 |
 |
 |
|
POPULAR CLANLORE EXPLAINED Many people will have come across one of those if-your-name-is-here-we-have-your-tartan lists, frequently displayed in tourist shops throughout Scotland. Likewise, there are those colourful clan maps, depicting so-called clan territories. And with boring regularity, we come across those glossy, overpriced clan books, presenting a never-ending regurgitation of the same historical clan data and tradition, most of which relates only to the more prominent clans. As usual, the big names hog the limelight! In fact, all of the foregoing examples might be accused of dispensing a somewhat over-simplistic view of Scottish cultural history. Creeping Feudalism The simple truth is, all the powerful clans only became so after absorbing several smaller families - often called 'septs' - into their ranks. Similarly, the idea that members of a clan, even if they share a common surname, are related to an equally common ancestor is a gross distortion of reality. The late Sir Thomas Innes of Learney (a former Lord Lyon, King of Arms) wrote that a clan's identity is focussed on its chief, who is "the sacred embodiment of the race - the supreme individual, giving to it its race-ideal the coherence and endurance of personality." The inference here is that the early Celtic chiefs were somehow seen as tribal patriarchs, having autocratic dominion over their 'children' (Gaelic: clann) and the lands on which the tribe was settled. Innes of Learney argued that early clan structure in the Scottish Highlands presented a social order onto which feudalism would be easily grafted. This feudalism was the new 'social order' that came into England with William the Conqueror in 1066: but it was by royal invitation during the reign of David I., King of Scots (1147-1153), that it began to creep across Scotland. Sliding Scale of Privilege The late Lord Lyon went a stage further when he said: "but for feudalism, we should have no clans today, as we Scotsmen understand the term." On this, one might be forgiven in supposing that he was merely supporting a system that largely perpetuated his own official status. Alternatively, if the genealogy of his noble family runs true to form, his elusive forbear the Flemish Berowald (c. 1160), might be regarded as one of several such foreign 'grafts' to be nourished on native root stock! A fundamental rule of feudalism required that every man should find himself a lord and master. This applied equally to barons and peers of the realm, the result of which created a social pyramid, its broad base being the common vassalage, with the sovereign at the apex - he being the fountain of honour, and answerable only to the Almighty! From base to pinnacle in the great feudal heap, there existed a sliding scale of privilege, the degree of which varied according to the amount of favour given to (and received from) the Crown. Anyone fortunate enough to find a niche close to the royal person generally came off best. Meanwhile, at the bottom of the scale, the serf had no legal standing worth mentioning. The really important part of the system ruled that regal patronage was only valid when it appeared on a piece of parchment bearing the royal seal. Only with a written charter could a person claim legal entitlement to a tract of land - the fact that a family may have lived on said land since time began did not enter into the deal. Such charters also created the need for family names, or surnames as they came to be called. Thus, some noble families simply adopted the name of their lands, giving rise to the many known Lowland names, like Kilpatrick, Dunbar, Buchanan and Colquhoun. Crown Favourites Unfortunately for the Gaels, many of the lesser clan chiefs held no charters for their ancient lands. As a consequence, many soon awoke to discover that they had overnight become vassals of Crown favourites, many of whom were in-comers of Flemish and Breton origins. Thus, we find such families as Fraser, Cummings (Comyn) and Chisholm inheriting lands occupied by native Celts, many of whom later adopted the surname of the ruling family. So much for the theory of common ancestry! In certain land charters we come across reference to "nayffs" (natives). One such document relating to the Munros of Foulis, nayffs are listed along with "forests, fishings, mills, ferries" and other features attached to the lands in question, all becoming the property of the grantee, to be disposed of as he saw fit. It follows, therefore, that when a feudal superior obtained a grant of new lands, it would be in his best interest if he 'planted' several of his own trusted vassals in key positions among the indigenous 'nayffs', and thereby made his presence felt. By this procedure, I am convinced that countless common folk were, throughout history, shunted all over Scotland. Moreover, migrations of this nature would not be deemed important enough to appear on written records. In the case of feudalism, there is ample evidence to show that its so-called 'marriage' with patriarchal clanship did not result in a happy honeymoon or lasting partnership! If anything, it was the cause of years of hostility between Gaels and the anglicised Lowlands - the effects of which were still evident during the time of the infamous Highland "clearances" of the 19th century. Broken Heilan'men! The history and nature of Gaeldom is considerably more complex than popular clan literature would have us believe. In contrast, if one takes the time to seek out and read some of the more scholastic writings, as found in the journals of noted historical institutions, such as the Gaelic Society of Inverness and the Scottish History Society, a more realistic view of Highland life is perceived. Great emphasis is often placed on the supposed martial nature of the Gael, and of his apparent preoccupation with clan feuds. Overall, a somewhat warlike image is portrayed, being a perception that was greatly encouraged, and overtly exaggerated, during times when the glens and straths were turned into military recruiting areas for the British army. It is more likely that the average Highlander was (and is yet) no more aggressive by nature than his counterpart in the Lowlands, or anywhere else for that matter. The many clan feuds were seldom instigated by ordinary clansmen, but were largely due to the egotism and greed of a few chiefs and feudal lords, whose actions were seldom born out of any conscious desire to enhance the lifestyle of the clan community. Many of the powerful Highland chiefs retained their mercenaries (Gaelic: buannachan) who, apart from protecting the clan lands, might equally be hired out to 'foreign' service. They were the trained warriors or 'regular army' of Gaeldom - and if a chief found difficulty recruiting men of the right calibre from among his own 'children' he simply recruited them from other clans. In later years we come across references to "broken Heilan'men", they being the result of small clans whose lands had fallen to more powerful neighbours, and who were then obliged to accept the sovereignty of the conquering chief or scatter in the hope of finding protection among other clans. Right of the Sword No better example can be found than in the history of Clan Gregor, whose early chiefs defied feudalism and chose to defend their territory by right of the sword (Gaelic: coira chlaidheimh). This brought them into direct conflict with the powerful Campbells, who by stealth, marriage and, more importantly, legal charter, eventually acquired MacGregor lands, thus reducing the 'Gregalach' to being mere tenants in their ancient glens. Many of the MacGregors settled on the lands of other clans across the central Scotland, which made it extremely difficult for their chief to maintain control over the more hot-headed clansmen. On the question of clan surnames, it is interesting to note that when the MacGregor surname was proscribed in 1603 (following the Glenfruin incident against the Colquhouns) many clansmen were obliged to accept the names of the clans which had offered them shelter. Sometimes disguised patronymics would be used: thus, Iain Dhu MacGregor might become simply John Dow, or John Black. When a clan and its lands became subjects of a more powerful neighbour, the subordinate clan chieftain might see fit to enter into a Bond of Manrent with his superior, by which he pledged his own and his clan's support for the new regime. If thus accepted, the small clan might in time become an integral part of the larger - which later gave rise to the term 'sept'. In some cases the sept members might adopt the surname of the ruling family. Others might equally decide to retain their own racial identity, often using the patronymic of some remote ancestor whom they regarded a progenitor of the family. A reasonable example of this might be cited in the case of the MacLennans and Macraes, who were known as long-term followers of the MacKenzie earls of Seaforth. Both were small clans, living cheek by jowl in Wester Ross, and had difficulties with the identification of their respective chiefs (more so MacLennans), yet they maintained their distinctive identities, along with a fair degree of autonomy - and were never styled 'septs'. Name Changes There were instances when septs became fully integrated with a larger clan. The powerful Clan Cameron of Lochiel might serve as a case in point, being as it was comprised mainly of three ancient septs. They were the MacMartins of Letterfinlay; the MacGillonies of Strone; and the MacSorlies of Glen Nevis (all in the Lochaber district). Apart from these, the proud Camerons also had the support of many MacMillans, MacPhees, MacWalricks (Kennedy) and others, who seem to have retained their own names, often, it is said, in the face of strong 'persuasion' to become Camerons by name (some used 'Cameron' as an alias). At the battle of Harlaw (1411), when the Lord of the Isles mustered 10,000 clansmen under the banner of Clan Donald, it would have been a brave man who suggested that they were all MacDonalds. To do so would be an insult to Mackinnons, MacPhees, MacQuarries, MacNeills and many other noble clans. Other methods by which name-changes were induced are on record. In 1688, a MacIver chief in Campbell territory had his forfeited estates restored to him, but only on condition that he and his descendants became known as Campbell. Among the more unusual circumstances, we hear of impoverished clansfolk who appear to have received hand-outs of oatmeal, on condition that they adopt the name of their benefactor - resulting in, for instance, the term 'Bowl (or boll) o'meal Frasers!" Then there was the more eccentric Cummings laird who received several landless people into his protection, and thereafter 'baptised' each in water from a stone trough by the door of his castle. Descendants of the strange converts became "Cummings of the hen trough!" (Gaelic: Cuminich clach nan cearc). Exactness of Official Records Yet another avenue along which new blood and new names arrived into clan territories came when a chief's daughter married into another clan. Part of her dowry often included a small retinue of supporters from among her own people. MacDonald historians tell us that, when Angus Og MacDonald married Agnes, the daughter of Guy O'Cahan an Irish chief, her dowry is said to have included 140 men of every surname in her father's lands. The final point I would like to make concerning origins of clan names is probably the most important. It should be remembered that, by tradition, Gaels have never been over-enthusiastic in establishing surnames as such. They have for generation been quite capable of identifying one another by their use of patronymics. This system was forever a source of great confusion among English speakers. Well into the 19th century, surnames were seldom used locally in the Highlands, and generally appeared only in legal documents - more especially in estate rent rolls and parish records, which were generally written in English. On a great many occasions little care was taken to ensure exactness. Parish records are therefore full of very crude attempts by scribes as they tried to grapple with the phonetics of the Gaelic language. The results are often all too obvious, as seen in modern anglicised versions of common Highland names: McKay (MacAoidh) and MacKean (MacIain) are but two examples. The plain truth is, the Gaels knew who they were, and if the poor lowlanders could not understand an ancient tongue (considered by many in the south to be born of an uncouth, barbaric race of people) that was their misfortune. Either way, the Gaels seldom went their way to enlighten them! I suppose there is a lesson to be learned in all this, in that the Highlands and the hardy race that once lived there have been largely misrepresented on the popular tourist front. Things are never quite what we have come to expect among "them thar hills!" ********** References: Tartans
of the Clans and Families of Scotland by
Thomas Innes of Learney (1945) Copyright - Malcolm Lobban The Scots Link, Issue No. 62 - 2002
Back to Home Page |