Clan Akin claims
Michael F McCartney
it to the local library to see what Balfour-Paul's Ordinary might
have for the name. I found Aiken of Dalmoak, Co. Dumbarton, with
two listings (1852 & 1892), both "Or three oak slips fructed
proper, a chief vair"; and another Aiken in Bristol(1885) "Or a
chevron Sable betw two cocks respectant in chief Gules & a hunting
horn in base Vert garnished & stringed of the third"
These anything like what Steve Adkin shows on his web-page?
--
Michael Fannin McCartney
Fremont, California
(Please do not use "m...@sns.com" any more - that account is dead)
Barry Gabriel
Michael F McCartney wrote:
> Being unable at the moment to access Akin(s)oti's web page, I made
> it to the local library to see what Balfour-Paul's Ordinary might
> have for the name. I found Aiken of Dalmoak, Co. Dumbarton, with
> two listings (1852 & 1892), both "Or three oak slips fructed
> proper, a chief vair"; and another Aiken in Bristol(1885) "Or a
> chevron Sable betw two cocks respectant in chief Gules & a hunting
> horn in base Vert garnished & stringed of the third"
Not even close. His arms almost appear to be impaled, but I'll send you
an image privately.
BG
Michael F McCartney
won't - I suspect it's got an evil soul of its own) receive
visuals. Is the bloody thing blazonable?
Steven Akins
Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
<7uh0bi$5p7$1@ssauraaa-i- Is the bloody thing blazonable?
The blazon for my achievement is as follows -
Gules a lion rampant Or in dexter; in sinister a dexter arm in armor embowed
fessways couped holding a battle-axe erect all Proper. Crest - A pair of
ravens statant Proper. Motto - Time How Short. Supporters - on a compartment
embellished with thistles, two stags rampant Proper.
Steven Akins of that Ilk
Guy Stair Sainty
On what basis have you assumed Supporters? As you have denounced the
jursidcition of the Lord Lyon, and you apparently therefore dispute
the legal basis for Scottish (and British) heraldic rules on their
use, what do they mean to you?
>
Guy Stair Sainty
Stair...@msn.com
www.ChivalricOrders.org
Steven Akins
Guy Stair Sainty wrote in message <7ulavg$t...@drn.newsguy.com>...
>On what basis have you assumed Supporters? As you have denounced the
>jursidcition of the Lord Lyon, and you apparently therefore dispute
>the legal basis for Scottish (and British) heraldic rules on their
>use, what do they mean to you?
The Supporters have always been used as an element of the Akins Arms
which I bear. They are a part of the full heraldic achievement, and I have
no reason to not use them, as they were traditionally a part of the full
armorial bearings used by my family, at least as early as the 1700's. I have
always taken them to be in indication of the fact that ours is the principle
or Chiefly line.
Steven Akins of that Ilk
Barry Gabriel
Steven Akins wrote:
These arms of yours look suspiciously Irish to me and not Scottish...
BG
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
><7uh0bi$5p7$1@ssauraaa-i- Is the bloody thing blazonable?
>
>The blazon for my achievement is as follows -
>
>Gules a lion rampant Or in dexter; in sinister a dexter arm in armor embowed
>fessways couped holding a battle-axe erect all Proper. Crest - A pair of
>ravens statant Proper. Motto - Time How Short. Supporters - on a compartment
>embellished with thistles, two stags rampant Proper.
>
Soprry...I haven't been following this thread...have these arms been
recorded at Lyon Court?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
Managing Director - Heraldic Media Limited
Publishers of "Cracroft's Peerage"
Tel: 0181-871 4659
Fax: 0870 0522631
E-mail: herald...@kwtelecom.com
Web site: http://www.kwtelecom.com/hmedia/
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<Guy_m...@newsguy.com> writes
>In article <b0_O3.958$kh....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Steven says...
>>
>>
>>Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
>><7uh0bi$5p7$1@ssauraaa-i- Is the bloody thing blazonable?
>>
>>The blazon for my achievement is as follows -
>>
>>Gules a lion rampant Or in dexter; in sinister a dexter arm in armor embowed
>>fessways couped holding a battle-axe erect all Proper. Crest - A pair of
>>ravens statant Proper. Motto - Time How Short. Supporters - on a compartment
>>embellished with thistles, two stags rampant Proper.
>>
>>Steven Akins of that Ilk
>
>jursidcition of the Lord Lyon, and you apparently therefore dispute
>the legal basis for Scottish (and British) heraldic rules on their
>use, what do they mean to you?
If the supporters have not been allowed by Lyon Court then they are
contrary to the Law of Arms in Scotland and therefore illegal.
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>>jursidcition of the Lord Lyon, and you apparently therefore dispute
>>the legal basis for Scottish (and British) heraldic rules on their
>>use, what do they mean to you?
>
>which I bear. They are a part of the full heraldic achievement, and I have
>no reason to not use them, as they were traditionally a part of the full
>armorial bearings used by my family, at least as early as the 1700's. I have
>always taken them to be in indication of the fact that ours is the principle
>or Chiefly line.
>
With respect, Mr Atkins, then unless your supporters have been
matriculated with the Lyon Court then you have no right to bear them.
If you want to be taken seriously as a Scottish Chieftain then it
behoves you to abide by the Law of Arms in Scotland.
Barry Gabriel
> [snip]
> >The blazon for my achievement is as follows -
> >
> >Gules a lion rampant Or in dexter; in sinister a dexter arm in armor embowed
> >fessways couped holding a battle-axe erect all Proper. Crest - A pair of
> >ravens statant Proper. Motto - Time How Short. Supporters - on a compartment
> >embellished with thistles, two stags rampant Proper.
> >
> >Steven Akins of that Ilk
>
> Soprry...I haven't been following this thread...have these arms been
> recorded at Lyon Court?
Not by him.
BG
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-380E794A.313C63F1+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
These arms of yours look suspiciously Irish to me and not Scottish...
BG
I've considered this myself. My family did reside in Co. Monaghan, Ireland,
as transplants on the Ulster plantations. Still, the reverse side of the
tombstone which bears the arms features a nice depiction of the Scottish
thistle, indicating their true nationality. It also gave the rather dry
epitaph of - The virtues of ye dead, to name I do not chuse, to say his were
not few, indeed, is nothing to profuse. My McCorkle ancestor's heraldic
tombstone bore a similarly stoic verse - Our days begin with trouble here,
our life is but a span, and cruel death is always near, so fail a creatur's
man. That of his mother-in-law, Elizabeth Forbes, was even more grim - O all
ye old that pass me by, come view the place where I do lye, and hence do
learn that you must come, down to the mansions of the tomb. Also you youths
as you do pass, prepare for death, youth fades like grass+ADs- before the months
come hastening on, in which you'l say your joys are gone.
Happy Samhuinn.
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel
> SO far as we can tell Akins' arms haven't been recorded by Lyon;
> IIRC he said his family has been in America (Maryland?) since
> prior to the 1672 act.
Wasn't Maryland settled originally by Catholics???
> The arms reportedly were used by his
> ancestors as a bookplate (again IIRC) & on a gravestone, all in
> Maryland. Whether they were brought from the old country (the
> arms, not the gravestone :) or adopted here, I dunno. If they
> were invented/assumed here & not copied from someone else's arms
> by an ancestor (or a tombstone carver) then they are IMO as valid
> as any assumed arms here, with the advantage of long use.
Well...as valid as any assumed arms can be...which really isn't much...
> If they
> were copied, then they are as invalid as any other copy=cat
> assumption would be - though it probably wouldn't be hard (given
> the somewhat unusual design) to modify them to be unique.
On a semi-serious note, the arms in question look Irish to me, not
Scottish...wait a minute, Akins is a fairly common Irish surname...could
it be?....
> Unless
> they were really used in Scotlans, however, its silly to call then
> the arms of a Scottish clan chief.
Though I do not have access to the references that I once did, these
arms in the references that I do have I cannot find as being attributed
to any Scottish families or individuals with the name Akins.
BG
Steven Akins
Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
SO far as we can tell Akins' arms haven't been recorded by Lyon;
IIRC he said his family has been in America (Maryland?) since
prior to the 1672 act.
To be more accurate, what I stated was that my family left Scotland in 1646
and went to Ulster, where they settled in Clones, Co. Monaghan, Ireland,
along with thousands of other Scots. They came to Cecil Co., Maryland, which
was largely settled by Scottish Protestants, prior to 1750, and the
tombstone which is now the earliest surviving artifact to display the arms
was erected at Steele Creek Presbyterian Church in Mecklenburg Co., N.C. in
1785 by my fourth great grandfather on the grave of his next youngest
brother, whose estate he was administrator of. I have never stated that the
arms were recorded by Lyon, though who knows what was in the Liber
Insignatorum which was lost to the sea off Berwick.
Michael F McCartney
IIRC he said his family has been in America (Maryland?) since
Maryland. Whether they were brought from the old country (the
arms, not the gravestone :) or adopted here, I dunno. If they
were invented/assumed here & not copied from someone else's arms
by an ancestor (or a tombstone carver) then they are IMO as valid
assumption would be - though it probably wouldn't be hard (given
the arms of a Scottish clan chief.
--
Michael F McCartney
arms, Calvert quartering Crossland, are now the State flag); but
the laws of the proprietary guaranteed freedom of religion to any
Christian (& IIRC tacitly tolerated Jews) whether RC, 'piscy,
presbyterian, or whatever. Akins may well have been a
Scotch-Irish name, like mine; one of my sudday school teachers as
a boy in the presbyterian church was Mrs. Eakins. The arms may
have been adopted in Ireland, or after immigrating - I don't think
Akins-oti has said, & most likely he doesn't know (few would).
We've argued validity of assumption till we're affrontee Azure so
I won't waste space on it here. As with a certain TM, my
objectins aren't to the arms, but to the pretensions...and in this
case, to the bigotry of the individual, which says nothing about
the arms; as someone recently noted, the grandson of the eminent
armiger may be a scoundrel, or words to that effect.
BTW - our infantry company warcry at Ft Benning was "Where's
Sherman now that we need him?"
se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk
Barry Gabriel <bgab...@uccb.ns.ca> wrote:
> On a semi-serious note, the arms in question look Irish to me, not
> Scottish...wait a minute, Akins is a fairly common Irish
surname...could
> it be?....
The lack of partitions/ordinaries and the charges do point this way. I
have heard of quite a few Eakins in counties Donegal and Derry.
Planters or natives though?
Sean
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Steven Akins
se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk wrote in message
<7upjv0$oov$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
The lack of partitions/ordinaries and the charges do point this way. I
have heard of quite a few Eakins in counties Donegal and Derry.
Planters or natives though?
Sean
Nearly all of the Akins, Aikens, Eakins, etc. in Ireland were Scots
transplants to the Ulster Plantations, though some, like Frank Aiken,
co-founder of Fianna Fail, seem to have gone native after several
generations - he was born in the 1800's. One of the earliest recorded Aicken
arms was from Dublin, it was Gules, a cross crosslet Or cantoned by four
bezants. It dated to the 1600's I believe. Despite the fact that the Irish
give us a very nice pedigree tracing back to the Milesians, most of the
members of our Clan arrived there from Scotland,
and were staunchly Presbyterian.
Guy Stair Sainty
says...
>
>SO far as we can tell Akins' arms haven't been recorded by Lyon;
>IIRC he said his family has been in America (Maryland?) since
>prior to the 1672 act. The arms reportedly were used by his
>ancestors as a bookplate (again IIRC) & on a gravestone, all in
>Maryland. Whether they were brought from the old country (the
>arms, not the gravestone :) or adopted here, I dunno. If they
>were invented/assumed here & not copied from someone else's arms
>by an ancestor (or a tombstone carver) then they are IMO as valid
>as any assumed arms here, with the advantage of long use. If they
>were copied, then they are as invalid as any other copy=cat
>assumption would be - though it probably wouldn't be hard (given
>the somewhat unusual design) to modify them to be unique. Unless
>they were really used in Scotlans, however, its silly to call then
>the arms of a Scottish clan chief.
Such long usage of assumed arms would probably give them legitimacy,
but not the adoption of Supporters which have a meaning in British
heraldry clearly understood even at the end of the 17th century. I
am extremely skeptical of the claim that the 17th or 18th century
arms, as stated by Mr Akins on tombstones of that date, showed
supporters. Even peers tombstones did not as a rule show supporters
on the tomb stone itself, unless they were full painted blazons on
a grand interior tomb or carved as a sculptural work. I find it
highly improbable that in the Maryland of Lord Baltimore, or in any
of the colonies ruled by a British governor under the Crown, that
someone claiming the status of gentleman (and in colonial America
it was still those claimaing that status who used Arms publicly in
the 18th century) would have used Supporters unless he was a Peer or
Baronet. The status of Scottish Chief was not taken into exile to
the Americas; aside from those few Chiefs who joined the Stuart Kings
in exile whose identity is well-known, there was no reason for a
Chief to go into exile and only the Chief, not any junior representatives
of his line, would have used Supporters (and I am not even convinced
of that in 18th century Scotland - perhaps James Dempster can
comment on this if he reads it).
This seems like another Terence MacCarthy coming over the horizon,
but this time with unusual views on ethnicity and Scotland. How long
before an ancient Akins badge of distinction is discovered, founded
no doubt by the Druidic ancestors of the clan and awarded for the
maintenance of the purity of the blood of the clan?
Guy Stair Saintye
Stair...@msn.com
www.ChivalricOrders.org
Francois R. Velde
>Wasn't Maryland settled originally by Catholics???
Yes, and it was also the first colony to grant freedom of religion in the
mid-17th c. (quite a bit earlier than the Puritans up north).
--
François Velde
ve...@nospam.org (replace by "heraldica")
Heraldry Site: http://www.heraldica.org/
Steven Akins
Guy Stair Sainty wrote in message <7uqq5s$1...@drn.newsguy.com>...
Och maun, can I no play the deil's advocate wi' oot you getting your
tabbard in a wad. Apart from my admittedly off hand musings on my personal
views, the arms that I bear are in fact genuine to my family, the only
augmentation to them being that I display the motto and medallion of the
Order of St. Andrew together with them, as a member of that Order. The stag
rampant supporters however have always been shown together with the Akins
arms, as were the lion rampant guardant supporters borne by my McCorkle
ancestor on his tombstone. These tombstones date to 1785 and 1790
respectively, so this would be shortly after North and South Carolina's
colonial period. As far as Clan Chiefs not going into exile, you may recall
the MacNab who transplanted much of his Clan to Canada along with himself
during the time of the clearances I believe. At any rate my family left
Scotland as a result of political problems during the Cromwellian Civil War,
hence their removal first to Ulster, then later to Maryland. After all this,
I dinna think they gave a flying fig about what the powdered wig set back in
Britain had to say about heraldic propriety. If they held any regard for the
British government, they certainly supressed it well as American soldiers
during the Revolutionary War, in which my fourth great grandfather served as
first lieutenant in Stark's South Carolina Dragoons.
Suze Hammond
bg> Subject: Re: Clan Akin claims
bg> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 01:15:22 -0300
bg> On a semi-serious note, the arms in question look Irish to me, not
bg> Scottish...wait a minute, Akins is a fairly common Irish
bg> surname...could it be?....
According to Black's "Surnames of Scotland", Akin/Aiken/Atkins (etc.) are
all pretty much the same name, and quite Scottish. It is "a double
diminutive of Adam". The first record appears in 1450.
We of Scots descent won't be shed of this particular bigot quite so easily
as all that, I'm afraid.
Suze
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
It really begs the question that any arms borne by a person purporting
to be a Scottish chieftain can be genuine if they are not recorded at
Lyon Court. I'm afraid that Mt Atkins will have to accept that his arms
are "arms of assumption" until such time is they are matriculated.
> the only
>augmentation to them being that I display the motto and medallion of the
>Order of St. Andrew together with them, as a member of that Order.
The "Order of St Andrew"...and what, pray, is that?
> The stag
>rampant supporters however have always been shown together with the Akins
>arms, as were the lion rampant guardant supporters borne by my McCorkle
>ancestor on his tombstone. These tombstones date to 1785 and 1790
>respectively, so this would be shortly after North and South Carolina's
>colonial period. As far as Clan Chiefs not going into exile, you may recall
>the MacNab who transplanted much of his Clan to Canada along with himself
>during the time of the clearances I believe. At any rate my family left
>Scotland as a result of political problems during the Cromwellian Civil War,
>hence their removal first to Ulster, then later to Maryland. After all this,
>I dinna think they gave a flying fig about what the powdered wig set back in
>Britain had to say about heraldic propriety. If they held any regard for the
>British government, they certainly supressed it well as American soldiers
>during the Revolutionary War, in which my fourth great grandfather served as
>first lieutenant in Stark's South Carolina Dragoons.
So a rebel as well....... :-))
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>I'm afraid that Mt Atkins will have to accept that his arms
>are "arms of assumption" until such time is they are matriculated.
First off, the name is Akins not Atkins, our family has never spelled our
name with a T. Secondly, I do accept that my arms are arms of assumption. I
have never argued otherwise. They were assumed by my family more than two
centuries ago, whether granted or not, just as all ancient arms were assumed
by their bearers, and I assume them as my own during my lifetime. I have yet
to be pursuaded that there is any sound reason for an American citizen to
pay thousands of dollars to the British Crown, other than its snob appeal.
My heraldic achievement is protected by the United States federal government
through the U.S. Copyright Office as a work of the visual arts, as per form
VA which has been duly filed for the arms in my name. This protects them
throughout my lifetime, and may be renewed by my heir.
>The "Order of St Andrew"...and what, pray, is that?
The Order of St. Andrew is an Order of Chivalry, based at Balgonie Castle,
Fifeshire, and maintained under the auspices of the Laird of Bladnock and
Lochanbards, GM.
>So a rebel as well.......
Quite. My ancestors have always distinguished themselves in the service of
their country. My Fourth great grandfather, William Akins, Sr., having
served four tours of duty during the Revolutionary War as a volunteer in the
North Carolina Line, and a fith tour as a first lieutenant in the South
Carolina Line. My third great grandfather, William Akins, Jr., also fought
against the British during the War of 1812 in South Carolina, as a member of
Gourdin's 43rd U.S. Infantry. My great, great grandfather fought against the
Union Army as a Cavalryman in the 56th Alabama Partisan Rangers, C.S.A., so
indeed we have a long history of standing up for what we believe in in the
face of supposed authority.
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message
>God preserve us! Not another bogus order! What is Stuart Morris up to?
>You use the style "Akins of that Ilk"...two questions:
>
>1. Has this style been recognised by the Lord Lyon?
>
>2. My understanding is that the style "of that Ilk" is a Lowland usage,
>being originally used when one's surname was the same as the name of
>one's property, the word "Ilk" coming from the Anglo-Saxon and meaning
>"same". Thus "Dundas of Dundas" is "Dundas of the Same" or correctly
>"Dundas of that Ilk" (the use of the style does not always designate
>current ownership of the land - in the recent case of Swinton of that
>Ilk, who emigrated to America, and whose land was purchased by a
>Swinton, Lyon decreed, that in this case, Swinton of that Ilk should be
>head of the family, and Swinton of Swinton, the owner of the land). So
>my second question is: where in Scotland is Akins?
Actually it's Stuart's papa, H.E. Col. Raymond Morris, Laird of Balgonie and
Eddergoll, GCSA, though he is not the head of the Order.
As to your first question, I haven't any idea of Lyon's opinion in this
matter, though since Akins of that Ilk is in fact legally my last name, he
would be rather hard pressed to do otherwise, particularly in view of the
fact that it appears as such on all my legal documents, birth record, social
security card, driver's license, pass-port, etc.
As to your second question, Akin exists as a place name on the Isle of Skye,
viz. Kyle Akin, Dun Akin Castle, etc. It may have also once been a
place-name in Lanarkshire, though I have not been able to verify this.
However, the term of that Ilk can also be used to mean of that family which
makes up an honorable community. See Frank Adams Clans, Septs and Regiments
for Sir Thomas Innes comments regarding this.
Steven Akins
achievement have been added to the Clan Akins web-site and can be viewed by
going to http://www.angelfire.com/ar/clanakins/crest.html This is the
tombstone erected by my fourth great grandfather, William Akins, Sr. in 1785
at the grave of his younger brother, Thomas Akins, at Steele Creek
Presbyterian Church, near Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co., North Carolina.
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>
>>I'm afraid that Mt Atkins will have to accept that his arms
>>are "arms of assumption" until such time is they are matriculated.
>
>First off, the name is Akins not Atkins, our family has never spelled our
>name with a T. Secondly, I do accept that my arms are arms of assumption. I
>have never argued otherwise. They were assumed by my family more than two
>centuries ago, whether granted or not, just as all ancient arms were assumed
>by their bearers, and I assume them as my own during my lifetime. I have yet
>to be pursuaded that there is any sound reason for an American citizen to
>pay thousands of dollars to the British Crown, other than its snob appeal.
>My heraldic achievement is protected by the United States federal government
>through the U.S. Copyright Office as a work of the visual arts, as per form
>VA which has been duly filed for the arms in my name. This protects them
>throughout my lifetime, and may be renewed by my heir.
Unfortunately your family assumed these arms when, by the sound of it,
they were still subject to British Law, which at that time set out quite
clearly that the assumption of arms was illegal...so you can drop any
claim to parity with ancient arms over that score.
If you are what you claim to be, i.e. the chieftain of a recognised
Scottish clan, then surely you MUST as a matter of course record your
lineage and matriculate your arms with the Lord Lyon?
>
>>The "Order of St Andrew"...and what, pray, is that?
>
>The Order of St. Andrew is an Order of Chivalry, based at Balgonie Castle,
>Fifeshire, and maintained under the auspices of the Laird of Bladnock and
>Lochanbards, GM.
God preserve us! Not another bogus order! What is Stuart Morris up to?
>
>Steven Akins of that Ilk
>
>
You use the style "Akins of that Ilk"...two questions:
1. Has this style been recognised by the Lord Lyon?
2. My understanding is that the style "of that Ilk" is a Lowland usage,
being originally used when one's surname was the same as the name of
one's property, the word "Ilk" coming from the Anglo-Saxon and meaning
"same". Thus "Dundas of Dundas" is "Dundas of the Same" or correctly
"Dundas of that Ilk" (the use of the style does not always designate
current ownership of the land - in the recent case of Swinton of that
Ilk, who emigrated to America, and whose land was purchased by a
Swinton, Lyon decreed, that in this case, Swinton of that Ilk should be
head of the family, and Swinton of Swinton, the owner of the land). So
my second question is: where in Scotland is Akins?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
>
>>God preserve us! Not another bogus order! What is Stuart Morris up to?
>
>>
>>1. Has this style been recognised by the Lord Lyon?
>>
>>2. My understanding is that the style "of that Ilk" is a Lowland usage,
>>being originally used when one's surname was the same as the name of
>>one's property, the word "Ilk" coming from the Anglo-Saxon and meaning
>>"same". Thus "Dundas of Dundas" is "Dundas of the Same" or correctly
>>"Dundas of that Ilk" (the use of the style does not always designate
>>current ownership of the land - in the recent case of Swinton of that
>>Ilk, who emigrated to America, and whose land was purchased by a
>>Swinton, Lyon decreed, that in this case, Swinton of that Ilk should be
>>head of the family, and Swinton of Swinton, the owner of the land). So
>>my second question is: where in Scotland is Akins?
>
>Eddergoll, GCSA, though he is not the head of the Order.
"H.E."? And how on earth is Raymond Morris an "excellency"?
>
>As to your first question, I haven't any idea of Lyon's opinion in this
>matter, though since Akins of that Ilk is in fact legally my last name, he
>would be rather hard pressed to do otherwise, particularly in view of the
>fact that it appears as such on all my legal documents, birth record, social
>security card, driver's license, pass-port, etc.
Fine...but what makes you think that you are entitled to use the
Scottish style "of that Ilk" in the first place?
>
>As to your second question, Akin exists as a place name on the Isle of Skye,
>viz. Kyle Akin, Dun Akin Castle, etc. It may have also once been a
>place-name in Lanarkshire, though I have not been able to verify this.
>However, the term of that Ilk can also be used to mean of that family which
>makes up an honorable community. See Frank Adams Clans, Septs and Regiments
>for Sir Thomas Innes comments regarding this.
>
>
Bryan J. Maloney
You claim that the full achievement is protected by law. Which law?
Which jurisdiction? What country? US law recognizes no personal heraldic
protection. The ancient law of arms of Scotland is in Lord Lyon (a
pre-Union institution). To be protected by Lord Lyon, one must be
registered under Lord Lyon.
So what jurisdiction protects the achievement?
Bryan J. Maloney
> First off, the name is Akins not Atkins, our family has never spelled our
> name with a T. Secondly, I do accept that my arms are arms of assumption.
What code of law protects the achievement, in that case?
> to be pursuaded that there is any sound reason for an American citizen to
But if you assume them under right as an American citizen, there is no
legal protection under the jurisdiction that permits their assumption,
given that US law grants no protection to arms nor to achievements. Under
what jurisdiction do you claim protection for your achievement?
> My heraldic achievement is protected by the United States federal government
> through the U.S. Copyright Office as a work of the visual arts, as per
No! YOUR SPECIFIC REPRESENTATION of the achievement is protected under US
copyright law. US copyright law does not protect arms or achievements,
only specific representations, thereof.
> VA which has been duly filed for the arms in my name. This protects them
> throughout my lifetime, and may be renewed by my heir.
You don't know diddly-doo about copyright, do you? Copyright lasts for
your lifetime plus 75 (I think) years, then it's over with, cannot be
renewed.
Steven Akins
Bryan J. Maloney wrote in message ...
Again, my protection is my copyright of the Arms. Lord Lyon cannot
offer any protection outside of his own jurisdiction anyway. Can you name a
single instance in which someone from outside of Great Britain has been
brought to Lyon Court for the unlawful misuse of another's arms? I can think
of numerous instances in which the arms of Clan Chiefs, registered with
Lyon, have been egregiously misused here in the United States (and I suspect
elsewhere) with perfect impunity. I'm afraid that Lyon's leash is only as
long as the Scottish border, and in America as elsewhere his bark is much
more than his bite. He Lyon had any real ability to protect the arms in his
register, then undoubtedly countless scores of stationary engravers and
souvenir vendors would find themselves arraigned in Lyon Court for the
unauthorized use and distribution of arms which are supposedly under his
protection.
It will be interesting to see if any situation will develop now that my
crest is being commercially produced in Scotland as the Clan Akins
crest-badge, available in the form of cap-badges, kilt-pins, sgian-dubhs,
plaid-brooches, etc. by a major crest badge manufacturer in Scotland, which
will be available to the general public through retail distributors. Lyon of
course could raise a stink about it if he wants to, I suppose, since they
are manufactured in Scotland, but then I hold the copyright to them. Could
lead to an international incident of heraldic proportions!
Barry Gabriel
Steven Akins wrote:
> [snip]
>
> The Laird of Bladnock and Lochanbards is a fellow by the name of Col. V.
> Helmut von Braundle-Falkensee, a friend, I suppose, of Raymond Morris. His
> wife is in some was supposed to be descended from the House of Stuart. I
> don't know much of him personally, but not a bad fellow for an Austrian I
> think, seems very fond of Scottish culture.
Gotta website for this chap?
BG
Michael F McCartney
easy thing with a 14.4 modem (almost as ancient as his arms!).
Thoughts: (1) content aside for the moment, web page & graphics
well done. The computer-art arms are OK - the supporters have
some flair - but the charges on the shield lack panache; they
should at a mimimum "fill the space" rather than float in a sea of
red. (That's the artist, tho', not AOTI)
(2) The "Uncle" somebody Akins AOTI mentioned in a posting, would
by Scottish practice (which AOTI cites on his page, however mush
he poo-poo's it here) be a member of his clan & entitled to use
the crest-badge as much as any white Akins.
(3) THe Highland/Isle of Skye business doesn't seem to connext
with anything re: his family other than a similarity of a
place-name; the history he cites (its from Black's Surnames...)
would suggest rather a place-name in Lanarkshire, which is also
more consistent with the Ulster settlement since James VI barred
Highlanders from the plantation.
--
Michael Fannin McCartney
Fremont, California
"It's not enough to love the flowers, you have to hate the weeds"
(Anonymous - plagairized from Reader's Digest)
Michael F McCartney
lines at a time):
(4) The arms on the 1785 tombstone (on his web) do indeed appear
to have the stag supporters. This is after independence, so of
course UK rules wouldn't apply, except as matters of taste (or
good taste :) One suspects a scuptorial version of an heraldic
stationer, but without more research can't say for sure.
(5) As noted by others, the design of the arms can't be
copyrighted - & if they could, Steven didn't destgn them, someone
did at least as early as 1785. Steven only owns copyright to one
artistic variation; any of us could render them artistically in a
somewhat different style & copyright our version.
(6) Likewise, anyone else (Akins or not) could also change their
name to Akins of that Ilk & have just as great/little a legal
standing as Steven. No one else may happen to do so, but the
legal status is still not unique.
(7) The website fairly brims with Scottishness, including comments
re: the supporters, which make AOTI's "up yours Lyon" approach
seem, at the very least, inconsistent...
Barry Gabriel
> bg> Newsgroups: rec.heraldry
> bg> Subject: Re: Clan Akin claims
> bg> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 01:15:22 -0300
>
> bg> On a semi-serious note, the arms in question look Irish to me, not
> bg> Scottish...wait a minute, Akins is a fairly common Irish
> bg> surname...could it be?....
>
> According to Black's "Surnames of Scotland", Akin/Aiken/Atkins (etc.) are
> all pretty much the same name, and quite Scottish. It is "a double
> diminutive of Adam". The first record appears in 1450.
I am quite aware that the name is also Scottish...I even have a copy of
Black. I also have MacLysaght where it is listed as, besides of Scottish
origin, but of native Irish as well.
>
>
> We of Scots descent won't be shed of this particular bigot quite so easily
> as all that, I'm afraid.
Welcome to the club.
BG
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3815C6FC.8259AF04+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4APg- The +ACI-Order of St Andrew+ACI-...and what, pray, is that?
+AD4-Apparently awarded by this bird, or his
+AD4-father...http://www.wedding-services.demon.co.uk/balgonielaird.htm
No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master, The Laird
of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
Barry Gabriel
> In article <g48Q3.86$tS1....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, Steven Akins
> <sja...@sonet.net> writes
> >
> [snip]
>
> > the only
> >augmentation to them being that I display the motto and medallion of the
> >Order of St. Andrew together with them, as a member of that Order.
>
> The "Order of St Andrew"...and what, pray, is that?
Apparently awarded by this bird, or his
father...http://www.wedding-services.demon.co.uk/balgonielaird.htm
BG
Michael F McCartney
Ancient G Noble Order of E Clampus Vitus (loosely organized during
the California Gold Rush as a parody of the Masons, Odd Fellows &
such - ridiculous initiations well lubricated by demon rum etc) -
anyway, unless the Order of St Andy is a put-on, it seems somehow
incongruent for someone as derisive of Scottish legitimacy to tie
into an "Order" based in Scotland (& thus under Scottish law)
which pretty clearly has, to put it mildly, no standing there.
Of course the same might be said of the use of purely Scottish
designation such as "oti" but what the hey...
