Dear Rick, Generally a Coat of Arms was granted to an Individual. His eldest son then inherited those Arms unless he had earned his own before. In the 1400's there became established rules (varying from country to country) on the variances by second son, third son, et cetera. Before this formalization there was very few rules for what you put on your shield. Indeed, many groups had generic shields to help indentify your group in battle. A banner, on a long pole, was the earliest form of Arms and indicated where the leader of that group was. Many families honor an ancestor by displaying his Coat of Arms. The rules for this vary widely. In England, you need to have a "Right" or permission from the current holder of those arms and show proof you are related. In America, you can use anybodys Coat of Arms or even design your own. The second part of your question was regarding Crusades. The Crusades were bluntly Church sanctioned declarations of war by proxy. The Church authorized a group to wage war to right some type of wrong perceived by the Church. The First Crusade was equal to this Century's First World War as the Second Crusade was equivalent to the Second World War. Does this mean that there were not "sanctioned" war events prior to this? No, there were other sanctioned events, but not on the same scale. A "sanctioned" event occurred against King Harold of England who was given notice he was excommunicated just prior to the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Some believe this explains his lack of action against the invaders and lack of aggressiveness. Seeing the Papal Banner in front of the enemy must have had some type of affect. In 1086, the Church's Papal banner again flew ahead of the Christian Army as they took back the city of Toledo in Spain from the Moors. The flexing of Church authority grew stronger under these victories. It was not a question of if but when they would invade the Holy Land to try to seize the Holy Cities of Christendom. Royals celebrated their presence in these Crusades by placing a Cross on their tunics and sometimes on their shields. Being on a second, and wearing two crosses in a sanctioned event was a great honor, being on three was very remarkable. It is not surprising that that later Coat of Arms touted their participation in these Crusades. I hope this is helpful, Sincerely, John R. Carpenter La Mesa, CA sample from notes: Coat of Arms is a common way of tracing lineage. The arms granted to Lord George Carpenter in 1719, as published in the account of his life (The Life and Times of Lord George . . .) were Pally of six, argent and gules on a chevron, azure,three cross crosslets, or. CREST, on a wreath a globe in a frame all or. Supporters, two horses, party-perfess, embattled argent and gules. MOTTO: "Per Actua Belli" (Through the Asperities of War). John the Elder, Bishop, granduncle to this William, had the same Coat of Arms. The same arms, less the supporters and motto, were used by the Herefordshire Carpenter family and were emblazoned in a glass window of the college and church at Westbury upon Trin as early as 1443. They were placed there by permanently by Bishop John (the Elder) Carpenter of Worcester, who was a native of Westbury and a great benefactor of the college, having rebuilt and refounded it. Bishop John Carpenter died in 1476 and was buried in the church, where a plain altar monument was errected to his memory. This church (in 1890) is the Holy Trinity of Bristol, and is described in Willi's Survey of Cathedrals, published in 1742. And in Atykn's and Rudder's History of Gloucester where there is a very interesting sketch of Bishop John Carpenter who was also known as "Master John Carpenter" mentioned in the will of the town clerk of London, John Carpenter, the younger. !"The arms borne by the Carpenters of Homme in Herefordshire show three cross crosslets, and the same appears in a lineage of several generations commencing about 1300 with a Maurice Carpenter, or Carpender, Gent., in the County of Glouster, and reported in the Herald Visitation in that county." This indicates his decent from the same Norman family of the de Melun Carpenters of France. The three cross crosslets indicate fighting in three crusades. end notes J. R. Carpenter wrote: > > Hello list, > > This is in response to several things I've seen posted on this list. > > Could someone please explain "family" coats-of-arms? I thought that > coats-of-arms were only granted to individuals. > > Also, the Crusades were not the same as the Norman Conquest. From the site > www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/firstcrusade/Overview/Overview.htm: The First > Crusade officially began on November 27, 1095, with a proclamation from Pope > Urban II delivered to clergy and lay folk who had gathered in a field in > Clermont, central France. Before the armies departed in mid 1096, a People's > Crusade jumped the gun and left in March 1096, arriving in Constantinople in > August. Some Jews in Europe were attacked along the way, and the People's > Crusaders were all but destroyed by the Turks at Civetot. The official > armies did not leave until mid 1096, some of their commanders being Raymond > IV of St Gilles, Count of Toulouse; Bohemond, Duke of Taranto; Godfrey of > Bouillon; Hugh, Count of Vermandois; and Robert, Duke of Normandy. They > arrived in Constantinople in early 1097. Their subsequent history is beyond > the scope of this Conquest/Crusade reply. > > I haven't done any comparing of "rosters", but since the First Crusade had > many Normans in it, I would think it is possible that some of those involved > in the Conquest may have also been Crusaders. Although some viewed the > Conquest as a holy venture, my point is that these were two separate events. > > Thanks, > Rick