Family Name and Clan

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Whatever label some may tag me for this, I still cannot imagine wearing a clan tartan to which I do not belong simply because I like the colors, or some such aesthetic reasoning. Doesn't mean I wouldn't consider wearing the Clergy tartan, for instance, since I'm an ordained minister... or a national tartan, perhaps. But, for me, the clan aspect is on a different level.

As a traditionalist fuddy-duddy I agree 100%-- for me it's all about The Clan, and that almost mystical bit of tartan that brings us all together. As our late Chief might said, "I was a Macmillan long before I was an Argyll..."

[An t-Ileach]

To chip in a couple of historical notes: K Henry VII (the great-grandfather of Queen Jane Grey) was a Tudor not a Stuart. It was through his daughter Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland, that the Stuart king James VI and I (Queen Margaret's great-grandson) inherited the throne of England.

At some point, I expect in the 19th Century, the Royal Stewart tartan became a universal tartan, as did the Government Sett (known universally as the Black Watch tartan).

As someone pointed out, in naming one is the son/daughter of one's father. However, it wasn't and isn't that simple in the Highlands and Islands. You can also be known as the son/daughter of your mother, or even your grandmother. It was all a simple and handy way of identifying someone in smallish communities by picking on something that was well-known in that community. I'm still known in certain circles as "David Isla Jean's son" (and a second cousin is "David Muriel Jean's son").

One can belong to a clan by descent, area affiliation, or election - you can decide (elect) to affiliate, for whatever reason. Traditionally one would have to approach the clan Chief. Nowadays, it's becoming more common to find people who just decide that they're going to be part of that clan and carry on as if they were. Of course, if one wants to join the clan society/association, then one would probably have to go through the clan Chief.

[sharpdressedscot]

Wasn't the Royal Stewart really meant for the Royals, but people misread their words and began wearing that tartan??

[actualrealproperscot]

One can belong to a clan by descent, area affiliation, or election - you can decide (elect) to affiliate, for whatever reason. Traditionally one would have to approach the clan Chief. Nowadays, it's becoming more common to find people who just decide that they're going to be part of that clan and carry on as if they were. Of course, if one wants to join the clan society/association, then one would probably have to go through the clan Chief.

What clans are you speaking off ?, this really is over romantacised nonsense. People belonged to a clan because they fough for the clan chief in times of war in retrun for their own proteciton and land rights. I doubt sincerely that the clan chief stated ' aye, ye are all in my clan, including our future american brothers when they are born 200 years from now'.

If clans DID exist then you wouldnt be in one because you are not scottish, you just have a scottish last name.

[sirdaniel1975]

There are so many comments in this thread that I agree with, even those that do not agree with the other.

There are many degrees of realities amongst those of us who celebrate our Scottish heritage. If it wasn't for the whole mess of it all, most of what we all here appreciate would not exist or be so popular these days.

There are many people who are very comfortable reading a standard "sept list" for a "clan" and accepting the generalized association with a certain name. Whether it is accurate or not. (I personally felt motivated to do the research).

There is a certain truth in that clan societies are very accepting in the membership of persons whom happen to share a common name with the clan. I know that some clan societies don't have the greatest role call in membership.

Then there are those of us, for whatever reason feel the need to be exact. The reason might be the need to just plain know for sure. (my reason) Then there are those romantic feelings of what a highlander is/was and so on... People today seem to want that feeling of belonging to something.. People want to be somebody, they want to have a label, etc....

From my own experience, it is very rewarding to take the time and do some genealogical research. (I have actually done a lot) It will also give you something to hand down to further generations. Someone down your line will be interested.. it will happen.

[English Bloke]

I go with the 'wear what you like' school personally although I do respect those that do not; I fully understand the desire to "belong" however I wear solid-colour and tartan kilts because I like wearing kilts, they look great. ( I wear a sporran with it because I need somewhere to keep my fags and phone and a man bag doesn't cut it for me...). Then again I'm an Englishman. I have a thin (but provable) connection to Scotland as I suspect most Britons have somewhere along the line but that's not my reason for wearing a Kilt. I'm just enjoying an item of clothing that I 'discovered' more by accident than design. My guide to choice of the Kilt is, if I like it and it's within my limited budget, I'll probably buy it. I have a wish-list which has Clan association but it's not burning holes in me. Looking at the prices attached to proper kilts from uncommon weaves I can see why promoting the Clan idea is finacially desirable to those in the trade. The clan association thing, as far as I can make out, is a relatively recent invention which is losing it's credibility in Britain (as are many other established traditions). The high prices of 'real' Kilts and the advent of cheap footy kilts is partly to blame for people seeing through the mystique. You don't want to go trashing your 'Old and Rare handmade' on a Stag weekend in Amsterdam do you. That said, If the Clan thing works for you, crack on. Interesting article linked here ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Sobieski_Stuart )
And it's on't t'internet, so it must be true!

[sharpdressedscot]

..
If clans DID exist then you wouldnt be in one because you are not scottish, you just have a scottish last name.

So, what you're saying is, even if you have descent and heritage you can't be in a clan unless you're a real Scot?

Dude...

[gilmore]

So, what you're saying is, even if you have descent and heritage you can't be in a clan unless you're a real Scot?

Dude...

I may be mistaken, but I surmise that what is being said is that no one anywhere---regardless of ancestry---can at the moment be in a Highland clan since they haven't existed for several centuries, and when they did, they were only in the Scottish Highlands.

[Bugbear]

Ai karamba! Do you ever just want to crawl out into the desert, across the sharp, scalding hot rocks and broken glass, and forget who you are... or are not?


Sorry, it's just too much to deal with at this point.

[actualrealproperscot]

So, what you're saying is, even if you have descent and heritage you can't be in a clan unless you're a real Scot?

Dude...

Had a scottish clan member migrated to north america, and had a son. Then no that son would not be a member of that clan. It is not neccassarily because he is american. It is because he is not in scotland living in the clan system.

You well know that the clan system was a balanced society where clan membership balanced on what you could do/owed your clan chief. It was not considered on some notion of bloodlines, descent and surnames. You were in a clan if you could offer that clan something or if you were born into through another clan system.

I doubt clan chiefs considered americans and canadians born hundreds of years into the future as part of their clan. It is silly to assume that there were complex rules on membership, A highland clan was not a golf club, it was a highland clan.

as I have said before clan societies are now clubs for people with last names, and I personally believe the vast majority of septs claiming to belong to a clan to be bollocks.