GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118872864


From: Robert Davenport <>
Subject: Coats of Arms
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:01:04 -0700
References: <6.2.0.14.1.20050615124908.01ce8900@pop1.nb.sympatico.ca><003b01c571ef$efcc8e50$ac5ac242@charlie1><REME20050615174058@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <REME20050615174058@alum.mit.edu>


On the other side of the coin, colonial America had no genealogy libraries,
no Internet, etc. Therefore, when people used coats of arms, it was
normally because they had brought the design with them from the old
world. Often times, this was on a tankard, or a ring. And these were not
cheap to make. In other words, they didn't have access to the design,
unless it was really a coat of arms in their family.













At 02:42 PM 6/15/2005, you wrote:
>Janet wrote:
> > You could not display arms not belonging to your lineage. The Dragon
> > with a bloody hand in his mouth is there.
>
>I've gone back and forth on this issue many times over the years, but
>the bottom line is this: in Colonial America, there were no Heralds'
>Visitations. In other words, there was no authority capable of
>discerning, let alone enforcing, the rules of heraldry, and anyone
>here who felt he had a reason to display a coat of arms could do so
>with complete impunity. Any blazon found in America must therefore
>be taken under advisement.
>
> John Chandler
>
>
>==============================
>New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors
>at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more:
>http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429


This thread: