Dear Robin, Amos B. Carpenter proved that the entire thing was just a scam. It is described in the appendix of the Carpenter Memorial. So (e) disproven entirely is correct. I agree with you that there may have been some anglo-aristophilic pride involved. This evidenced also by the exclusion of those who did not think or act like them (IE the Loyalsts of the American Revolution and those "rebels" who fought for the Confederacy). Also the searching of the right "Coat of Arms" for the right Carpenter line to claim them from a deceased lineage in England seems to support the same. Thanks! John R. Carpenter La Mesa, CA Robin Carpenter wrote: > > JRC: > In your recent message to Linda, you referred to the "great fortune" some > turn-of-the-century Carpenter researchers hoped to claim. I remember > reading of this treasure hunt (probably in the intro to "Carpenter > Memorial"...which portion I haven't reviewed in some time; maybe elsewhere, > too.) > I'm wondering whether you kow what became of that forlorn hope. Not that > I'm trying to revive the chimera...but I'm curious as to how the story ends. > Here are some possibilities: > (a) they found it, but the "fortune" wasn't worth it. > (b) found it, but couldn't get it. > (c) never could find it. > (d) someone found it, but claimed it and kept it himself. > (e) disproven entirely. > RLC > P.S. In addition to the $$$, it seems to me there was also a kind of > anglo-aristophilic pride involved. We'd all like having a king or famous > admiral (or at lease a duke or baronet) among our forebears, but I think the > turn-of-the-century ethos valued such connections far more than we do today. > Thus the great effort in "Carpenter Memorial" to lay American claim to > English coat of arms.