Gray Tartan

[Don Patrick]

but I wouldn't put too much reliance on a connection just because the surname is similar. I have been doing a bit of genealogy and found that what seems to be the case almost never is and you can only ever rely on hard documentary evidence.

In the case of tartans, most agree (where it is an issue) that the majority of us only have the surname to use as a basis of tartan rights. It is a shame but that is the way it is today. Back then it could happen that a MacDonald might move to the lands of a MacGregor and there upon immediately change his surname to MacGregor.

Blood line was suspose to be followed at the Lord and Chief levels, but allegiance was the rule of the day for all those clan members at the lower end of the totem pole. There is at least one incident where the chief of the clan picked up a new last name and the whole courtyside immediately changed their last names as well.

The surname issue is actually even worse - making genealogy tracking almost impossible. There were at least three 'other' common methods individuals used to allow the last name of their descendants to wander. One the 'T' Name or nick name, another using the name of the area they were living in, and another by the use of Mac or such. It was so bad, I believe DNA, such as it is, is our only resonable hope of straightening the lineage issue out.

It wasn't until the mid 1800s that a decision was made by the registrars that off-spring would be required to use the surname of their father. Until that time a Scottish son might choose most any last name they so desired.

I believe the way it works; The Lord of Lyons is involved in determining the Chief of a Clan. Particularily where there are issues - such as the Gray-Campbell issue in the 1950's. The chief of the clan, then is entitled to make the decisions for the clan - such as matters concerning the tartan.

Sorry to use so many words. Guess I got carried away.

[Peter C.]

Don Patrick,

Hunting stewart is a free tartan, there are at least two fashion tartans based on the Royal Stewart tartan, there is the Royal Stewart tartan itself which should only be worn with the Monarchs permission but is worn by thousands of people who have not had permission, and the Royal Family do not complain. They do not even answer back when people insult them. They do not complain when when people fly the Scottish Royal Standard at highland games. One of many ways they behave for which I have great respect. As Archangel said, Lady Jane was queen for that short time, so if you are related you have more right than most to wear the Stewart tartan.

But Phil made some good points that are worth thinking about too.

In the end it is up to you.

Peter

[Don Patrick]

I guess my real problem with my logic - there is no clan Chief for the Gray (Grey) Clan. The only person eligible had to choose between the Gray or the Campbell Clan. He chose the Campbell Clan.

So although the Standing Council has said the surname is sufficient to merit use of the tartan - it's number did not include a Chief of the Gray Clan.

The other real issue, was Lady Jane really Queen of England?

[Ruanaidh]

I think we are dealing with two distinct families here: the Scottish Grays and the English Greys.
Lady Jane Grey's claim to the English throne was through her maternal grandmother, Mary Tudor, the younger sister of Henry VIII. Henry's third Act of Succession left the throne to his son Edward, then his daughters Mary and Elizabeth. If none of his children had issue, the crown went to the descendants of his sister Mary. Henry purposely excluded the descendants of his older sister Margaret (married to James IV of Scotland) because he didn't want the crown to pass to the Scots!. When Henry died the crown passed to the 10 year old Edward who only lived for five more years. His will excluded his sisters and named Lady Jane Grey as his successor. Whether a fifteen year old could write a legal will or whether the will could nullify an Act of Parliment is a moot point. The nation preferred a daughter of Henry to his grand niece and Lady Jane paid with her head.

[Don Patrick]

I believe I ended up answering my own question. The Queen of England is the Clan Chief for the Stewart Clan (I'm told). Her requirements for the wearing of the tartan differs from that of the other clan chiefs. She in effect requires royal blood lineage in order to wear the Stewart Tartan - a lineage I certainly can not prove.

That is my answer.

[McClef]

As a minor, Edward VI was the subject of power plays by those who wanted to be Protector (a phrase now normally replaced by the word Regent), firstly the Seymours (due to their relationship with Jane Seymour, Edward's mother) and afterwards the Dudleys.

Protector Dudley had a vested interest in Jane as he had married off his son Guildford to her and is considered to have persuaded Edward in his last illness to change the succession.

When Edward died, the new will was presented as a fait accompli and the intention was that Henry's daughters should be arrested but they had been warned and escaped and Mary was able to rally popular support that led to support for Jane crumbling and enabling her to gain the throne.

Mary originally was determined on clemency as she realised that Jane had been an unwilling tool in all of this, but Jane's father led a rebellion that showed she could be a focus of danger and disaffection. Also her intended Bridegroom, Phillip of Spain, was reluctant to come to England whilst this danger existed. Jane refused to renounce her Protestant faith and so Mary, who was determined to return England to the Catholic faith, did not exercise the clemency she had promised and Jane and Guildford went to the block.

[Archangel]

Was Jane Queen?
You keep asking this and you keep getting answered. Yes, England is never without a monarch and she was it for those few days. If the current Royal Family say that she was Queen, will that satisfy you?

I believe the way it works; The Lord of Lyons is involved in determining the Chief of a Clan. Particularily where there are issues - such as the Gray-Campbell issue in the 1950's. The chief of the clan, then is entitled to make the decisions for the clan - such as matters concerning the tartan.

The problem is that your belief is misguided. The Court of the Lord Lyon only covers Heraldic issues and only applies to those clans it recognizes. It only applies to the commercial use of the clan name when that clan is covered by the Lyon's Court. It doesn't apply to the general public wearing of the tartan. It doesn't apply to those clans not under its ruling. And it only refers to the bloodline aspect of the clan structure, which is only one of the three parts of the clan structure.

What is happening here is that there is a legal definition of clan that is necessary for heraldry, land, and identification. There is also a social definition of clan that applies to everything else and that's where who gets to wear what tartan comes in. You might want to look at clan in Wikipedia, it's a pretty good article.