Here is a little bit of what is going on about Henri (Justin) Bagearu.

1.Title: The History of Markham Township

Note: Cited by Richard W. Thomas in 19 Oct 1999 e-mail to BADGEROW-L@rootsweb.com mailing list.

Repository:

Media: Book

Page: 60

Text: Henri (or Justin) Bagereau was a member of Lafayette’s expedition from France to help the American insurgents in their struggle against imperial Britain…

2.Title: Badgerow Family History

Author: Badgerow, Egbert M. & Justin F. Badgerow

Publication: 1937

Note: Collected and compiled by first cousins Egbert (son of Gordon R. Badgerow) and Justin (son of Lafayette Badgerow). Cited in 24 Oct 1999 e-mail from Darlene L. Martin to Badgerow m ailing list . Martin has a copy.

Repository:

Note: Darlene L. Martin

Media: Manuscript

Text: Justin Bergereau, and his brother John, came to this country under Marquis Lafayette, both serving throughout the Revolutionary War, and were members of a titled family in France <Without some documented proof I would take this as here say, KKB>. After the war Justi n Bergereau married a Scotch woman named Gordon, who came to the U.S. with her brother Major Gordon of the British Army.

6.Title: The History of Markham Township

Note: Cited by Richard W. Thomas in 19 Oct 1999 e-mail to BADGEROW-L@rootsweb.com mailing list.

Repository:

Media: Book

Page: 60

Text: "Henri (or Justin) Bagereau was a member of Lafayette’s expedition from France to help the American insurgents in their struggle against imperial Britain. The Victoire in which he was billeted was wrecked off the North Carolina coast, but Henri made it to shore and became an officer in the Continental Army. After the war, he married Mary Gordon in Vermont; in 1779 twin boys,Martin and Justin, were born, followed by Philip in 1784. Some time later, Mary died, and Mary Ann, b. 1788, David, b. 1792, and Catherine b. 1793, we re the issue of a second marriage. Henri and his family eventually came to Upper Canada. The change in spelling the name likely occurred at this time."

7.Title: Loretta Baughan

Note:

Repository:

Media: Electronic

Page: 1 Nov 1999

Text: I quickly scanned through the index and found some possible French spellings of our name. Bear in mind that the French pronounce an "R" with a very throaty sound. These seem to be the most likely cand idates…BERGERON, BERENGUIER, BARBAROUS, BADAROUX, and BAGEREAU. (Re: microfieche from French govt that was presented to the 58th Congress listing the French soldiers who came to America and helped u s gain our freedom from England…part of the US Serial Set)

8.Title: Richard W. Thomas

Author:

Repository:

Media: Electronic

Page: 21 Oct 1999

Text: "The History of Markham Township": On page 60 the paragraph starts "Henri (or Justin) Bagereau was a member of Lafayette’s expedition from France to help the American insurgents in their struggle agai nst imperial Britain…

Thanks Kelley for explaining that; much clearer picture now.

The reason I question the desire to attribute arms for a 7th great grandfather is that the number of contemporary descendants are unknown apparently (and could be numerous), and your husband (correct me if I’m wrong) isn’t the first in line of succession from this ancestor.

Thus, you’re attribution of arms to this individual, Henri Badgerow, will be presuming that no other contemporary descendants would desire to have a say in this and furthermore, to me it seems that the first in line of succession at the very least should be consulted if known.  Perhaps if other contemporary descendants had a desire to have access to arms, they would want some entirely different concept.

It just seems overall, a desire to somehow ennoble or give supernormal meaning to a distant ancestor. Not to say he wasn’t noble or his achievements weren’t great, simply that he was apparently not recorded to have claimed his own arms as they may not have been a priority for him.

My belief is that I may not speak for my other relatives, I can only speak for my own claim.  Thus, I went as far back as my living dad to have him make a decision about his arms and my dad may have justifiably attributed arms to his own deceased dad if he wished (though neither of us care to pursue that).

I just don’t believe in trying to control or lay claim to what is not rightfully under my sole possession and possibly belongs to others, without at least attempting to consult those who possess equal or better claim.

Only offering these thoughts for consideration, and not telling you how to do things.  Also, other more experienced members of this forum may disagree (and if they do I sure hope they’d share so as to enlighten me as well).