Michael F McCartney
Scottish family that moved to Ireland during the Ulster
plantations, & then later to America, which is plausible. What
isn't plausible is to treat the surname ("clan" if you will) as if
the whole surname root-&-branch made these moves, which is clearly
not the case since there are still Akins (various spellings) in
both Ireland & Scotland. Even if "election" was the proper way to
select a chief "of that ilk" - which it isn't except in the
limited sense of an ad-hoc derbfine, which Lyon administers - it
seems somewhat odd to not include those "clansmen" on the old
sods. If SA wanted a territorial title, why not pick one clearly
in his own lineage e.g. based on whatever farm/estate/etc his
direct ancestors owned in North Carolina?
Sean Mac Lochlainn
> Apparently awarded by this bird, or his
> father...http://www.wedding-services.demon.co.uk/balgonielaird.htm
> BG
Looks like what the average highlander might wear on a trip to the
local gay bar.
Sean
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Barry Gabriel
> [snip]
> No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master, The Laird
> of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
And who praytell is that and by what right does he confer this bauble?
BG
EJD
Sean Mac Lochlainn wrote:
> In article <3815C6FC...@uccb.ns.ca>, Barry Gabriel
>
> > Apparently awarded by this bird, or his
> > father...http://www.wedding-services.demon.co.uk/balgonielaird.htm
> > BG
>
Ye Gods! Say what you like about him, at least old Terry MacCarthy cut a better
figure....
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> writes
>Well, I finally got a look at Mr Akins' (Akin's?) web page, no
>easy thing with a 14.4 modem (almost as ancient as his arms!).
>Thoughts: (1) content aside for the moment, web page & graphics
>well done. The computer-art arms are OK - the supporters have
>some flair - but the charges on the shield lack panache; they
>should at a mimimum "fill the space" rather than float in a sea of
>red. (That's the artist, tho', not AOTI)
>(2) The "Uncle" somebody Akins AOTI mentioned in a posting, would
>by Scottish practice (which AOTI cites on his page, however mush
>he poo-poo's it here) be a member of his clan & entitled to use
>the crest-badge as much as any white Akins.
>(3) THe Highland/Isle of Skye business doesn't seem to connext
>with anything re: his family other than a similarity of a
>place-name; the history he cites (its from Black's Surnames...)
>would suggest rather a place-name in Lanarkshire, which is also
>more consistent with the Ulster settlement since James VI barred
>Highlanders from the plantation.
I've also had a look at the Clan Akins' Web Site...and I too can see
some inconsistencies.
First of all, the web site makes great play that the purpose of the Clan
Society was to encourage Scottish culture....yet in his postings AOTI
has totally rejected the authority of the Lord Lyon...yet you can't
really get closer to the centre of Scottish culture than the Lyon
Court!!
Secondly, the web site states that AOTI had restored the extinct
Chieftainship of the Clan. Isn't this an oxymoron? If the
Chieftainship is extinct, then it is defunct, gone, no longer in
existence...and so can't be restored. It can be re-created, but that is
a different matter entirely.
Going on from this who were these ancient chieftains of Clan Akins?
What were their names and their pedigrees? How are they related to
AOTI?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
the copyright to one particular rendition of them. I could quite easily
come along, have a herald painter run up his own version of your
arms/crest for me....I too could then have this "major crest badge
manufacturer in Scotland" run me up a few gee-gaws...and then proceed to
undercut your prices...and there's nothing you could do about it.
You make much point in your posting that Lyon's remit does not extend
beyond the confines of Scotland. This is true. But then does your
copyright give you any protection beyond the shores of the USA?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3815C6FC.8259AF04+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
>
>+AD4APg- The +ACI-Order of St Andrew+ACI-...and what, pray, is that?
>
>+AD4-father...http://www.wedding-services.demon.co.uk/balgonielaird.htm
>
>No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master, The Laird
>of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
But you do realise that this so-called Order of St Andrew is 99% likely
to be a nogus or false order, don't you?
Perhaps you could give us its history?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
Lochlainn <maclochlai...@oceanfree.net.invalid> writes
>> BG
>
>Looks like what the average highlander might wear on a trip to the
>local gay bar.
Hmm...I've been to many a local gay bar in Scotland and not seen any of
your local highlanders wearing this stuff!!! :-)))
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3815F164.72266A11+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4-Steven Akins wrote:
+AD4APg- +AFs-snip+AF0-
+AD4APg- No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master, The
Laird
+AD4APg- of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
+AD4-And who praytell is that and by what right does he confer this bauble?
+AD4-BG
The Laird of Bladnock and Lochanbards is a fellow by the name of Col. V.
Helmut von Braundle-Falkensee, a friend, I suppose, of Raymond Morris. His
wife is in some was supposed to be descended from the House of Stuart. I
don't know much of him personally, but not a bad fellow for an Austrian I
think, seems very fond of Scottish culture.
+AD4-AOTI
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>You make much point in your posting that Lyon's remit does not extend
>beyond the confines of Scotland. This is true. But then does your
>copyright give you any protection beyond the shores of the USA?
>Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
I do not pretend to be an expert on this subject, but it is my understanding
that there are international copyright laws.
Steven Akins
Michael F McCartney <10265...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
<7v4l7k$dp6$2...@ssauraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>...
>RE: Scottish vs Irish: AotI's website indicates that it is a
>Scottish family that moved to Ireland during the Ulster
>plantations, & then later to America, which is plausible. What
>isn't plausible is to treat the surname ("clan" if you will) as if
>the whole surname root-&-branch made these moves, which is clearly
>not the case since there are still Akins (various spellings) in
>both Ireland & Scotland. Even if "election" was the proper way to
>select a chief "of that ilk" - which it isn't except in the
>limited sense of an ad-hoc derbfine, which Lyon administers - it
>seems somewhat odd to not include those "clansmen" on the old
>sods. If SA wanted a territorial title, why not pick one clearly
>in his own lineage e.g. based on whatever farm/estate/etc his
>direct ancestors owned in North Carolina?
>Michael Fannin McCartney
Here's some food for thought from my book "From Dunakin's Distant Shadow -
The Story of the Akins Clan"
The Origin and Meaning of the Name of Akins
The spelling of the name of Akins, as we presently know it within our
own particular branch of what is today a large and ancient clan, is the
result of a linguistic evolution which has taken place over the course of
several centuries by way of a number of different countries in which our
family has made their residence. In Britain, where the name of Akins has its
origins, the usage of surnames themselves did not come about until after the
Norman Conquest which occurred in the year 1066 A.D.
Prior to this period individuals were known only by their given name.
To differentiate individuals of the same given name from one another, a
description might be attached such as John “the miller” in order to
distinguish him from John “the weaver” or John “the smith”. As many trades
were carried on from father to son, this led to the adoption of such
occupational descriptions as surnames. In other more rural areas where
nearly everyone shared the same occupation, such as farming or fishing, it
became a common practice to identify individuals by the name of their
father, in which case John might be known as John “son of Thomas”, as a
means of designating him more precisely in a village which might also
contain men named John “son of William” or John “son of Donald”. In the
Gaelic-speaking parts of the British Isles such as Scotland and Ireland, the
word “mac” would be used in place of the English word son. These patronymic
names also eventually came to be “fixed” from one generation to the next and
began to be used as surnames, giving rise to such familiar family names as
Thompson or MacThomas, Williamson or MacWilliam, and Donaldson or MacDonald.
While occupational and patronymic names account for a great number of family
names, others like the descriptive Long, Short, Little, Black, White, and
Gray are derived from an individual’s personal appearance. The location of
one’s residence also accounts for a great many family surnames, whether they
are of the general variety like Hill, Woods, or Rivers, or of a more
geographically specific sort, such as Dundee, Glasgow, or Leith to name but
a few.
In his book "The Surnames of Scotland - Their Origin, Meaning, and
History" George F. Black, Ph.D., tells us: "The use of fixed surnames or
descriptive names appears to have commenced in France about the year 1000,
and such names were introduced into Scotland through the Normans a little
over one hundred years later, though the custom of using them was by no
means common for many years afterward....at a general council held at Forfar
in 1061 during the reign of Malcolm Ceannmor (1057-1093) the latter directed
his chief subjects, after the custom of other nations, to adopt surnames
from their territorial possessions... Surnames originating in this way are
known as territorial...Towns and villages and hamlets also gave distinctive
appellation to several persons wholly unconnected by blood - to any one, in
short, who left one of the towns or villages to reside elsewhere...Some of
our local names have never travelled beyond the bounds of the place or
places which gave them origin...Others again have spread over two or three
adjoining parishes, and still others have wandered over the entire
country...Many local surnames have been derived from places, the names of
not a few of which have not survived...Many of these places were too small
to be recorded on the map or have been altered.”
The name of Akins itself has its origins in the country of Scotland,
from which our earliest ancestors are known to have come. While most of the
members of our family spell it in its present form, a practice which may be
traced back for well over two hundred years, prior to this time the name had
been spelled variously as Aiken, Aikin, Aiking, Aikins, Akens, Akin, Eakin,
Eaking, and Eakins on numerous records pertaining to members of our family.
While many of these documents were recorded by individuals other than our
ancestors themselves, such as court clerks and census takers, their spelling
of our family name illustrates the fact that little attention was paid to
spelling preferences and that each of the various different spellings were
considered interchangeable with the others. In Scotland itself, the name is
almost never spelled with the -s ending, and it is thought that this
termination may have been adopted later when our ancestors had gone to
Ireland, prior to their emigration to America, as this rendering of the name
is more common in the province of Ulster, particularly in County Monaghan,
where our family appears to have resided during the 17th century.
As will be seen in the following chapters of this book, the earliest
actual record pertaining to a member of our family using the spelling of
Akins is a tax-list dating to 1752. However the first example of a signature
by the hand of one of our ancestors cannot be found until 1832. In this
instance the signature is that of William Akins, a second generation
American, born in Cecil Co., Maryland, in 1756, who was at the time applying
for his Revolutionary War service pension. William’s brother, John, who gave
a sworn affidavit testifying to William’s military service also signed his
name using the spelling of Akins. Another brother by the name of Thomas, who
died in 1785 at twenty- eight years of age, lies beneath a tombstone on
which his name is spelled as Akins, yet a younger sister named Agnes, who
died in 1779 when she was but nine years old, is buried beside Thomas under
a gravestone on which her name is rendered as Akens. It is also known that
even after this period certain members of our family spelled the name as
Aiken or Akin, a practice which is continued by their descendants to the
present day.
