Clan Heraldry: What you can and can't wear and display

[Chas]

Actually in Scotland 'clan' refers to descendants of extended client groups in the Highlands and in the Borders. It is not a word 'reserved' for those in either geographical region, but it is considered as not pertaining to the families and tenants of Lowland names. For that reason Douglases, Hamiltons, and Bruces are not -- in Scotland -- considered 'clans', but Macdonalds, Mackenzies, Macgregors, Cunninghams, Kerrs and Scotts are.

Strange, Lord Lyon recognises Hamilton and Bruce as Clans and Douglas as an Armigerous Clan, but only because the Chief is the same person as the Chief of Clan Hamilton (Alexander Douglas-Hamilton, 16th Duke of Hamilton).

[ThistleDown]

We are now removed from the OP's question, so I hope he will bear with us for one or two more posts on the nature of 'clan'. One of the problems non-Scots often have is understanding the ethnic diversity of Scotland yesterday and today. As WV Highlander pointed out the Vikings were an important part of the 'mix' of the early centuries of the medieval period, but prior to their coming there were numerous settlers from the German north, Denmark and Norway, who merged with the locals, contributed to the language and culture and shared the suffering of the Viking raids later on. It was they who left their stamp on the North and West of Scotland. The folk of Northumbria were the main contributors to the Lowland east of Scotland and their language was not Gaelic; remnants of the British are still to be found in the Lowland west. By the time the clan system had risen in the Highlands the only Gaelic spoken in the south was in Galloway, and that apparently was more aligned to Manx than to the form spoken in the west Highlands. The feudal French and Flemish incomers of the 11C and 12C were gifted (or otherwise acquired) large tracts of land in the 'waist' of the country, in the uplands immediately to the south and in the northeast, reducing the locals to tenantry status quite different from the patriarchal/client status of the Highlands and the Borders.

I can't answer your question, Chas, other than to say that Lord Lyon is an extension of the feudal system and not the patriarchal. Except for Learney, most Lords Lyon have stayed away from 'clan' matters. For example, the feather question that began this thread

[WVHighlander]

I know it sounds strange at first, but it is was it is. Or rather, it was what it was.

While you're correct about the etymology of the Gaidhlig word clann (meaning "children of" or "family"), you have to understand that the clan system was not how things were organized in the Inglis speaking lowlands. That's one of the reasons you hear reference to the House of Stuart and the House of Wallace rather than the Clan Wallace and the Clan Stuart.

Over the years, Lowland families have romanticised and adopted many Highland customs in the name of Scottish nationalism, notably tartan and kilts. Thus, in the diaspora, a lot of Lowland descended families erroneously perceive of themselves as descended from a clan.

Hollywood films like Braveheart that dress William Wallace like some kind of Roman/Viking/Pict/Highlander instead of the Lowlander he was only serve to further confuse matters.

The borders region's reiver clans were the exception to the Highland/Lowland cultural divide as they shared much in common with both groups due to their way of life.

This is not an assertion by Thistledown but is a statement of widely accepted historical fact with which, I have no doubt, the 11th Earl of Elgin is already familiar.

While I understand its a widely accepted historical fact, I would proffer to you that the Lowlands didn't start speaking English until well after 1066. Prior to that it would have Gaelic or something akin to Cymru. The houses etc. occurred after 1066 and the Normans moved into the lowland area, brought in by the Kings of Scotland. That seems to be a fact often forgotten.....

[Nathan]

While I understand its a widely accepted historical fact, I would proffer to you that the Lowlands didn't start speaking English until well after 1066. Prior to that it would have Gaelic or something akin to Cymru. The houses etc. occurred after 1066 and the Normans moved into the lowland area, brought in by the Kings of Scotland. That seems to be a fact often forgotten.....

I'm not sure how any of this would refute what Rex or myself have suggested, but even still, I have to take issues with some of your claims.

Certainly all of Scotland and indeed all of Britain would have spoken some version(s) of Insular Celtic in Roman Times, but the Angles Jutes and Saxons arrived soon after the Romans left. The Anglian Kingdom of Northumbria was established way before 1066 (seventh century I believe) and the Anglo Saxon influence in the Lowlands of Scotland developed in parallel with the neighbouring linguistic development in England. Old English would have been practically the same in South East Scotland and Northern England and the two dialects (English and Scots) really only diverged from Middle English and from one another as a result of a slightly different amount of Norman French linguistic influence.

Meanwhile, in the North West and Hebrides, Gaelic continued to flourish and was bolstered by the success of Somerled and the rise of the Lordship of the Isles. Under this Gaelic civilization, the Clan system emerged which was based on a system of tanistry and a bond of extended kinship and a duty of care existed between the Chief and the Clan.

The system of rents, tenants and taxes in the Lowlands served to play down the significance of distant relatives rendering these relationships effectively legally and practically meaningless. A distinctly European system of primogenitor Aristocracy existed in England and the Lowlands in contrast to the Celtic system of tanistry which operated in the Gaelic Highlands.

"We're all Jock Tamson's bairns" at the end of the day but not all Scots are Gaels and not all families are clans.

[ThistleDown]

You are not entirely correct, WV Highlander, when you state that the Lowlands didn't begin to speak English until after 1066. It certainly is the Davidian revolution of the 12C that is seen as the milestone for feudal incursion into Scotland, but the eastern half of the Lowlands was Northumbrian. David himself spoke English. The families referred to (Hamiltons, Bruces, Douglases, etc.) were incomers and had no connection with a patriarchal 'clan' system. If such were in place in the 12C -- and that is questionable -- it was replaced with a feudal system such as already existed in England and in France. At the height of the 'clan' system in the Highlands there was nothing comparable in the Lowlands except in the Borders and Galloway.

[O'Callaghan]

I'm actually well aware that the shield I use for my picture belongs to the chief of the O'Callaghan clan and not to me, in strict heraldic terms, but it's such common practice to use such crests that I'm not doing anything a gazillion other people don't do. Usage past time immemorial if you like. Nobody is going to punish anyone for doing it. At least I'm not aware of any heraldry police!

In fact those families most closely related to the chief were exiled from Cork to Clare by Oliver Cromwell, or even fled to Spain (where the chief now resides), whilst the ordinary clansmen were allowed to remain. My family tree leads to Cork well after that time, so we are evidently not atall closely related to the chief.

The clan system and tanistry are of gaelic origin, and thus IMHO would have migrated from Ireland to Scotland. It's also true that the gaels were the third wave of settlement in Ireland according to legend, and there may have been others before that. As for Scotland, they intermixed with several other groups, so that although they became the dominant culture in the highlands, they probably weren't the majority of bloodlines there. To a certain extent, migration of both people and highland culture into the lowlands of Scotland could be said to be an extension of that, but only because Scottish gaelic culture is more distinctive and so appears 'more Scottish', even if it really isn't.

And yes, I know the kilt migrated in the other direction, but there is continuity between the great kilt and the Irish brat (cloak) before that, so ultimately that part of the culture can still be traced back to something Irish.

[WVHighlander]

...thank you for the lesson. I stand corrected and will keep my ignorance to myself...as well as educate myself on the 5th Century migration of Germanic peoples in and through the portion discussed. I will ask the Chief that we switch from kilts to lederhosen and pipes to the accordion. (Thank goodness fruehlingsfest is coming up soon.)

[ThistleDown]

All good discussion, WVHighlander. We learn bits and pieces from each other. You referred earlier to Elgin; are you a Bruce? Your avatar is a bit small for old(er) eyes.

Edit: now if I had only paid closer attention.... 'Cochrane'. Western Lowlands, yes? A 'land' name, I think, and taken by people who settled on it, not indigenous and not related to progeny. Yes? No?

[WVHighlander]

Yes, Cochrane from Renfrewshire and Paisley. Legend has it a Viking settler for the Chief's ancestors; however, my DNA is more Gael/Celtic with no trace of Norse....the name origin and translation has two predominate camps. One camp says Cochrane is an old Gaelic word for red brook and another says it is the bastardization of battle roar. Its on my list of projects to start working on for the Clan and try to clear up some of the murkiness.


...the Arms are my Arms not the Chiefs....lol

[ThistleDown]

Thanks. It's usually memory that gets murky and I often question my own. Good luck with your research; it's so very difficult to set aside legend and prove history. I wish you well. I didn't recognise your arms; I see you are in NCarolina in America and assumed they were assumed. Sorry, bad trait. We are far-adrift of the OP's question, but tell us more about your heraldry.