J. Stolarz;84282 wrote:
I’m still a little confused on what exactly a family association is. It almost sounds like a surname group or something…but I don’t think that it is. Somebody help me :p
It can be an organization for people with the same surname (similar to a Scottish clan association), but quite often they are for all the descendants of a particular person (an immigrant to America for instance). My wife’s family has a "family letter" that goes out once a month. A representative of each one of the siblings in a certain generation (her g-grandfather and his brothers and sisters I think) writes a column about what is going on in their branch of the family. Though it is informal right now, if it were to continue into our generation or beyond it would likely become a true family organization.
I think surname groups are a perfect application for an heraldic badge. That seems less presumptuous to make for a distant ancestor than a full achievement. It’s also much more useful, because it can be easily adopted by armigers and non-armigers alike.
Personally, I honor my 10th great grandfather, whom our clan (and ancestral town) is named for, in my crest, which stands for him alone. Of course, my kids may wish to change it…
I think the US heraldic registry has a good rule of thumb: no more than 2 generations back (maybe 3 these days as great grandfathers live longer). If no one is still alive who actually knew the person, they’re off limits by good taste.
Hi all,
Wow, didn’t know this would touch such a nerve. Quite a fascinating discussion.
Anyway to answer a couple of the questions:
- Yes, John Rathbun does have surviving male descendants, probably in the tens of thousands. They were (and are) a particularly fecund family.
- There are a few different "Rathbone/Rathbun" associations. All have an element of genealogy involved, some are more surname associations than others. Here’s a sample.
http://www.stanford.edu/~dorcas/Rathbone.html
The one in particular that I meant I cannot find the website for at the moment.
***
I’d love to research further and see if perhaps I could find legitimate arms, it is not out of the question that he or his close descendants would use them.
Quote:
In 1683 he was a representative from Block Island to the Rhode Island general assembly; June 16, 1686, he signed with others, a petition to the King of Great Britain in regard to the writ of "Quo Warranto"
So he was a moderately prominent freeman. I’d prefer to research further and see if perhaps I could find legitimate arms, it is not out of the question that he or his close descendants would use them.
There’s an alternate (to the Rathbone of Greenbank) CofA in Burke’s General that I have no information on. I’d like to know the individual source. How can I research this?
My first advice would be to try and determine if he already (Or somebody else in his paternal line) had a coat of arms. It would be a shame to do a design for him, when he already had one, or could’ve had one.
Secondly, what is your main goal in trying to have a coat of arms for this branch of family? If it’s just because all the bucket shops have it wrong…then that same argument could apply to 99% of the surnames of people on this forum.
J. Stolarz;84329 wrote:
My first advice would be to try and determine if he already (Or somebody else in his paternal line) had a coat of arms. It would be a shame to do a design for him, when he already had one, or could’ve had one.
Secondly, what is your main goal in trying to have a coat of arms for this branch of family? If it’s just because all the bucket shops have it wrong…then that same argument could apply to 99% of the surnames of people on this forum.
If I understand him correctly, Mark is saying that many family members have fallen prey to the bucket shops and have co-opted/accepted the bucket-shop arms for the surname Rathbone arms as their "family crest". He would like to steer them clear of this practice by providing an alternative. Is that about right, Mark?
That would make more sense. In which case you should still make your best effort to find out if there is an arms available to them already.
Kenneth Mansfield;84332 wrote:
If I understand him correctly, Mark is saying that many family members have fallen prey to the bucket shops and have co-opted/accepted the bucket-shop arms for the surname Rathbone arms as their "family crest". He would like to steer them clear of this practice by providing an alternative. Is that about right, Mark?
Bingo, that is a primary goal.
Love to see them using arms, which they do to a great extent. But it bothers me that they are usurping.
If I could find legitimate arms (a possibility) used by these ancestors, it would be a home run and maybe I could dissuade people from using the bucket-shop arms.
A nice ground-rule double would be convincing the family associations to agree on new arms.