, were long and kite-shaped for protection. By the 14th century, as armor improved, shields became smaller and flat-topped, serving more for identity at tournaments and ceremonies than for defense.
So, where does the term "coat of arms" come from? It originates from the linen surcoat that a knight wore over his chain mail. This garment was embroidered with the same design—the same armorial devices—as the shield. This design is the arms. Therefore, the term "coat of arms" correctly refers to the emblem on the shield, not the entire composition of shield, helmet, and other ornaments.
If the shield displays the "coat of arms," then what is the symbol often called the "crest"? To understand its role in heraldry and how it fits into the larger picture, let’s move to the next key part of a heraldic achievement.
Elements of a Heraldic Achievement
2. The Crest is Just the Ornament on Top
The crest is often misunderstood. The key difference: the crest is a decorative element only, not the main heraldic identifier. Understanding this helps clarify its role versus the coat of arms.
When heraldry was at its peak, the crest was a physical object placed atop the helmet. It began as decoration, helping knights stand out at tournaments or in battle. Think of it like a car’s hood ornament—it adds distinction, but isn’t central.
Crucially, although a crest is part of a full heraldic achievement, it is always secondary to the arms shown on the shield. The coat of arms can exist without a crest, but a crest never stands alone as an identifier. A crest is always connected to the helmet and the shield below. Therefore, the use of crests alone—like on modern rings or cards—is a modern custom, not historically accurate, and does not match the rules of heraldry.
Having seen how the crest is truly used, it's helpful to look at the next critical feature it rests upon: the helmet that supported it.
3. The Helmet Isn't Just for Show—It Signifies Rank
In real heraldry, every detail matters, and the helmet is a clear sign of the owner’s social rank. The kind of helmet shown was not just for looks; strict rules decided which helmet matched each rank in society.
This helmet system illustrates the regulated, personal nature of arms. According to heraldic manuals, distinctions were clear:
* Position: The helmet of a sovereign faced forward (affronte). For all other ranks, the helmet was shown in profile.
These rules show that a coat of arms was a personal award tied to someone’s social status, not shared by everyone with the same name. Neither a king nor an ordinary person named Smith could have the same emblem. Helmet design made status clear—a detail often ignored by "family crest" sellers.
The emphasis on individual distinction continues with another striking element connected to the helmet: the mantling.
4. The Mantling: A Battle-Torn Cape, Not Just a Flourish
Mantling, flowing from the helmet and framing the shield, is one of the most dramatic heraldic elements. Often mistaken for decoration, mantling (or lambrequin) has practical origins that became an artistic statement.
The mantling was a piece of cloth attached to the helmet, which hung down over the wearer's shoulders. Its original purpose was likely to protect the knight from the sun's heat, shielding his metal armor from overheating. In art, however, this simple cloth took on a life of its own.
Artists often show mantling with jagged, swirling edges to suggest battle damage, adding a sense of bravery and honor. Mantling always appears in two colors: a main color on the outside and a metal or fur on the inside. This makes it both attractive and meaningful.
Torse/Wreath and Mantling - AI Generated
5. The Torse (or Wreath): The Twist that Binds
Between the top of the helmet and the base of the crest is a small but important part called the torse. It is easy to miss, but it connects the helmet to the crest both in structure and appearance.
The torse is defined as a "wreath, composed of twisted silk." It is made from the principal colors of the shield, twisted together into a rope-like circlet. Its practical function was to cover the joint where the three-dimensional crest was physically attached to the helm.
With details at the top of the achievement in place, our next element widens the composition to its outermost limits: the honor guard of figures known as supporters.
6. Supporters: An Exclusive Honor Guard
On each side of the shield, you might see figures called supporters that look like they are holding it up. Not every coat of arms has them; they are a special sign of high rank and are one of the rarest parts of heraldry.
Supporters can be animals, such as lions or stags, or mythical creatures, such as dragons and griffins. They were seen as symbols of "sovereign greatness and formidable power." In the past, only certain nobles, chivalric orders, or important groups could use them.
With supporters established as rare privileges, we now turn to another deeply personal and expressive feature tied to the owner: the motto.
