who kilt who?

**madmacs** · 18th August 11, 07:26 PM

Anyone have a good site showing the low points of which clans killed who? I know most of the chequered past of the Macleans and the Lamonts, and we had to do Glencoe in high school history, but i'd be interested in the others. Links?

**digitalR2** · 19th August 11, 05:42 AM

This one is a very good guide to the Clans and Tartans of Scotland. scotclans.com

Cheers

**Tobus** · 19th August 11, 09:48 AM

Seems like a pretty morbid subject. I can understand wanting to study the dynamics and relationships between the clans in past centuries, but why are you interested solely in who killed who? This is a delicate topic (as evidenced by the forum descriptor warning against rivalries), and it's easy for such discussions to take a nasty turn.

That said, I'd be willing to bet that any thorough source of clan history will have that information (albeit probably not in a tailored format for that specific purpose). You may just have to study each clan's history separately.

The one that comes to mind from my own clan (Colquhoun) is the battle of Glen Fruin in 1603. What's interesting is that if you go to the Wikipedia page for that battle and scroll to the bottom, they have a whole bunch of links to Scottish clan battles. You can click them individually and find out a lot of what you're looking for.

**English Bloke** · 19th August 11, 11:22 AM

Wasn't it all a very long time ago? Does it really matter now?

**mookien** · 19th August 11, 02:11 PM

madmacs: An excellent DVD on clan:clan conflict and clan:crown conflict is "Clans of Scotland" narrated by Paul Murton. It gives an interesting and engaging summary of 12 of the most historically powerful and influential clans. It can be purchased at Amazon, and I imagine many other places, for about $30.

A truly superb video history, "A History of Scotland" starring (narrated by) Neil Oliver and covering Scotland's story from its first recorded history is similarly available for a bit less than $50. While it covers clan conflict, it does not emphasize it like the "Clans of Scotland" does.

**robthehiker** · 19th August 11, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by English Bloke

Wasn't it all a very long time ago? Does it really matter now?

Does that apply to all history or just the politically charged stuff?

**Jock Scot** · 19th August 11, 10:49 PM

Alright I have a modest interest in history, but EB does have a point that all of this death, double dealing and general skulduggery between the Clans did happen an awfully long time ago and with all things considered, Scotland of today gets on with day to day life very well without dwelling on the grizzly past. Something that other parts of this planet might take heed of perhaps?

Nevertheless if you regard that most Clans have done something pretty dreadful to the other Clans you will not be far wrong! Take the Campbell/MacDonald thing for example, it was not just a one way affair, both inflicted dreadful atrocities upon each other over the centuries and that sort of behaviour went on at various times between most, if not all, the clans. There were long periods of peace though!

Indeed yes, the TV programs mentioned above are very good at giving a broad look at the Clans.

**English Bloke** · 20th August 11, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by robthehiker

Does that apply to all history or just the politically charged stuff?

That's not what I meant. I have no problems with studying history. "the low points of which clans killed who?" however seems a bit focused to me, like the history of it doesn't actually matter, let's just cut to the killin'. I may have misinterpreted the question... Apologies for interrupting the conversation, I'll be off now. Do carry on...

**PEEDYC** · 20th August 11, 02:59 AM

Originally Posted by Tobus

This is a delicate topic (as evidenced by the forum descriptor warning against rivalries), and it's easy for such discussions to take a nasty turn.

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

Take the Campbell/MacDonald thing for example,

I agree Tobus. When asked what tartan I wear and they get the response "Campbell" it is not uncommon for someone to bring up the MacDonald's and Glencoe. This is where the true facts of Glencoe are not known and when the comments can get out of hand.

Most so called clans fought each other and robbed one another at some time and when it came to battles then it was usually Highlander against Highlander in the main with a few French, Irish, English and others thrown in for good measure.

I think most Scots are proud of our heritage but not so much of our history if you see what I mean ,...

**robthehiker** · 20th August 11, 04:11 AM

Originally Posted by English Bloke

That's not what I meant. I have no problems with studying history. "the low points of which clans killed who?" however seems a bit focused to me, like the history of it doesn't actually matter, let's just cut to the killin'. I may have misinterpreted the question... Apologies for interrupting the conversation, I'll be off now. Do carry on...

I know. i was having fun with you.

But seriously, violence makes for interesting history. After all, when studying American history would you rather read about the gunfights in the wild west or about the farmers of the same period?*

*This is not intended to imply that farmers are uninteresting or less important in historical, nor is it intended to condone violence of any kind in any jurisdiction or period.