FIND MY CLAN

The Evolution of Clans: From Survival to the Pursuit of Kinship, Heritage, and Community

When people attempt to “find my clan,” they’re expressing their need to find kinship, to connect with their Scottish heritage, and to join a welcoming community. The clan and family societies they find are far different than the original clans that evolved to survive in the land now called Scotland. They originated as autonomous, self-governing kin-based tribes with traditions of Gaelic tanistry. Clans adapted to the Norman enforcement of land-based feudalism. They unsuccessfully fought a centralized government that actively worked to suppress them. In the modern age, with Scottish descendants spread across the world, clans were re-invented as a concept made manifest by clan and family societies. These societies draw from a diverse range of ancient customs, medieval adaptations, and modern traditions.

Download PDF version of this complete article here.

James VI & I

Sir Walter Scott

Origins and Spread of Clans in Scotland

The early Celtic people of Scotland were primarily the Picts, Irish Gaels, and Britons. The Gaels brought their early socioeconomic structure of clans, chiefs, and tanistry. They eventually overwhelmed the Picts and Britons. Norse invaders from the east pushed into the northern and western highlands and adapted to this clan culture. The Picts had migrated to the area by the Iron Age, between about 800 BCE and 400 CE. They are considered to be descendants of the Caledonii and other northern Iron Age tribes. The term "Picti" appears in written records of the Romans from the late 3rd century AD. The Picts were organized into several chiefdoms, each ruled by a local chieftain or king. These chiefdoms were often associated with specific territories and hillforts. Kinship and family ties played a significant role in their social organization. The Brythonic people, or Celtic Britons, were already present in the modern-day Strathclyde area of Scotland by the first century BCE, before the arrival of the Romans. They spoke Common Brittonic, which later evolved into the Brittonic languages like Welsh, Cornish, and Breton. The Britons lived in tribes and kingdoms, usually associated with specific territories and hillforts. The social structure was more tribal and kin-based. The third wave were the Irish Gaels. The monk Bede (known as “the venerable”) wrote in about 731 CE: “In process of time, Britain, besides the Britons and the Picts, received a third nation, the Scots, who, migrating from Ireland under their leader, Reuda, either by fair means, or by force of arms, secured to themselves those settlements among the Picts which they still possess. From the name of their commander, they are to this day called Dalreudini; for, in their language, Dal signifies a part.” (Sellar, A.M., translator. 1907. Bede's Ecclesiastical History of England. London: George Bell and Sons.) The area he claimed was called “Dál Riata,” meaning Riada’s share or portion. At that time, Ireland was called “Scotia” by the Romans and what is now Scotland was called Alba, Albyn, or Albany. The first Irish Gaelic settlements were overwhelmed by the native Picts. “At length, in the year 503, the neglected colony was utterly overwhelmed by the Picts, whereupon a powerful force of the Irish Dalraids, under the leadership of Leom, Aengus, and Fergus, crossed over, invaded Albany. , and gradually subjugating the Picts, reestablished the colony on a basis which was the foundation eventually of the Scottish monarchy of all subsequent history.” (Sullivan, A.M. 1909. The Story of Ireland, New Edition. Dublin: M.H. Gill & Son Ltd. and Waterford.) The land was given the name Scotia Minor and Ireland was called Scotia Major. The Dalriadans pushed further into Pictland with ongoing battles. They later shared cultures and intermarried with the Picts. (Illustration: Campbell, Ewan. 1999. Saints and Sea-Kings: The First Kingdom of the Scots. Edinburgh: Birlinn Ltd) The first known divisions of Scotland were territorial, but with some reference to kinship. The Irish missionary Columcille or Saint Columba (521 –597) recounted: “Moirsheiser do Cruitline clainn, Eaindset Albain i seclit raind, Cait, Cé, Cirig, cethach clanii. Fib, Fidach, Fotla, Fortrenn. The English translation is “Seven children of Cruthne divided Alban into seven divisions. Cait, Ce, Cirig, a warlike clan. Fib, Fidach, Fotla, Fortrenn.” (Skene, William Forbes, Editor. 1867. Chronicles of the Picts, Chronicles of the Scots, and Other Early Memorials of Scottish History. Edinburgh: H.M. Register House.) While the first use of the origin of the word “clan” is undeniable, later historians have observed that “the matching of seven divisions with the seven children of Cruithne, a legendary first king of the Picts, sounds equally mythic in its symmetry…” (Moffat, Alistair. 2024. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland: A New History. Edinburgh: Birlinn.) However, these regions are linked to the geography noted in the 12th century with a revised list known as De Situe Albania: Cirech (or Circenn) as Angus and the Mearns; Fotla as Atholl and Gowrie; Fortiu as Strathearn and Menteith; Fib as Fife with Fothreue; Fidaid as Moray and Easter Ross; and Cat as Caithness and South East Sutherland. (Ibid.) The “clanna” are mentioned as spreading throughout what is now known as Scotland. From the “seven children of Cruthne” evolved the mormaers of these regions of Alba. They ruled over the individual tribes who inhabited their regions. The Picts and the Gaels were eventually united under Kenneth mac Alpin (“son of Alpin.”) Two years after he succeeded his father, Alpin mac Echdach, “Kenneth seized the shaky throne of Pictland and held the combined realm until his death in 858.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2024. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland: A New History. Edinburgh: Birlinn.) Kenneth mac Alpin became the first king of both Picts and Scots. The Norse comprised the fourth incursion, starting in the late 8th century and continuing through the 15th century. They established settlements in the Northern Isles (Orkney and Shetland); the Western Isles (the Hebrides, including the Isle of Skye); and mainland territories (including Caithness, Sutherland, and parts of Argyll.) “By the end of the eleventh century the Sudreyjar, the Norse name for the Hebrides, Kintyre, the Clyde islands and the Cowal Peninsula, were all in the hands of Viking sea lords and settlers.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2024. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland: A New History. Edinburgh: Birlinn.) This pushed the kingdom of Dál Riata eastwards into the highlands and the Lowlands. The Norse established earldoms that were ruled by powerful earls or “jarls” who had significant autonomy and control over their territories. Within these earldoms, local chieftains and leaders managed smaller communities and settlements. As with the Picts, the Norse settlers integrated with the local Gaelic-speaking population and embraced the custom of clans and chiefs. However, the lands they settled remained in the control of Norway. In 1264, Allexander II, King of the Scots, attacked Caithness and Skye, forcing the Norwegians to negotiate. “In the Treaty of Perth of 1266, they agreed to give up their claims to the Hebrides (but not the Northern isles) and the Isle of Manin exchange for 4,000 merks.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2024. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland: A New History. Edinburgh: Birlinn.)