JBGarrison;81112 wrote:

The reason I question the desire to attribute arms for a 7th great grandfather is that the number of contemporary descendants are unknown apparently (and could be numerous), and your husband (correct me if I’m wrong) isn’t the first in line of succession from this ancestor.

So what? In French heraldry unquestionably, and in American heraldry by long established practice, and even in English heraldry de facto, all descendants of the original bearer of the arms, in the legitimate male line are entitled to inherit those arms, in the original form, without any alteration required. If Kelley’s husband could trace his lineage back to Charles Bagereau, the tax collector from Dreux, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because he’d be fully entitled to "Azure three lozenges bendwise in bend Argent over all a lion rampant Or."

In practice, of course, not all descendants do use the ancestor’s arms, and they won’t in this case, either. But they’re entitled to.

Grants to an ancestor are fairly common in Scotland. Of course the Scottish system requires differencing for cadency, but the concept of artificially giving arms to someone long dead to provide a group armorial identity for his descendants is the same.

Quote:

It just seems overall, a desire to somehow ennoble or give supernormal meaning to a distant ancestor. Not to say he wasn’t noble or his achievements weren’t great, simply that he was apparently not recorded to have claimed his own arms as they may not have been a priority for him.

Bearing arms does not ennoble, so assuming arms on an ancestor’s behalf doesn’t ennoble him.  This is particularly true in the French context, where there has never been any suggestion that those below the gentry were barred from having arms.  The Armorial General de France is full of merchants, craftsmen, and other non-nobles.

Of course arms were not a priority for the ancestor, but again, so what?  Kelley’s husband would not be pretending that 7xgreat grand-dad actually bore the arms.  It’s all open and above board.  Go for it.

Joseph McMillan;81113 wrote:

Grants to an ancestor are fairly common in Scotland. Of course the Scottish system requires differencing for cadency, but the concept of artificially giving arms to someone long dead to provide a group armorial identity for his descendants is the same.

But applying group identity to 7 generations of relatives who are not even known to each other?  It may have precedent and it may be accepted, but I question the usefulness of it, though less so now since you have given your experienced endorsement to this Mr. McMillan.

Those who don’t know each other won’t know about the arms and won’t use them.  But if they find out about them, then they find out about each other, and then the arms have served not only to unify the extended family symbolically but in reality.

Win-win.

Strongly second Joe’s last comment.  Arms are (well, can or IMO should be) more than just an artful substitute for a signature or name tag—they can / should also be a unifying expression of family identity and (in the best sense) shared pride.

Not everyone shares this enthusiasm for the extended lineage—each individual family member has the right to opt out & start afresh if they wish, recognizing that they will have cut the visual tie—but if the arms are nicely designed & hopefully have some symbolic attraction, its likely that most won’t take that route.

If you do have contact with at least some of your husband’s extended family, it might be nice to include them in some way in the design process so they would also have a sense of ownership and attachment to the new design.

Dohrman Byers;81106 wrote:

I have always wondered how to blazon a suggestion such as Kenneth’s. I know one could get the proposed effect by dimidiation, e.g. "Dimidiating Gules a fleur-de-lis Argent and Argent a maple leaf Gules." Dimidiation, however, is a way of marshaling arms. How would one blazon such a device as part of a simple coat of arms? Would one have to say, "Per pale Gules and Argent a demi fleur-de-lis and a demi maple leaf conjoined in pale counterchanged" or is there some cleaner way to do this?

Below is a badge granted by the Canadian Heraldic Authority to a Ms. Mikel, blazoned as "A maple leaf Azure dimidiating a rose Argent barbed and seeded Or, ensigned by a Loyalist military coronet also Or"

http://archive.gg.ca/heraldry/pub-reg/ProjectPics/iv135_19910005_badge_mikele.jpg

Thanks, Ben. First time I’ve seen that blazoned.

Joseph McMillan;81107 wrote:

Repeating my suggestion from the open area of the forum

 

One could also have one larger cogwheel with the badger superimposed on it, although that begins to lose the allusion to the French arms.

 

I hasten to add that my aversion to the fleur-de-lys/maple leaf concept is altogether unrelated to having suggested this design.

