Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
BarBara

Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Legg inn av BarBara » 29 aug 2005 18:12:01

I would like some help sorting out the probabilities of the following.

When George Curwen (later Corwin) emigrated to America in 1638, he took
along the Curwen coat-of-arms, claiming it for his own. The only thing he
apparently added was a crescent, denoting a second son -- whether he was a
second or third son hasn't been determined yet for sure. Unless, of course,
the c-o-a came from an off-shoot of the Cumberland Curwens that descended
from a second son. Does anyone know of a branch of this family that bore a
crescent on their arms?

I don't know whether he used the arms before he emigrated -- I would guess
not.

His uncle, Matthew/Matthias Curwen/Corwin, who had preceded him to America
in 1633-4, was a second son and could probably have claimed the c-o-a, too.
But he never did -- probably because he was a Puritan or at east a
non-conformist of some kind.

The question arises because I'm not sure George was entitled to the c-o-a.
His line of descent can only be traced with certainty to a Thomas Curwen who
was in Sibbertoft, Northants, by 1524 and died there in 1557. The line from
there back to Cumberland has not been substantiated.

So the question is -- would this ambitious, upwardly mobile young man who
married above his station in Northants be likely to usurp the c-o-a of the
Curwen family, just because he bore the same surname? OR can I assume he was
entitled to the arms because he KNEW he was descended from the much more
famous family in the north? He eventually made a place for himself in Salem,
Mass., in the New World and died a wealthy man.

I waffle on this question, thinking it would be stupid of him to claim a
false descent, since his credibility would be ruined if anyone discovered
he'd faked a connection -- not to mention that his well-to-do in-laws would
be appalled as perhaps would those who knew him before. Still, he might
count on not getting caught or ever being visited by the King's Heralds. Or
perhaps no one in America cared one way or another what arms he pretended
to.

What's the likelihood for any of these scenarios?

Best, BarBara

Chris Dickinson

Re: Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Legg inn av Chris Dickinson » 30 aug 2005 08:50:02

BarBara wrote:

<snip>
So the question is -- would this ambitious, upwardly mobile young man who
married above his station in Northants be likely to usurp the c-o-a of the
Curwen family, just because he bore the same surname?

Yep

OR can I assume he was
entitled to the arms because he KNEW he was descended from the much more
famous family in the north?
snip


Nope

Chris

John Brandon

Re: Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Legg inn av John Brandon » 30 aug 2005 14:12:51

Or perhaps no one in America cared one way or another what arms he pretended
to.

My impression is that this one is the most likely.

John Brandon

Re: Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Legg inn av John Brandon » 30 aug 2005 14:52:37

I waffle on this question, thinking it would be stupid of him to claim a
false descent, since his credibility would be ruined if anyone discovered
he'd faked a connection -- not to mention that his well-to-do in-laws would
be appalled as perhaps would those who knew him before.

I don't think the consequences would have been quite *this* dire,
provided that he had merely used the coat of arms on a seal without
ever saying much about it. He might be in some trouble if he had
boasted about the false connection. But discreet use of a seal,
provided little was said about it, may not have bothered most early New
Englanders.

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Curwen -- right to use c-o-a?

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 31 aug 2005 23:39:15

In message of 30 Aug, "John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote:

I waffle on this question, thinking it would be stupid of him to claim a
false descent, since his credibility would be ruined if anyone discovered
he'd faked a connection -- not to mention that his well-to-do in-laws would
be appalled as perhaps would those who knew him before.

I don't think the consequences would have been quite *this* dire,
provided that he had merely used the coat of arms on a seal without
ever saying much about it. He might be in some trouble if he had
boasted about the false connection. But discreet use of a seal,
provided little was said about it, may not have bothered most early New
Englanders.

Perhaps one should add that as there is no regulation of arms in the
USA, you can do what you like there.

To my knowledge, the only country that has any active regulation of who
may bear arms is Scotland.

It might be an idea to have a look at the FAQ for the rec.heraldry
newsgroup:

http://heraldica.org/questions.htm

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»