Gaelic Tanistry and the Clan System

The Gaelic clan system was essential to the survival of early Scottish communities, acting as both a social and political structure. Clans provided protection, identity, and governance, ensuring that members had security in times of conflict and hardship. Each clan was bound by kinship, with loyalty to the chief being paramount. Chiefs played a crucial role in maintaining order, resolving disputes, and leading military efforts when necessary. Isolated communities relied on their clans for sustenance and defense. Clan land ownership was central to clan identity, with territories often leading to disputes and feuds that shaped Scotland’s history. Clans also developed distinct traditions, symbols, and laws, fostering a deep sense of belonging among members. From earliest recorded history until 1100 CE, clans were based on the Gaelic traditions of the founders of Dál Riata. The Pictish, Brythonic, and Norse tribes slowly adapted to these customs. The clans were based on familial and territorial connections but they became more diverse: “The way that people related to each other in Dál Riata was very different from society today. People saw themselves as belonging to large extended families which included all descendants of a person’s great, great grandfather. Young men and women were often sent to be brought up by foster parents, providing another network of social ties. These extended families also formed alliances in larger tribal groups.” (Campbell, Ewan. 1999. Saints and Sea-Kings: The First Kingdom of the Scots. Edinburgh: Canongate Books Ltd.) Some of the clans under the mormaers were detailed in the “Tract on the Scots of Dalriada” as “the clan Fergusa gall, son of Eachach buide,” “the clan Conall Cerr, son of Eachach buide,” “the clan of Kenneth, son of Alpin, son of Aedan.” (Skene, William Forbes, Editor. 1867. Chronicles of the Picts, Chronicles of the Scots, and Other Early Memorials of Scottish History. Edinburgh: H.M. Register House) Some clans and families broke off from the larger tribes and others merged with more powerful tribes. For example, Clan Farquharson was derived from Farquhar, fourth son of Alexander “Ciar” Mackintosh of Rothiemurchus, 5th Chief of Clan Shaw. (Clan Farquharson UK.) The Caithness Hendersons branched from Gunn Clan and were once called MacHendrie. (Clan Henderson Society.) Ancestors of the Currie family served as Hereditary Bards to the Lords of the Isles and later to the MacDonalds of Clanranald. (Learned Kindred of Currie.) The period of the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries was when the great Gaelic families were founded and began to make their fortunes. “Families like Clann Dòmhnaill, descendants of Scandinavian Gaels, who ruled as lords of the Isles for 200 years; but also like the Frasers (na Frisealaich), who drew their descent from Anglo-Norman settlers from south of the Forth; or the earls of the Lennox, whose ancestor bore the Old English name Ælwine. The Campbells saw themselves as descendants of northern Britons (indeed, of Arthur!) and of Normans, as well as of Gaels. To be a Gael, in the middle ages, then, was to be a speaker of Gaelic—it was not a racial or ethnic tag. Gaelic clans looked to multiple lands for their ancestry, not just the Highlands.” (Clancy, Thomas Owen. 2005. “Gaelic Scotland: a brief history.” University of Glasgow Centre for Scottish and Celtic Studies.) Each clan established its own customs based on their individual histories: “the clans were by no means culturally homogenous but were of five distinct origins. The Norse clans in the north and north-west islands and coasts included the MacLeods, sons of Ljót; Maclvers, sons of Ivar; MacSweens, sons of Swein; and MacAulays, sons of Olaf. On the mainland were the territories of clans with clear Pictish origins, the most famous being the confederation of Clan Chattan which includes Mackintoshes, MacGillivrays, MacPhersons and other names. To the west lay the glens and straths of the Irish or Dalriadan clans, principal amongst them Clan Donald and its satellites. Clan Campbell probably arose in the Old Welsh-speaking kingdom of Strathclyde for the name is from Cam-Beul which means 'Twisted Mouth', possibly denoting people who did not speak Gaelic. The similar origins of the Galbraiths are clearer - their first recorded chief was Gilchrist Bretnach, Gilchrist the Briton, an Old Welsh speaker who lived at the end of the 12th century in western Stirlingshire.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2015. Scotland: A History From Earliest Times. Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited.) The three major pillars of their customs included connections to each other, to the land, and to their leader. While initially based on kinship, these socio-economic units also included other families and individuals. They were connected to their land though a sense of dùthchas: “The term dùthchas is difficult to translate but it means something like 'the collective heritage of clansmen and women, their customary rights to land, fishings, upland pasture and other staples' - and, even more simply, 'home'.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2015. Scotland: A History from Earliest Times. Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited.) In fact, the social bonds between members of a clan were “meaningful when and where members of a clan had possession of land, either as owners or tenants. This underlying principle of clan formation was embodied in the saying that a clan without land was a broken clan.” (Dodgshon, Robert A. 1998. From Chiefs to Landlords: Social and Economic Change in the Western Highlands and Islands, c.1493-1820. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.) Membership in a clan was also critically important: “Just as a clan without land was a broken clan, so also was it said that a man without a clan was a broken man. To be part of the established order of the region, you needed to be affiliated to an established clan.” (Ibid.) The head of each local tribe or “clainne” of kith and kin was called a “toísech,” Gaelic for "first" or "leader." This leader is first mentioned in the property records of the Book of Deer, written sometime between 1130 CE and 1150 CED. In the Gaelic system of “tanaisteachd” or tanistry, the head of the tribe was the “fittest” member of the family. This system “embraced certain main features, one of which was that the succession was always continued in the family of the chief within three degrees of relationship to the main line.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2024. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland: A New History. Edinburgh: Birlinn.) This meant that a brother may have precedence over a son, unike the later system of primogeniture. However, each clan developed unique processes for selecting their chiefs, combining hereditary principles with collective decision-making by clan members. Succession wasn't always straightforward, especially if multiple candidates had legitimate claims. In such cases, a “derbhfine” was called, which was a family council of noble kin who played an essential role in selecting the new chief. This council would often choose the most suitable candidate from among eligible family members, considering factors like strength, leadership abilities, and popularity. In some clans, the chief would designate a successor, known as the tanist, based on merit rather than strict primogeniture. This system aimed to ensure the most capable leader succeeded to the chiefship while avoiding conflicts. However, acceptance by the clan members was crucial. A candidate had to gain the approval and support of the clan's influential leaders and people, enhancing their role as both a leader in battle and a representative of the clan's interests. This combination of hereditary principles, family councils, and collective decision-making helped maintain strong, capable leadership within the clans while balancing tradition and merit. In addition to their primary vocations with the clan, members had various responsibilities to their chief, reflecting the close-knit and communal nature of the clans. Members were expected to be loyal to their chief and provide military assistance during battles and conflicts. Members often provided tributes or rents to their chief, which could be in the form of agricultural produce, cattle, or other resources. These contributions helped maintain the chief’s household and the clan’s overall well-being. Members, especially those with influence, took part in councils and decision-making processes. They provided advice to the chief on various matters and helped devise strategies for the clan's prosperity. Key individuals within the clan, such as the “sennachie” or oral historian, were involved in preserving and passing down the clan’s traditions, customs, and heritage. This included participating in rituals, ceremonies, and storytelling to keep their history alive. These responsibilities helped maintain the clan’s structure, ensuring its survival and fostering a strong sense of community and identity. The ancient chief was responsible for the clan in ensuring the clan's well-being, protection, and unity. For example, the chief was responsible for the safety and defense of the clan. This included leading the clan in battles and conflicts, as well as safeguarding the clan's territory. The chief had the authority to make decisions on behalf of the clan, including settling disputes, administering justice, and managing the clan's resources. The chief also represented the clan in negotiations and interactions with other clans, as well as with the Scottish Crown. This role was crucial in maintaining the clan's standing and securing alliances. In addition to the sennachie, chiefs were keepers of the clan's history, traditions, and culture. Finally, they hosted feasts, gatherings, and cultural events, which were essential for strengthening social bonds and unity within the clan. These responsibilities helped maintain the structure and cohesion of the clan, fostering a sense of identity and belonging among its members. In early medieval Scotland, a “mormaer” was a regional or provincial ruler over the individual clan chiefs. The term is believed to originate from Gaelic or Pictish, meaning either "great steward" or "sea steward." Mormaers held significant power, overseeing large territories and often acting as the king's representatives in their regions. Mormaers played crucial roles in the governance and defense of their territories, maintaining order, collecting taxes, and providing military support to the king.

