House of Names

**Burly Brute** · 23rd November 10, 04:43 PM

It seems the census on google is that the site is bogus, your thoughts?

http://www.houseofnames.com/

**artificer** · 23rd November 10, 05:19 PM

Oh yeah.

All of the "Your family crest" places are pretty much scams. If you go and read "Armorial Général" by Johannes Baptist Rietstap, you can see a catalog of family names and coats of arms. Most of these "your famous family" vendors are using the entries from this book to market their stuff.

The fact is that NEARLY ALL families WEREN'T knights, or recognized with a coat of arms. Most families were farmers, millers, coopers, smiths, etc etc who tended to get on with life despite that fact.

The fact that a coat of arms exists for someone with the same last name as you DOESN'T mean that it's YOUR family coat of arms.

Hopefully MacMillian of Rathdown will wade in here with more specifics.

**AFS1970** · 23rd November 10, 06:02 PM

I have seen outfits like this set up at fairs and festivals. They often print a family history with the same artwork regardless of the name, just a collection of shields along one edge.

**Graham A. Robieson** · 23rd November 10, 06:06 PM

Greetings,

That site is bogus...coats of arms were given to individuals (in service to a lord/earl/king or high ranking person with land)...not entire families etc, on another posting I made with the 'Robert the Bruce' thread explains in regards to the names of Rob etc, after looking over that houseofnames, the wider world should be more aware of that website because it is not accurate and the owner of that website should be taken to court for misleading those who would believe just because their surname is on it, makes it unique to them.

Another note: when looking up the name Robinson, yes the origin is in Yorkshire with the influence of Robert de Bruce, cause bruces had many lordships in Yorkshire and the possibility for the break down of the name Robinson spelt differently is correct, but as in my signature at the bottom 'Discovery consists of seeing what everyone else has seen, and thinking what no-one else has thought' could see the possibility that Rob-in-son taken in the same understanding as the term Mother-in-Law/Father-in-Law...interesting to wonder about that...son-of-Rob, Robert could have had many childern outside of marriage cause the name only appeared as a result of the Bruces being there!!! I wonder what discoveries can be made with that.

I hope this info can shed some more light on the subject,

All the best,

Graham.

**Burly Brute** · 23rd November 10, 06:58 PM

Great input guys, a few weeks ago I did a simple google search similiar to "house of names scam" and it came up with lots of articles/blogs of people who realized it's uselessness. I do think, like stated, they can get general areas of origin for names...although the website kind of cops-out and lists like 80 countries of origin...lol And yes, I know exactly what you mean about the booths that sell those lamenated pieces of crrrrrrap! Only 25 bucks, pfft...ya, thanks but no thanks!

Thanks again guys,

-Z

**Cygnus** · 23rd November 10, 09:33 PM

The whole idea behind a coat of arms is to be recognized on the battlefield while wearing full armour; since family members generally fought together, having them all bear the same arms really wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. So, as Graham pointed out, coats of arms were and are granted to individuals, not families; though the heraldic achievements of various family members are generally similar to show their membership within that family.

When battles were no longer fought by horsemen in full armour, some areas did away with differencing coats of arms for individuals (I believe Milano was one of the first places to do so), making it so all future members of the armigerous families there would bear identical arms.

Scotland's system of heraldry is often held up as a model of how things should be done and still grants armorial bearings to individuals, differenced using a very complicated system to denote the bearer's position in the family. These bearings are also protected by law, and using another's arms is punishable by a fine as well as confiscation of materials marked with the arms in question.

So, unless your family is both of noble stock and hails from one of those few places to abolish individual coats of arms, the coat of arms you find on similar sites for your surname is not actually yours and it may well be illegal for you to use it.

EDIT: For the sake of completeness, I feel I should say that I neglected to mention that the Netherlands (among other nations) was notorious for its unregulated heraldry (particularly among the merchant classes) even before the system of differencing arms was abolished in other locales.

**Burly Brute** · 23rd November 10, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by Cygnus

The whole idea behind a coat of arms is to be recognized on the battlefield while wearing full armour; since family members generally fought together, having them all bear the same arms really wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. So, as Graham pointed out, coats of arms were and are granted to individuals, not families; though the heraldic achievements of various family members are generally similar to show their membership within that family.

When battles were no longer fought by horsemen in full armour, some areas did away with differencing coats of arms for individuals (I believe Milano was one of the first places to do so), making it so all future members of the armigerous families there would bear identical arms.

Scotland's system of heraldry is often held up as a model of how things should be done and still grants armorial bearings to individuals, differenced using a very complicated system to denote the bearer's position in the family. These bearings are also protected by law, and using another's arms is punishable by a fine as well as confiscation of materials marked with the arms in question.

So, unless your family is both of noble stock and hails from one of those few places to abolish individual coats of arms, the coat of arms you find on similar sites for your surname is not actually yours and it may well be illegal for you to use it.

Great insight! And after further reading, I had read a lot about the rareness of the actual coat of arms being awarded out and all. However, I was mostly speaking to their legitimatcy in regards to name origins and the like. Thanks though for the great info! And no worries, I wont be breaking the law! ;-)

**The Wizard of BC** · 24th November 10, 01:28 AM

The authority on Arms in Scotland is The Court of the Lord Lyon.

For the definitive word please follow this link.

http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/216.181.html

**Chas** · 24th November 10, 03:29 AM

I hate these people (and all those like them) like poison. What they are doing is identity theft - pure and simple. The sooner the authorities round the world wake up and take note and start locking them up, the better the world will be.

Regards

Chas

**Schiehallion** · 24th November 10, 03:46 AM

Beware too of Books with all your family's surnames in the world..... you pay a large sum of money and all it contains is the coat of arms granted to an individual of that same surname or even similar name, obtained from the aforementioned directories , a bit of history, etc etc and a list of all the other suckers who paid a subscription. Utter rubbish!