7. The Motto: Your Ancestor's Personal Soundbite
The motto usually appears on a scroll below the shield. Unlike the rules for the rest of the arms, the motto allowed for personal expression—a phrase reflecting wit, faith, or values.
Mottos could take many forms, offering a glimpse into the original owner’s thoughts: "I trust in God").
- A call to action, like "Fortes fortuna adjuvat" ("Fortune favors the brave").
- A "canting" motto, which was a clever pun on the family name. The Holme family, for example, used "Holme semper viret" ("Holme always flourishes"), a play on the holm-oak or holly tree that appeared in their crest.
Mottos often became family traditions, though armorial rules here were much looser—an individual touch that underscores how heraldry was focused on the person, not just the surname. That distinction leads directly to our final and most surprising point.
8. The Real Shocker: Coats of Arms Belong to Individuals, Not Surnames
All the details we’ve covered—the parts, the rules, and the honors—lead directly to one clear conclusion that challenges the "family crest" business. This is the most important fact to know.
A coat of arms belongs to a specific individual, not to all with the same surname. This key distinction sets heraldry apart from the idea of a "family crest," which suggests shared symbols for all name-bearers and misrepresents the tradition.
According to the laws of arms, armorial bearings are a form of hereditary property that descends through the direct line of descent of the person to whom they were first granted or first lawfully borne. In practice this means that, within a single family, the senior heir would bear the arms “undifferenced” (in their plain form), while other descendants who were also entitled to the arms would be expected to bear appropriate differences to prevent confusion. This practice, known as “cadency” or “differencing,” is precisely why even close relatives are not, strictly speaking, supposed to present identical arms in all circumstances. A second son might add a crescent, a third son a mullet, and so on, as a conventional way to signal place within the family. The larger point stands, the arms belong to a particular line of descent, not to everyone who happens to share a surname. That is why there is no such thing as a single “coat of arms for the name of Smith.”
What often gets lost is that the strongest, legally enforceable version of this principle is jurisdiction-specific. In the British Isles, heraldry is not merely a custom; it is also treated as law within particular legal frameworks. In England (and by extension the College of Arms’ jurisdiction in England and Wales, and in practice the related system for Northern Ireland), arms are regulated through established royal authority and recorded by heraldic officers; disputes and misuse fall within the historic jurisdiction of the Court of Chivalry, which the College of Arms describes as the court with jurisdiction over “misuse of arms” and notes is a civil court.
Scotland is even clearer in statutory terms. The Court of the Lord Lyon is a court of law with a dedicated prosecutorial function, and Scottish legislation historically empowered the Lyon authority to proceed against the unauthorized use of arms. The statutory foundations include (among others) the Lyon King of Arms Act 1592 and the Lyon King of Arms Act 1672, the latter establishing the Public Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland and attaching penalties to unregistered or unauthorized bearing in the manner set out in the Act’s scheme.
Outside those jurisdictions, particularly in the United States, the landscape changes sharply. The United States has no national heraldic authority that grants arms to private citizens, and there is no general legal regime that treats personal coats of arms as a state-regulated species of property in the English or Scottish sense. According to Martin Sunnqvist, there is a longstanding connection between heraldry and the law, with legal discussions about heraldic rights and practices dating back to the 14th century. In the United States, Americans generally have the freedom to create, adopt, and use original arms as long as they do not violate other legal protections such as laws against consumer deception, trademark infringement, or misuse of copyright in artistic representations.
The American Heraldry Society puts the ethical point plainly: even where there is no domestic heraldic regulator, taking someone else’s arms is akin to identity theft in moral terms, and sharing a surname does not entitle someone to use another person’s arms without proving descent or permission.
This is the main point: selling coats of arms for any surname is historically wrong everywhere and illegal in places with real heraldic laws, like England and Scotland. In countries without such laws, like the U.S., the issue is more about honesty, good taste, and respect for tradition than about legal action. Still, the basic rule of heraldry stays the same. Arms are meant to identify a specific person and their rightful heirs. Treating them as something anyone with the same last name can buy goes against the true purpose of heraldry and, in some places, the law.