In Scotland, the first recorded instance of the name being used dates
from the year 1405 when John “of Akyne”, a Scottish merchant, petitioned the
court for the return of his ship and goods, which had been illegally seized
in England. Later records show that a William Ackin served as a witness in
the Scottish parish of Brechin, Fifeshire, in the year 1476. A man by the
name of John Eckin was a tenant under the Bishop of Aberdeen in 1511; while
a John Ackyne served as a bailie in Stirling in 1520, and Robert Aykkyne was
admitted to the burgess of Aberdeen in 1539. The Scottish parish registers,
which recorded marriages and christenings dating from the Protestant
Reformation of the late 16th century, show that individuals bearing the
surname under various forms of spelling were most numerous in the counties
of Fife, Perth, Angus, Aberdeen, Stirling, Lanark, Dunbarton and
Renfrewshire in the late 1500’s and early 1600’s, but by the 18th century
the name had spread south to the Lothians, west to Ayrshire, and as far
north as the Shetland Isles. Among the many recorded spellings of the name
found throughout Scotland are Ackin, Ackyn, Ackyne, Aickin, Aiken, Aikein,
Aiking, Aikne, Akine, Akene, Aicking, Aickine, Aikine, Aicken, Aken, and
Akin.
In a report furnished by the genealogical research organization Hall
of Names on the surname of Akins it is reported that: "Few areas in Britain
have produced as many notable families in world history...as the Border
region of England and Scotland. The family name Akins is included in this
group...The first record of the name Akins was found in Lanarkshire where
they were seated from very ancient times at the old barony of Akyne in that
shire...The family name Akins is believed to be descended originally from
the Strathclyde Britons. This ancient founding race of the north were a
mixture of Gaelic Celts whose original territories ranged from Lancashire in
the south, northward to the south bank of the River Clyde in Scotland...In
1246, 6 Chiefs from the Scottish side and 6 from the English side met at
Carlisle and produced a set of laws governing all of the Border Clans...In
1603 the unified English and Scottish crowns under James I dispersed these
"unruly border clans', clans which had served loyally in the defence of each
side. The unification of the government was threatened and it was imperative
that the old "border code" should be broken up. Hence the Border Clans were
banished to England, northern Scotland and to Ireland. Some were outlawed
directly to Ireland, the Colonies and the New World.
As to the meaning of the name itself and its precise origin, many
theories exist offering widely differing accounts. According to Black’s The
Surnames of Scotland , the name represents a variant of Aitken, a Scottish
form of the English name Atkins or Adkins, itself a diminutive form of Adam.
Black also states that the common Scottish surname of Aicheson or Aitcheson
is also of the same origin with the additional suffix of -son to designate
the patronymic origin. This suffix seems to have been used somewhat
inconsistently early on however, as Black refers to a George Aczinson of
Lanark, who was ordered to “stand under the cownt of the breid irnis” in
1490, while he later appears as George Aczin in 1498.
While Black cites John of Akyne as being among the first to bear the
surname, he mistakenly suggests that the “of” was evidently an error,
apparently unaware that Akin occurs as a place name in Scotland, where it is
found on the Isle of Skye which is separated from the mainland by a narrow
sea passage called Kyle Akin, from the Gaelic Caol Acain, meaning the
“Strait of Hakon”. The village of Kyleakin, which lies along the strait for
which it was named, is the site of an ancient fortress, now in ruins, once
known as Dun Akin castle. According to Scottish legend, the fortress came
into the hands of the MacKinnon clan about the year 900 A.D. when a
Norwegian princess, referred to as Saucy Mary, married Fingon, the
progenitor of the MacKinnons. The legend goes on to relate that Mary and
her husband streched a heavy chain across the sound and levied a toll on
all the ships passing through the strait. According to Charles MacKinnon of
Dunakin, in his 1984 book Scottish Highlanders: A Personal View, it was in
the shadow of Dunakin that King Hakon IV’s war galleys mustered in 1263
before the Battle of Largs, at which the power of the Norsemen was finally
broken in Scotland by Alexander III, King of Scots.
Based upon similar information, Elsdon D. Smith, in his Dictionary of
American Family Names, gives the meaning of the names Akins and Akin as
being a “variant of Aiken” or “dweller near Akin, a strait in Scotland
named after King Hakon of Norway”. Even Black, who appears unaware of this,
states of the name that “in Orkney it is believed to have replaced the Old
Norse name Haakon and its derivative Hakonson.” Black also cites the name of
Magnus Attkinsone, a tacksman of Garth in Harray in 1492, which “may be a
misreading of Awkinsone (= Hakon’s son, Hauquinus was the Latinized form of
Hakon…).” Likewise in The Encyclopedia of American Family Names by H. Amanda
Robb and Andrew Chesler, we find the name Akins listed as a transformation
of Akin, “the name given to those who were from the area near Akin, a strait
in Scotland named for King Hakon of Norway.” Their book goes on to include
the information that, in the United States, Akins is the most frequently
encountered form of spelling with some 23,586 individuals bearing that form
of the name, followed by 17,924 persons who use the spelling of Aiken, and
12,140 who render it as Akin.
Nevertheless, Kyle Akin is quite remote from the area in Scotland
where most of the persons bearing our family name have been living for the
past six hundred years, and it may well be that another explanation as to
the meaning of the name is in order. Aken is the Flemish spelling of Aachen,
a province in western Germany near the borders of Belgium and the
Netherlands, and it is known that the Flemish were enterprising merchants
involved in the linen trade with England, Scotland and Wales during the
latter part of the 12th century. During this time, the Scottish kings
granted a number of charters to Flemish noblemen, among them the lands of
Innes in Moray, which were received by Berowald of Flanders; the lands of
Leslie in Aberdeen, given to Malcolm, son of Bartholf the Fleming; and the
lands of Biggar in Lanarkshire, which were settled by Baldwin of Flanders.
Certainly it is possible that the name of Aken could have been brought over
by Flemish families of this name who may have settled along Scotland’s
eastern coast during this period, although there are no records to support
speculation of this sort.
Within the county of Lanarkshire, Scotland, where a great many families
bearing our surname are found, there was once a barony of Aikenhead, dating
as far back as the 13th century. The barony itself gave rise to the use of
Aikenhead as a family name of the territorial sort and as early as 1296 the
records show that a Gilbert de L’Akenheued of the county of Lanark rendered
homage for his lands of that name. In 1372 the lands of Akynheuide in the
sheriffdom of Lanark were confirmed to John de Maxwell by King Robert II. In
the same year a Convallus de Akinhead witnessed a grant of the lands of
Auchmarr to Walter de Buchanan. A William de Akynheued was bailie of the
burgh of Rutherglen in 1376, and in 1444 a William de Akinhede was a notary
public in Irvine. In 1489 remission was granted to three individuals named
Akynhed who, with a number of others, held the Castle of Dumbarton against
the king, and as late as 1509 there is mention of a payment to a John “of”
Akynheyd. James Aikenhead, claiming to represent Aikenhead of that Ilk,
advocate and one of the commissioners of Edinburgh, is recorded as having
been granted a coat-of-arms by the court of Lord Lyon between 1672 and 1673.
The heraldic historian Nisbet states that this James was the son of David
Aikenhead, Lord Provost of Edinburgh, described as “eminent for his loyalty
and virtue”. The red face of this particular Lord Provost seems to have
prompted Robert Leighton to compose the following limerick:
“If what is said were justly
said,
That’s Head of Aiken timber’s
made,
His fyrie face had long agoe
Sett all his head in blazing
glow.”
The barony of Aikenhead was apparently sold in the time of the Lord
Provost’s father, but the name is still common in Lanarkshire.
Though our surname appears to have evolved parallel to the name of the
barony and family of Aikenhead, the fact that aiken is the Scots word for
oaken may provide some insight as to the origin of the name, both as a
territorial and as a family name. According to the Etymological Dictionary
of Family Names, both Akin and Aken are analogous with the name Aiken,
meaning “oaken; hard or firm”. Other instances of its use occur in the
place-name Aikenhauld, site of an old parochial church in the parish of
Oathlaw, Forfarshire; and in the personal name Aikendrum, a legendary
Scottish figure during the reign of King James II who was commemorated in
ballad:
“We have heard of Whigs galore, Aikendrum,
Aikendrum,
We have heard of Whigs galore, Aikendrum;
But we’ve sought the country o’er
With cannon and claymore,
And still they are before! Aikendrum, Aikendrum;
For the opposition’s sake you shall win!”
The Scottish place-name Achin, from the Gaelic word achadh meaning “a
field”, might also be considered. As a root word it forms the name of a
number of places in Scotland, such as Achinduin, a deserted episcopal
castle, now in ruins, on the west coast of Lismore Island in Argyleshire,
and the similarly named Achindune, once a strong baronial fortification,
long fallen to decay, on the rivulet of Fiddich, near Dufftown, Banffshire.
Even more plausible as a possible origin of our family’s surname is the
Gaelic name Eachainn meaning “horse-lord” the Scottish form of Hector. This
frequently appears as the patronymic surname MacEachan “Son of Hector” in
the Scottish highlands, and may have been anglicized to Eakin or Aiken by
those of the name who settled in the lowlands.
In his Irish Families: Their Names, Arms and Origins, Edward MacLysaght
equates the name of Aiken with that of O’Hagan, saying “In Irish it is O’
hAodagain, descendant of Aodhagan (diminutive of Aodh or Hugh). There are
many variants of the name in English such as Hegan, Aiken, etc…The sept was
located in Co. Tyrone with the seat of its chief at Tullahogue, where he
excercised the hereditary right of inaugurating O’Neill as King or Overlord
of Ulster.”
In their book A Guide to Irish Roots authors William and Mary Durning
state that the name in its various forms became established in the province
of Ulster in the 17th century by Protestant colonists who came to Ireland
from Scotland, where the name is common in the county of Ayrshire. Their
book lists the spelling of Akins as being the form most often found in Co.
Monaghan, while Aiken is more usual in Co. Antrim, and Eakin in Co. Down.
They go on to give an interesting pedigree for the name which predates the
6th century colonization of Scotland by the Irish Scotti for whom the
country was later named. In this genealogy they surmise that the name Akin
is derived from the Irish O’Eakin [O’hOgain], a family which descends from
the Irish Clann Tuirtre, itself a descendant of Fiach Tort, son of Colla
Uais of the Clanns of Oirghialla which were comprised of the descendants of
Eochaidh Dubhlein, son of Caibre Liffechar, son of Cormac Ulfhada and his
wife Etaine, who ancestry goes back another forty-nine generations in
Ireland to its earliest mortal founders, the Milesians.
