This chapter takes issue with the popular view that, in the imperial period, multigenerational families had been replaced by the nuclear family as the primary reference point in funerary contexts; that each generation established its own tomb; and that this reflects a decline of the family clan and growing individualism in Roman society more generally. I argue that this misconception is based on flaws in the methodology applied. Tombs were most frequently founded as multigenerational mausolea that gained in significance with every new user generation. In elite families, the idea of the gentilicial family clan lived on into late antiquity with mausolea constituting a prime location for celebrating the longevity and dignity of a family. Many freedmen shared this idea, though they had to adapt it to their means and circumstances. While affection and pietas towards kin sometimes took precedence over concern for the family name, the preservation of the name was essential for many. Lacking legal ancestry and often also offspring, freedmen heirs secured the survival of a name and, in return, the tomb’s founder became their ‘ancestor’, a concept that was remarkably successful with some tombs remaining in the family name for up to 100 years.