Something like this ~ Yet this suggestion was for my huband and not Henri Badgerow/Bagereau.  I could possibly go with simple Bend over the embattled roundels… making the roundels the indifference for my husband. RIGHT?

http://www.custom-gifts-and-arts.com/heraldry/badgerow_arms3.jpg

If your husband is the direct male line descendant of Henri Bagereau, then Henri’s arms are your husband’s arms. There is no need to difference them, and doing so would not be in keeping with French (or American) heraldic norms.

(I would not blazon these as roundels embattled pierced or as annulets embattled or whatever, but as cogwheels or gears; call them what they are.)

ADDED LATER:  I realized while driving home from work that in all of this I’d forgotten that part of the task is arms for the ancestor, Henri Bargereau, and part for Kelley’s husband, the mechanically inclined gentleman.

Now there’s nothing necessarily wrong with designing arms that are specific to Kelley’s husband (with the gears) and imputing them to the ancestor.  Lord Lyon and the Chief Herald of Ireland seem to do this all the time.  JFK’s arms granted by the Chief Herald combine Kennedy and Fitzgerald elements, but were granted in the name of the President’s great-grandfather who had no known connection to the Fitzgeralds.  The Scottish grant and matriculation shown at http://www.lochawe.com/matrcltn.html show a version of the arms of the chief of Clan Campbell differenced for "indeterminate cadency" with ibis heads, representing the petitioner’s home state of Florida, but the grant is in the name of his 5xgreat grandfather who never set foot south of Georgia.

But I can see that if you’re in contact with the wider family group and trying to design arms that will reflect the broader heritage, the gears for "mechanical" might not resonate.  My recommendation would still be to design for Henri and have everyone else including your husband use the same arms, à la française.  Perhaps you could omit a crest for Henri (a crest would not have been permitted to a non-noble in France in any case).  Then the specific interests of each descendant could be reflected in a different crest, your husband’s reflecting his mechanical interests.

Embattled Annulets seem more…. oh heraldrically descriptive… using THREE Annulets could represent the number of countries Henri lived (FRC, USA, and CAD) and not an actual ability or occupation.

What or how would you describe (in a word or two) if the Badger’s eye, nose and toenails/claws to be red (gules)?  Or would that have to added specifically in the blazon?

Here is a little bit better representation of this gold Badger idea… I generally use AI for design program.

http://www.custom-gifts-and-arts.com/heraldry/badgerow_arms3b.jpg

Personally I wouldn’t blazon the eyes or the nose of the badger and would just leave it up to artist interpretation.  Red nose = Rudolph the red nosed badger, and red eyes make me think of a rodent being ridden by a demonic spirit.  Not to mention, these are details which wouldn’t be important in identification by a longbowman picking his target.

I DO like the "armed gules" (meaning claws are red).

Again, just lending my opinion in hopes of helping out.

And here with lozenges…

<div class=“bbcode_center” >
[ATTACH]818[/ATTACH]
</div>

That is really good Claud, like how you interrupt putting red where the black would be on the Badger’s face…. I think you caught on that I wanted some kind of hint of the other color to bring it more forward (stand out) against the other devices, yet keep if heraldric and less graphic design.

I looked for a referrence heraldric Badger on other arms to get a jiff how it would be drawn… and could only find one and I did not like how the artist did the Badger.

Claud… I had a similar drawing on paper… and it looks like a Bear.  So you would have to make sure the head stays less rounded, keep muzzle long and not with do much depth, and the legs a bit shorter.

This is kind of off topic… but its about a Badgerow and a badger.

One day my husband comes home with a strange look on his face. I asked him what was wrong.  "I have a delima".  "What’s the delima?"  I have a badger running around the back of my pick-up and I am trying to figure out how to get it out".  I get that look of puzzlement, then ask "How the heck did you get a badger in your truck?"..... "Well I thought it was dead, fresh road kill, not a mark on it either - perfect pelt, so I picked it up and put in the back.  Got a few miles from home and the SOB woke up".

"Can’t shoot it… put a whole in my truck."

"Can’t live trap it, trap is not big enough for this creature"

"Can’t just let it get out, then we’d have an angery badger running around the farm… eventually taking out the chickens and stuff".

Eventually he figured it out… 55 gallon drum with a lid… slide it out onto lid, flip and seal.