According to The book of Ulster Surnames by Robert Ball, in Ireland the
name is “common only in Ulster, Aiken is of Scottish origin….The name was
very common in the parish of Ballantrae in Ayrshire and many of our Aikens
may stem from there. There are many variant spellings. It was recorded as
being used interchangeably with Eakins in Belfast, Eakin in counties Derry
and Donegal, Ekin in Co. Donegal and Egan in Co. Down…In Co. Antrim where it
is most popular, it was found to be most concentrated in the area northwest
of Ballymena in the mid-ninteenth century.”
Thus, in the end it seems that there may be no certain answer as to the
question of an exact derivation of our family name, though its origins are
clearly traceable to Scotland where it has a long and established history
from which it spread, first to Ireland and then to America, where our family
has flourished for nearly three hundred years.
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>But you do realise that this so-called Order of St Andrew is 99% likely
>to be a bogus or false order, don't you?
>Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
To paraphrase the character Forrest Gump, "bogus is as bogus does"
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3814F4FF.138D708F+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4-Gotta website for this chap?
+AD4-BG
I don't even think he has e-mail. All of our correspondence is handled via
air-mail. Just got a batch of certificates from him today which I have to
sign and mail back for the Laird's Assembly, which is affiliated with the
Order of St. Andrew. He has given me the position of High Commissioner on
this board. Want to join?
Barry Gabriel
No, I do not wish to join. Why would you have to sign certificates? However,
the name sounded familiar to me and I found him affiliated with the "Order of
St. Joachim", located here, http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rosan/joachim.htm.
Is this St. Andrew order one of his new orders?
BG
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
Adrian M Whatley
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>really get closer to the centre of Scottish culture than the Lyon
>Court!!
Come off it! Much though the inhabitants of this NG might prefer matters
heraldic to assume more cultural prominence, I would imagine that most people
living in Scotland (and thereby defining Scottish culture) have never heard of
the Lyon Court.
--
Adrian M. Whatley
Universitaet/ETH Zuerich,
Institut fuer Neuroinformatik,
Winterthurerstrasse 190,
CH-8057 Zuerich, Switzerland.
Phone: +41 1 635 3067 Fax: +41 1 635 3053
Email: a...@ini.phys.ethz.ch WWW: http://www.ini.unizh.ch/~amw
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>And can you explain the origin of this Order of St Andrew?
The best that I am able to determine it dates back to 1988 when it was
"restored completely and was formed into an effective working international
humanitarian/charitable organization", though allusions are made to a
historical founding which occurred on St. Andrews Day (November 30) 1688 at
Castle Blair Atholl in Scotland, by friends and companions of the House of
Stuart.
Steven Akins
Adrian M Whatley wrote in message <3816e...@rzunews1.unizh.ch>...
>Come off it! Much though the inhabitants of this NG might prefer matters
>heraldic to assume more cultural prominence, I would imagine that most
people
>living in Scotland (and thereby defining Scottish culture) have never heard
of
>the Lyon Court.
>Adrian M. Whatley
Well, if heraldry is "the science of fools" then Lord Lyon would win the
Nobel Prize.
Steven Akins of that Ilk
Guy Stair Sainty
This claims to antiquity are pur einvention. James II and VII had already
just founded an Order of Saint Andrew, with the title Order of the Thistle,
dedicated to that Saint and with the Saint's cross as its badge. This was
a Royal Order of Knighthood, and although given by the Stuarts in exile, also
became an Order of the new dynasty. Its present Head is HM Queen Elizabeth
II.
This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body which cannot
be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but rather as an infantile fantasy,
a harmless joke not worth taking seriously.
Guy Stair Sainty
Stair...@msn.com
www.ChivalricOrders.org
Steven Akins
Guy Stair Sainty wrote in message <7v6u7r$2n...@drn.newsguy.com>...
>This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body which
cannot
>be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but rather as an infantile
fantasy,
>a harmless joke not worth taking seriously.
>Guy Stair Sainty
Like the Knights of Malta, a la Sir Francis, you mean?
Adrian M Whatley
Steven Akins wrote in message ...
I'm sorry, but I fail to see a logical connection either between my post and
your response, or between the 'if' part of your response and the 'then' part.
Adrian M. Whatley
Steven Akins
Adrian M Whatley wrote in message +ADw-38171a67.0+AEA-rzunews1.unizh.ch+AD4-...
+AD4-I'm sorry, but I fail to see a logical connection either between my post
and
+AD4-your response, or between the 'if' part of your response and the 'then'
part.
+AD4-
+AD4-Adrian M. Whatley
Never mind.
Anton Sherwood
: > No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master,
: > The Laird of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
Barry Gabriel <bgab...@uccb.ns.ca> writes
: And who praytell is that and by what right does he confer this bauble?
Right? Seems to me that if a bunch of blokes want to call themselves
the Order of St Andrew, and the name isn't already taken, it's no one
else's business how they run their club. Well, if St Andrew comes
along and objects I say his is the final word.
--
Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* http://www.jps.net/antons/
dwi...@my-deja.com
Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body
> which cannot be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but
> rather as an infantile fantasy, a harmless joke not worth
> taking seriously.
As usual, I must disagree. This new Order is a purely private body,
which cannot be categorized as a "Royal Order of Knighthood" as you
pointed out by contrast with the Order of the Thistle. It is a private
body, true. But if it follows the outline for an Order (including the
Rule of Chivalry), and allows for members only those who have achieved
the social rank of Knight (or equivalent in the appropriate circles), or
admits members in lower ranks according to right priviledge, then I see
no reason it couldn't be called an Order.
I will always disagree with the concept that an Order is only valid if
it has a fons recognized as landed sovereign nobility. It just doesn't
wash with historical practice before the victorian resurgence of
chivalric interest.
-=-=-=-=-
Dwivian is a Knight by virtue of wearing lots of metal and riding a
horse simultaneously.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Steven Akins
dwi...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7va0i3$4ps$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <7v6u7r$2n...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>> This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body
>> which cannot be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but
>> rather as an infantile fantasy, a harmless joke not worth
>> taking seriously.
>
>As usual, I must disagree. This new Order is a purely private body,
>which cannot be categorized as a "Royal Order of Knighthood" as you
>pointed out by contrast with the Order of the Thistle. It is a private
>body, true. But if it follows the outline for an Order (including the
>Rule of Chivalry), and allows for members only those who have achieved
>the social rank of Knight (or equivalent in the appropriate circles), or
>admits members in lower ranks according to right priviledge, then I see
>no reason it couldn't be called an Order.
>
>I will always disagree with the concept that an Order is only valid if
>it has a fons recognized as landed sovereign nobility. It just doesn't
>wash with historical practice before the victorian resurgence of
>chivalric interest.
For once, I agree with dwivian. The point is any authority, be it the GM of
the Order of St. Andrew, The Chief of the Clan Akins, or H.M. the Queen, is
more or less self-proclaimed, even if supported by long standing tradition -
or not. The Queen has at her command the forces of the British government,
because these forces allow her to tell them what to do and have authority
over them. By the same token, I have as a result of my direct efforts, a
Clan of my kinsmen who allow me to lead them, as does the founder of the
Order of St. Andrew. It honestly doesn't make any difference whether
something is a year old, or a thousand years old; we live in the here and
now, and the past ceased to exist the minute the present came into being.
History is written about the past in the present, so no history is ever
completely accurate. School children in America are taught Columbus
discovered the New World because the Scandinavians aren't Catholic I
suppose. At best, history is filled with half-truths and inaccuracies about
the past, so being unreliable it must necessarily be irrelevant as a
foundation for that which exists in the present - history mind you, not the
past (the two things are quite distinct).
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>I'm sorry to be profane, but what a load of cobblers!
>Here we go, yet again, the same old justification for self-styled (ie
>bogus and usually fraudulent) orders......nah nah nah 600 years ago you
>could do this so I can do the same today.
Have you ever considered seeking professional counseling for this
inferiority complex you are evidently suffering from? It would do you a
world of good to let go of this misconception that you have of other people
having more right or justification than yourself to initiate precedence.
Steven Akins
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel
> [snip]
>
> For once, I agree with dwivian. The point is any authority, be it the GM of
> the Order of St. Andrew, The Chief of the Clan Akins, or H.M. the Queen, is
> more or less self-proclaimed, even if supported by long standing tradition -
> or not. The Queen has at her command the forces of the British government,
> because these forces allow her to tell them what to do and have authority
> over them. By the same token, I have as a result of my direct efforts, a
> Clan of my kinsmen who allow me to lead them, as does the founder of the
> Order of St. Andrew. It honestly doesn't make any difference whether
> something is a year old, or a thousand years old; we live in the here and
> now, and the past ceased to exist the minute the present came into being.
> History is written about the past in the present, so no history is ever
> completely accurate. School children in America are taught Columbus
> discovered the New World because the Scandinavians aren't Catholic I
> suppose.
Actually, at that time the Christian Scandanavians were Catholic.
BG
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
>In article <7v6u7r$2n...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>> This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body
>> which cannot be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but
>> rather as an infantile fantasy, a harmless joke not worth
>> taking seriously.
>
>As usual, I must disagree. This new Order is a purely private body,
>which cannot be categorized as a "Royal Order of Knighthood" as you
>pointed out by contrast with the Order of the Thistle. It is a private
>body, true. But if it follows the outline for an Order (including the
>Rule of Chivalry), and allows for members only those who have achieved
>the social rank of Knight (or equivalent in the appropriate circles), or
>admits members in lower ranks according to right priviledge, then I see
>no reason it couldn't be called an Order.
>
>I will always disagree with the concept that an Order is only valid if
>it has a fons recognized as landed sovereign nobility. It just doesn't
>wash with historical practice before the victorian resurgence of
>chivalric interest.
I'm sorry to be profane, but what a load of cobblers!
Here we go, yet again, the same old justification for self-styled (ie
bogus and usually fraudulent) orders......nah nah nah 600 years ago you
could do this so I can do the same today.
A "private" Order of Chivalry is a total oxymoron!!
>
>-=-=-=-=-
>Dwivian is a Knight by virtue of wearing lots of metal and riding a
>horse simultaneously.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>> Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body
>>> which cannot be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but
>>> rather as an infantile fantasy, a harmless joke not worth
>>> taking seriously.
>>
>>As usual, I must disagree. This new Order is a purely private body,
>>which cannot be categorized as a "Royal Order of Knighthood" as you
>>pointed out by contrast with the Order of the Thistle. It is a private
>>body, true. But if it follows the outline for an Order (including the
>>Rule of Chivalry), and allows for members only those who have achieved
>>the social rank of Knight (or equivalent in the appropriate circles), or
>>admits members in lower ranks according to right priviledge, then I see
>>no reason it couldn't be called an Order.
