Clan Shaw Confusion

[Millionspoons]

Hi All, this is my first post, I hope I posted it in the right place and I'll try to make it readable.

In my family it has always been believed that we descended from the Highland Clan Shaw of the Chattan Confederation.
We didn't have solid proof, but its always what people said, my grandparents, and uncles, it was somehow just something the family knew and talked about.
We had done our genealogy as far as we could and we had hit a wall in the early 1700s and couldn't actually make the connection to Scotland,
but we were still certain that we were Scottish.
So over the years we have bought lots of Clan Shaw items to have, like my kilt and brooch, cups, and lots of other things. We went to the 46th New Hampshire Highland Games
and I joined the Clan Shaw Society, and had a certain amount of pride at the calling of the clans, it was fun.
Then for my 10th anniversary my wife got me the best subscription to Ancestry.com, with all the international information, military records, and newspaper articles (The newspaper is what made the difference). So, with this I was able to find just one tiny bit of information that connected me to a landslide of more family information. I was able to get all the way to Scotland.......
And as it turns out I'm a Shaw alright, but from the Lowland Clan Schaw of Sauchie. Who have no arms bearer and have been defunct for years and years. So now I'm here with all this stuff, and I feel like a charlatan.


All that said, here is my real questions. I have tried to do as much research on it as I can but there seems to be very little information on it, why is the clan tartan for Clan Schaw the very same as the Highland Clan Shaw? Everywhere I look it says that these two clans "have no connection to each other", yet they have the same tartan? The 2 clans lived at least probably 2 or 3 days away from each other or more? (Idk, not an expert) I don't see how or why they would have the same anything? Is there any obscure place I might find some information on this? Or is this a dead end and I should just accept it and move on?
Also... how often does an armigerous clan get a new chief? Probably wishful thinking huh?


Well, That's my sad story, thanks for listening.

[ThistleDown]

Not so sad, Millionspoons, there are Shaws in Yorkshire (where it apparently refers to the above-ground part of an arable crop such as turnips) with no apparent connection to the Shaws of Inverness-shire, as well. The name Schaw has pretty much ceased to exist in Scotland today and probably was simply how the name was recorded at some time in the Sauchie family's history. The Lowland name is territorial 'of Schaw' in Lanark.

The Highland Shaws are a branch of the Clan Chattan. The name 'Shaw' in the Highland sense was a name adopted as the most closely resembling its Gaelic name in pronunciation. That's the problem with one culture and language assuming the rights of another. In the Mackintosh muniments the name is variously spelled Sheo, Scheoe, Schetho, Schethou, and elsewhere in our records it is even given as Macstag and Mchedow. Missing out the 'Mac' the name is often rendered as Seath, Sheach and Shaw.

To your 'real' two questions: (1) There is no reason why the two families should have the same 'anything'. Lord Lyon has separated the northern Shaws from all others for just the argument you have brought to us on this XMarks -- far beyond our kilt-focus, mind you . Highland societies (largely US) from the beginning of the 20th have 'acquired' names that are similar or sound-like Highland names, or who were names of 19C Highland estate tenants and taken them in as clansfolk. And (2) wishful thinking, I hope.

If I can help your further with reference to Clan Shaw, Clan Ay, Clan Chattan and the Central Highland, please PM me. I'm the sitting historian for the Clan Chattan.

[Tomo]

In terms of clan tartans, it's worth keeping in mind that these are largely a 19th century invention (or re-imagining if you like).

The notes on the Scottish Register of Tartans for the Shaw tartan attribute it to "McIan (c.1845) in a drawing of Farquhar Shaw of the Black Watch, who was executed for mutiny in 1743. Co-author, James Logan, describes the figure as wearing the 'regimental' tartan with a red line to distinguish the philabeg from the belted plaid. The Shaw tartan, it appears, had been derived from errors in the graphic illustration of the Black Watch."

So if you like the tartan keep on wearing it and don't worry about connecting all the dots.

[Millionspoons]

Wow, that's really interesting guys. Thanks for replying so soon and explaining that. I didn't really know that a lot of the tartans we know are fairly recently designed.
I guess that I don't have to get rid of all of my stuff just yet.

I do still kind of wonder though, what the Schaws might have wore back then though. It would be interesting to know.

Again thanks guys!

[Steve Ashton]

The answer to your question Millionspoons is far more complicated that at first glance.


Part would depend where they lived. If they were in a city or in the Lowlands they would probably dress just like everyone else in that area or region. It would have been very rare to see a kilt in the cities of Edinburgh or Glasgow. Much as it is rare today. If you are in those cities today in a kilt, the locals automatically see you as an American tourist.
And it would depend on their station in society. A banker would dress in almost a uniform. Much like today in a professional office environment. Most guys would look very much alike. It was quite common to tell in an instant what a guys work was by how he was dressed.
And it would depend on the era. Fashion is an ever changing thing. There has always been those "fashion forward" folks and those who prefer to dress how they learned when younger. But fashion of the 1770's was quite different from just 20 years before or after. And very much different from the 1870's.

So to say "How did a person with a particular last name dress" would make about as much sense then, as asking that same question today. Just because a person lives in Scotland would not have meant that they always, and only, wore a Tartan that represented their last name.

[Millionspoons]

Yeah, I suppose that's very true. I think that most Americans are lead to believe that everyone in Scotland wears a kilt with their clan tartan all the time and always have for as far back as anyone can remember. That said, I suppose what I really mean is way back then when my ancestors were there, and if they did wear a kilt, and wanted it to represent the Schaw clan, I just wonder what it looked like is all. Or if there really ever was one that they officially wore.
By the way, I appreciate the fact that people actually reply on this forum. It's a nice change to other forums where no one actually replies to one another. Very cool.

Thanks

[EagleJCS]

My family has not been able to determine from whence we came either. (My Scott line 'starts' in the Clinch River valley of Southwest Virginia in the late 1700's. It's a challenge untangling the records of several men bearing the same name living in the same general area in the same time period.) Also, there are Scottish Scotts (the Clan Scott is seated in the Borders area, but there are also some Scott's from around Elgin), there are Irish Scotts unrelated to the Scottish, and English Scotts unrelated to either of the others, so my family may be from any of those places. Before surnames were common, 'the Scot' or 'the Scott' (before spelling was standardized) was used as a descriptive suffix of someone from Scotland. These days, anyone bearing the surname is welcome to join the Clan Scott Society and is considered a part of the clan by the chief (his grace the Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry, who has so stated).


Regarding your question about how a chiefless clan goes about determining a new chief ... there is a process defined by Lord Lyon.

From what I've read, it takes a lot of research on bloodlines and a lot of communication among the clan (and/or clan society) members to determine if there's even an interest in naming a new chief and who might be 'next in line'. It can be done, though.

If memory serves, Clan Cunningham determined a new chief a few years back, and Clan Carruthers did just recently.