One of the mysteries of the English language finally explained.
- ‘There is no American law by which you can obtain a coat of arms, as our government has not ever recognized coat armor.’
- ‘The question of rightful ownership of coat armor does not pertain in this country, for the very nature of the settlement and development of America makes it unlikely that any more that a few families have legitimate claim to specific insignia.’
- ‘The coat armour (cloak worn over the armour) was a visual identification of the bearer, someone who was worthy and was recognized in battle.’
- ‘Thus, to establish the right under English (or German, French, Swiss, etc.) law to a coat of arms, it is necessary to prove your uninterrupted male line descent from someone who is legally entitled to use this coat armor.’
- ‘The devices were painted on their shields and coat armour, the protective coat worn over the amour; for this reason the devices came to be called ‘coats of arms’, or simply ‘arms.’’
- ‘With these growing intricacies, coat armour, to a large extent, was losing its original beauty of distinction and advertisement.’
- ‘Secondly, it assumes coat armour to be hereditary in the male lines of a family, with differences to distinguish cadet branches.’
- ‘That good deeds will give great joy, and will proclaim the worth of noble men of coat armor.’
- ‘They also have the care of pedigrees and the bearing of coat armour.’
- ‘Cheshire and Lancashire families made similar additions of crests to the plain prescriptive coat armor which they had previously used from time immemorial.’
Top tips for CV writingRead more
In this article we explore how to impress employers with a spot-on CV.