>>
>>I will always disagree with the concept that an Order is only valid if
>>it has a fons recognized as landed sovereign nobility. It just doesn't
>>wash with historical practice before the victorian resurgence of
>>chivalric interest.
>
>the past, so being unreliable it must necessarily be irrelevant as a
>foundation for that which exists in the present - history mind you, not the
>past (the two things are quite distinct).
It really is just not worth arguing against these people....you can tell
them what "is" a thousand times and every time they will come up with
this nonsence.
Fine, Mr Akins.....you carry on and believe that the "Order of St
Andrew" but every time I see it mentioned, I will point out that it is a
self-styled Order and should not be taken seriously by anyone. Just in
the same way that I cannot see you so called "Clan" Akins as being
anything other than a self-styled clan or your claim to use supporters
with your self-assumed arms as being equally ridiculous.
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>
>
>The best that I am able to determine it dates back to 1988 when it was
>"restored completely and was formed into an effective working international
>humanitarian/charitable organization", though allusions are made to a
>historical founding which occurred on St. Andrews Day (November 30) 1688 at
>Castle Blair Atholl in Scotland, by friends and companions of the House of
>Stuart.
In otherwords yet another bogus, self-styled "Order" of Chivalry...when
wil lthese people ever learn?
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
<sja...@sonet.net> writes
>
>cannot
>>be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but rather as an infantile
>fantasy,
>>a harmless joke not worth taking seriously.
>
>
>Like the Knights of Malta, a la Sir Francis, you mean?
Please, Mr Akins, don't make yourself look more of a fool than you
already are.
If you don't understand and accept the prestige of the Order of Malta
aka the Sovereign Order of St John, then it's no wonder you get yourself
involved in bogus so-called "orders" and clans.
Anton Sherwood
: This new so-called Order of St Andrew is a purely private body which
: cannot be categorized as an "Order of Knighthood" but rather as an
: infantile fantasy, a harmless joke not worth taking seriously.
As distinct from ...?
Anton Sherwood
: Fine, Mr Akins.....you carry on and believe that the "Order of St
: Andrew" but every time I see it mentioned, I will point out that it is
I'd do the same for Orders sponsored by institutions based on
aggressive violence, but I honestly can't be bothered.
Oh, wait a minute. "Self-styled" -- if an order is founded by someone
who excludes himself from membership, or if membership is determined
at least partly by persons not members of the order, does the order
thereby escape being "self-styled"?
Because, you know, the Garter (for example) was founded by someone
who appointed himself to it, and all appointments to that order have
come from within ...
Anton Sherwood
: Have you [PCB] ever considered seeking professional counseling for this
: inferiority complex you are evidently suffering from? It would do you a
: world of good to let go of this misconception that you have of other people
: having more right or justification than yourself to initiate precedence.
Hm, what do you mean by "initiate"? To make it stick
requires either great persuasive power or organized force.
Anton Sherwood
: Please, Mr Akins, don't make yourself look more of a fool than you
: already are.
: If you don't understand and accept the prestige of the Order of Malta
: aka the Sovereign Order of St John, then it's no wonder you get yourself
: involved in bogus so-called "orders" and clans.
So, when did that order cease to be "a joke" and become "worth taking
seriously"? When it was N years old? When it had N members?
When it got Papal recognition? When it conquered something?
Everything starts somewhere.
Derek Howard
<snip>
>The point is any authority, be it the GM of
> the Order of St. Andrew, The Chief of the Clan Akins, or H.M. the Queen, is
> more or less self-proclaimed, even if supported by long standing tradition -
> or not. The Queen has at her command the forces of the British government,
> because these forces allow her to tell them what to do and have authority
> over them. By the same token, I have as a result of my direct efforts, a
> Clan of my kinsmen who allow me to lead them, as does the founder of the
> Order of St. Andrew. It honestly doesn't make any difference whether
> something is a year old, or a thousand years old; we live in the here and
> now, and the past ceased to exist the minute the present came into being.
> History is written about the past in the present, so no history is ever
> completely accurate. School children in America are taught Columbus
> discovered the New World because the Scandinavians aren't Catholic I
> suppose. At best, history is filled with half-truths and inaccuracies about
> the past, so being unreliable it must necessarily be irrelevant as a
> foundation for that which exists in the present - history mind you, not the
> past (the two things are quite distinct).
This tirade about history does not seem to sit well with all the
previous protestations by SA of seeking to preserve and continue the
ancient Scottish culture and traditions (except LL!). Either history is
important or it is not. And discussion of half-truths and inaccuracies
is a bit rich from this source.
The authority of the Queen (and of honours and Orders subject to her) is
based on Parliamentary democracy and the will of the people. She does
not impose her authority by military might but has some 1500 years of
inherited claim to be considered as candidate for the job endorsed by
popular acclamation and Parliamentary and religious procedure. The
status of the constituion is internationally recognised by every other
sovereign power. When the people cease to will it to be so the situation
could change - as it soon might in Australia. (When will the citizens of
the USA have the chance to vote for a return to the fold?).
As for "Chief of Clan ..." this does not appear to have received either
the popular will (can SA show support of the majority of those of the
name? Nor does it show any respect for the traditions and values he
claims to hold so dear. Nor does it have any wideranging outside
recognition. It appears to fail on all counts. Likewise the "Order of
..." is but a club and nothing wrong with that as someone else has said.
I agree the age of it is not important though it can add lustre to
reputation if a body can be seen to last and be useful. It may have a
certain validity as a club but cannot be considered either as an Order
nor really chivalraic. It too both lacks proper "authority" and
recognition.
Derek Howard
Steven Akins
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>If you don't understand and accept the prestige of the Order of Malta
>aka the Sovereign Order of St John, then it's no wonder you get yourself
>involved in bogus so-called "orders" and clans.
Sounds like a case of "my Order is better than your Order" to me.
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3817C2CF.9E42AC8+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4-Actually, at that time the Christian Scandanavians were Catholic.
+AD4-
+AD4-BG
I was talking about at the time when the school books were written, not when
Columbus got lost on his way to India.
Steven Akins
Derek Howard wrote in message +ADw-38197EFD.387+AEA-skynet.be+AD4-...
+AD4-This tirade about history does not seem to sit well with all the
+AD4-previous protestations by SA of seeking to preserve and continue the
+AD4-ancient Scottish culture and traditions (except LL+ACE-). Either history is
+AD4-important or it is not. And discussion of half-truths and inaccuracies
+AD4-is a bit rich from this source.
The past is important, but you shoul not confuse the past with +ACI-history+ACI-.
History is whatever we in the present determine it should be, therefore it
usually isn't worth a hill of beans, as it is merely our (usually biased
and inaccurate) account of the past.
+AD4-The authority of the Queen (and of honours and Orders subject to her) is
+AD4-based on Parliamentary democracy and the will of the people. She does
+AD4-not impose her authority by military might but has some 1500 years of
+AD4-inherited claim to be considered as candidate for the job endorsed by
+AD4-popular acclamation and Parliamentary and religious procedure. The
+AD4-status of the constituion is internationally recognised by every other
+AD4-sovereign power. When the people cease to will it to be so the situation
+AD4-could change - as it soon might in Australia. (When will the citizens of
+AD4-the USA have the chance to vote for a return to the fold?).
Are you really so niave as to believe that the American people have any
desire to +ACI-return to the fold+ACI-. Very few of the general public could give a
hoot about all of the pomp and circumstance of heraldry, orders of
chivalry, noble titles, etc. Interest in these things, I'm afraid, is
limited to a very small majority of the American public.
Steven Akins
Anton Sherwood wrote in message <7vbgeb$kh2$1...@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net>...
>Hm, what do you mean by "initiate"? To make it stick
>requires either great persuasive power or organized force.
Or, perhaps, an atmosphere of general acceptance among those involved.
tyler hower
Steven Akins wrote:
And you operate according to an assumption that at the time that the first
schoolbooks were written, Catholics had a great deal of educational and/or
political power?
Tyler
Steven Akins
tyler hower wrote in message +ADw-3819A7F0.AF35ADA2+AEA-osu.edu+AD4-...
+AD4- And you operate according to an assumption that at the time that the
first
+AD4-schoolbooks were written, Catholics had a great deal of educational and/or
+AD4-political power?
+AD4-
+AD4-Tyler
As a well-organized group they evidently had more influence than the
Scandinavians, our school-children would be reading about Lief Erikkson
instead of Columbus, and we wouldn't be getting off work every second Monday
in October. No, I don't think that the Catholics have really been all that
influential. My point was that history, as a basis for the validity of any
given concept, is basically unreliable at best, and usually highly distorted
by those who write it.
dwi...@my-deja.com
Derek Howard <dho...@skynet.be> wrote:
> Likewise the "Order of ..." is but a club and nothing wrong with
> that as someone else has said.
I have to agree with this in an odd way. The "Order of ..." is ALWAYS a
club. The SMOM is a club. The Garter is a club. They are all
associations, and are therefore clubs ("a group defined by a particular
characteristic; a group of persons formed for some common object usually
jointly supported and meeting periodically").
But, they can be more, which is the point.
> I agree the age of it is not important though it can add lustre to
> reputation if a body can be seen to last and be useful. It may have a
> certain validity as a club but cannot be considered either as an Order
> nor really chivalraic. It too both lacks proper "authority" and
> recognition.
And, here is the point. What is proper "authority" to create an Order
of Chivalry? I would attest that the only way to do this is to first
define Order, and Chivalry, and see how the two meet. When I did this I
got some positive response and no negative, so I presume that I might
have hit it pretty close. The only authority to create such a beastie
is....well, by my reckoning, that would be God. Now, God can create
such things by virtue of His clergy, or his Vassals (sovereigns), or by
anyone else he gives the authority.
So, in order to determine validity, it is not sufficient to merely ask
for the Noble origin, but if there exists an ecclesiastical origin, or
an inspired leader. The last one opens up the can of worms, so those
wanting to pretend to be superior immediately disallow it in fear that
there might be a TMacC out there forming the group under false
pretenses, thereby limiting 'valid' organizations to those created by
landed nobles (preferably sovereigns) or heads of churches (pref the
Pope).
Now, as to recognition -- while it might be nice to be a recognized
Order in the eyes of other Orders, it isn't necessary for the function
of the Order. Nor is it necessary to placate the detractors by gaining
some 'right' oversight if the organization is doing what God wants of
it. Instead, it need merely to continue in the mission to which God
created it, and wait long enough to be seen as legitimate in the end.
Remember, the VOStJ was created by "dis-avowed" French Knights long
before it gained "legitimacy" and was doing just fine.
dwi...@my-deja.com
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <herald...@www.kwtelecom.com> wrote:
>>I will always disagree with the concept that an Order is only
>>valid if it has a fons recognized as landed sovereign nobility.
>>It just doesn't wash with historical practice before the victorian
>>resurgence of chivalric interest.
> I'm sorry to be profane, but what a load of cobblers!
Why? It is true, according to history. There was a massive change
during that time that introduced the romance of chivalry to the middle
classes. I have no idea if this was for the better or not, but it is
true.
> Here we go, yet again, the same old justification for self-styled (ie
> bogus and usually fraudulent) orders......nah nah nah 600 years
> ago you could do this so I can do the same today.
You note that I have not attempted to justify any self-styled orders.
So, your above statement is, to be profane, a load of cobblers. What I
am saying is that I see no reasonable impetus for the change from what
happened 600 years ago.
> A "private" Order of Chivalry is a total oxymoron!!
Why? And, answer without saying "because it *IS*" or "because the
definition of 'Order of Chivalry' says so." Since we apparently
disagree on the definitions, you'll have to work harder than that.
And, if you simply say "there is no reasoning with this lot" you are
giving up the argument without even resorting to mentioning a Nazi, so
you are violating Usenet policy!
Barry Gabriel
> Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3817C2CF.9E42AC8+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
>
> +AD4-Actually, at that time the Christian Scandanavians were Catholic.
> +AD4-
> +AD4-BG
>
> I was talking about at the time when the school books were written, not when
> Columbus got lost on his way to India.
If that is what you meant, then you should have said so then.
BG
Barry Gabriel
> Steven Akins wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >
> > I was talking about at the time when the school books were written, not when
> > Columbus got lost on his way to India.
>
> And you operate according to an assumption that at the time that the first
> schoolbooks were written, Catholics had a great deal of educational and/or
> political power?
>
> Tyler
They (Catholics) certainly did NOT have any real power in the U.S. or Canada
(except Quebec). I have no idea what Akins is trying to get at here, but back on
topic does not seem to be his goal.
BG
Darren S. A. George
>... Columbus, and we wouldn't be getting off work every second Monday
>in October.
What does Columbus have to do with Thanksgiving?
The Mad Alchemist
http://members.xoom.com/madalch
Steven Akins
dwi...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7vcgk5$u5i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>I have to agree with this in an odd way. The "Order of ..." is ALWAYS a
>club. The SMOM is a club. The Garter is a club. They are all
>associations, and are therefore clubs ("a group defined by a particular
>characteristic; a group of persons formed for some common object usually
>jointly supported and meeting periodically").
>But, they can be more, which is the point.
>And, here is the point. What is proper "authority" to create an Order
>of Chivalry? I would attest that the only way to do this is to first
>define Order, and Chivalry, and see how the two meet. When I did this I
>got some positive response and no negative, so I presume that I might
>have hit it pretty close. The only authority to create such a beastie
>is....well, by my reckoning, that would be God. Now, God can create
>such things by virtue of His clergy, or his Vassals (sovereigns), or by
>anyone else he gives the authority.
>So, in order to determine validity, it is not sufficient to merely ask
>for the Noble origin, but if there exists an ecclesiastical origin, or
>an inspired leader. The last one opens up the can of worms, so those
>wanting to pretend to be superior immediately disallow it in fear that
>there might be a TMacC out there forming the group under false
>pretenses, thereby limiting 'valid' organizations to those created by
>landed nobles (preferably sovereigns) or heads of churches (pref the
>Pope).
>Now, as to recognition -- while it might be nice to be a recognized
>Order in the eyes of other Orders, it isn't necessary for the function
>of the Order. Nor is it necessary to placate the detractors by gaining
>some 'right' oversight if the organization is doing what God wants of
>it. Instead, it need merely to continue in the mission to which God
>created it, and wait long enough to be seen as legitimate in the end.
>Remember, the VOStJ was created by "dis-avowed" French Knights long
>before it gained "legitimacy" and was doing just fine.
Hear, hear! Well put, Dwivian.
Steven Akins
Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3819C868.177711E4+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4-Steven Akins wrote:
+AD4-
+AD4APg- Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3817C2CF.9E42AC8+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
+AD4APg-
+AD4APg- +AD4-Actually, at that time the Christian Scandanavians were Catholic.
+AD4APg- +AD4-
+AD4APg- +AD4-BG
+AD4APg-
+AD4APg- I was talking about at the time when the school books were written, not
when
+AD4APg- Columbus got lost on his way to India.
+AD4-
+AD4-If that is what you meant, then you should have said so then.
I believe I did, but you misinterpreted what I was saying.
Steven Akins
Darren S. A. George wrote in message
+ADw-7vckk7+ACQ-gnl+ACQ-1+AEA-narses.hrz.tu-chemnitz.de+AD4-...
+AD4AIg-Steven Akins+ACI- +ADw-sjakins+AEA-sonet.net+AD4- wrote:
+AD4-
+AD4APg-... Columbus, and we wouldn't be getting off work every second Monday
+AD4APg-in October.
+AD4-
+AD4-What does Columbus have to do with Thanksgiving?
+AD4-
+AD4-The Mad Alchemist
+AD4-http://members.xoom.com/madalch
Perhaps you Canadians are thankful that you're not in America being
subjected to the lunacy of a day honoring an imbecile.
Klaus Ole Kristiansen
>tyler hower wrote in message +ADw-3819A7F0.AF35ADA2+AEA-osu.edu+AD4-...
>+AD4- And you operate according to an assumption that at the time that the
>first
>+AD4-schoolbooks were written, Catholics had a great deal of educational and/or
>+AD4-political power?
>+AD4-
>+AD4-Tyler
>As a well-organized group they evidently had more influence than the
>Scandinavians, our school-children would be reading about Lief Erikkson
>instead of Columbus, and we wouldn't be getting off work every second Monday
>in October.
Leif had no impact on the course of history. Columbus had tremendous
impact.
Klaus O K
Steven Akins
Klaus Ole Kristiansen wrote in message <7vcn3p$r...@ask.diku.dk>...
>Leif had no impact on the course of history. Columbus had tremendous
>impact.
>
>Klaus O K
This may be true, however, it should be common knowledge that it was the
Vikings who were the Europeans first to discover the New World, and that the
impact on the course of history was made by some bumbling idiot who had no
idea where on earth he was and decimated the native population with disease
and pestilence. Unfortunately what children learn in school is some
fairy-tale story about the "great discoverer" ad nauseam.
Francois R. Velde
> Remember, the VOStJ was created by "dis-avowed" French Knights long
> before it gained "legitimacy" and was doing just fine.
Given the efforts it made to gain legitimacy, first from the SMOM, then
from British authorities, it was probably not doing "just fine".
--
François R. Velde
ve...@nospam.org (replace by "heraldica")
Heraldica Web Site: http://www.heraldica.org/
EJD
Steven Akins wrote:
Nonsense! Where did you go to school? Everyone knows that the credit for
discovering America belongs to St. Brendan the Navigator....
Steven Akins
EJD +ADwAIg-ejd2+ACIAQA-worldnet.att.net+AD4- wrote in message
+ADw-3819F118.449BAB62+AEA-worldnet.att.net+AD4-...
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-Steven Akins wrote:
+AD4-
+AD4APg- Klaus Ole Kristiansen wrote in message +ADw-7vcn3p+ACQ-rrr+AEA-ask.diku.dk+AD4-...
+AD4APg-
+AD4APg- +AD4-Leif had no impact on the course of history. Columbus had tremendous
+AD4APg- +AD4-impact.
+AD4APg- +AD4-
+AD4APg- +AD4-Klaus O K
+AD4APg-
+AD4APg- This may be true, however, it should be common knowledge that it was the
+AD4APg- Vikings who were the Europeans first to discover the New World, and that
the
+AD4APg- impact on the course of history was made by some bumbling idiot who had
no
+AD4APg- idea where on earth he was and decimated the native population with
disease
+AD4APg- and pestilence. Unfortunately what children learn in school is some
+AD4APg- fairy-tale story about the +ACI-great discoverer+ACI- ad nauseam.
+AD4-
+AD4-Nonsense+ACE- Where did you go to school? Everyone knows that the credit for
+AD4-discovering America belongs to St. Brendan the Navigator....
Or was it Prince Madoc?
Bryan J. Maloney
<sja...@sonet.net> wrote:
> Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>
> >You make much point in your posting that Lyon's remit does not extend
> >beyond the confines of Scotland. This is true. But then does your
> >copyright give you any protection beyond the shores of the USA?
>
> >Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
>
> I do not pretend to be an expert on this subject, but it is my understanding
> that there are international copyright laws.
Most copyright is pretty much international due to various treaty
agreements. However, copyright law does not protect your arms nor your
achievement. It only protects the SPECIFIC REPRESENTATION made of them.
Somebody can, using the blazon, produce THEIR specific representation.
Since a blazon is a "set of instructions" and "instructions" cannot be
copyrighted, only specific printings or other releases, thereof, you're
not protected nearly as much as you think you are.
I suggest you fire your current IP attorney and get a competent one to
give you better advice.
Bryan J. Maloney
<sja...@sonet.net> wrote:
> Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote in message ...
>
> >But you do realise that this so-called Order of St Andrew is 99% likely
> >to be a bogus or false order, don't you?
>
> >Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
>
> To paraphrase the character Forrest Gump, "bogus is as bogus does"
Y'mean, like the "protection" you claim for your arms and achievement?
Bryan J. Maloney
<sja...@sonet.net> wrote:
> Barry Gabriel wrote in message +ADw-3815F164.72266A11+AEA-uccb.ns.ca+AD4-...
> +AD4-Steven Akins wrote:
>
> +AD4APg- +AFs-snip+AF0-
>
> +AD4APg- No, I was made Knight Commander of the Order by the Grand Master, The
> Laird
> +AD4APg- of Bladnock and Lochanbards, who lives in Austria.
>
> +AD4-And who praytell is that and by what right does he confer this bauble?
>
> +AD4-BG
>
> The Laird of Bladnock and Lochanbards is a fellow by the name of Col. V.
> Helmut von Braundle-Falkensee, a friend, I suppose, of Raymond Morris. His
> wife is in some was supposed to be descended from the House of Stuart. I
> don't know much of him personally, but not a bad fellow for an Austrian I
> think, seems very fond of Scottish culture.
So does he attend Great Wopping Loon on Thames?