French-Norman Feudalism

The French Normans advanced from England in the south and disrupted the Gaelic culture with the enforcement of feudalism. Feudalism had a profound impact on the Gaelic clan system, reshaping land ownership, governance, and social structures. When the Normans introduced feudalism to Scotland, it gradually replaced the traditional kin-based system with a hierarchical model centered on land tenure and loyalty to the crown. After the end of Roman rule in the 5th century, Anglo-Saxon settlements were established in eastern and southern Britain. In 1066, William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy, defeated the Anglo-Saxon King Harold II at the Battle of Hastings and became the King of England. The Normans, originally of Viking descent, brought with them their customs, laws, and language. They spoke a dialect of Old French known as Norman French. This language became the language of the English court, law, administration, and the elite for several centuries. Their influence brought a profound and lasting change to the social and economic structure of the earliest Scottish inhabitants. The Gaelic system of tanistry was first eroded through the introduction of the social and political system of feudalism by David I, King of the Scots (1084 – 1153.) He was heavily influenced by King Henry I of England, the fourth son of William the Conqueror of French Normandy. Feudalism up ended tanistry in terms of land ownership, centralized authority, and military allegiance. Under the Gaelic system, land was held collectively by the clan, with the chief acting as a steward rather than an absolute owner. Norman feudalism introduced individual land grants, where chiefs became feudal lords with direct obligations to the king. This weakened the communal nature of clans and made land disputes more common. “In feudal theory the monarch was regarded as the owner of all land in the kingdom which he divided among his most significant followers through formal charters in return for specific obligations.” (T.M. Devine. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands, Manchester: Manchester University Press.) Under this system, David gave Scottish lands primarily to Normans from England, in exchange for their fealty. These Normans included the family of Brus (ancestors of Robert the Bruce), Hamilton, and Gordon (thought to be descended from the Gorduni tribe in Flanders). Feudalism emphasized allegiance to the monarchy rather than clan loyalty. Chiefs who accepted Norman titles often had to balance their traditional role with new feudal obligations, leading to tensions between Gaelic customs and Norman governance. David created “earls” to replace the hereditary Gaelic mormaers and new sheriffs, barons, and lords to supplant the authority of the chiefs. Under the new laws of feudalism, the land no longer belonged to the clans or tribes but to the earls and barons. The land was no longer protected by the “fittest” member of the clan but was inherited by the son or descendant of the baron. Land was not the only favor bestowed: “And he not only gave the Normans most of the land, but he also gave them the chief offices about the court. It was only the very greatest nobles who got these offices, which it was considered a great honour to hold.” (Brown, Peter Hume. 1908. A Short History of Scotland. Oliver and Boyd, 1908.) Feudalism was a specific strategy to expand the power of the central government through the monarchy: “The most effective instrument for this systematic extension of state power was the creation of a loyal class of feudal landed families who acknowledged royal supremacy.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) This practice became more accepted: “after the granting of feudal charters in the 14th century and afterwards, the competing concept of oighreachd, literally 'that which is inherited', came to be accepted more and more. This made it clear that clan lands were owned by the chief and could be passed on by him. Clansmen and women paid rents in return for their land, a much less complex exchange than the ancient bonds of duthchas.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2015. Scotland: A History from Earliest Times. Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited.) More Anglo-Norman families migrated north in the early 1100s and soon morphed into the likes of Clan Grant (from “grand” or large), Clan Fraser (possibly related to the French surname Frezeliere or the name of an area in Anjou), Clan Menzies (from the place name Mesnieres in France), and Stewarts (coming from the Cotentin Peninsula, their ancestor was High Steward of Scotland).” (Moffat, Alistair. 2015. Scotland: A History from Earliest Times. Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited) Clans were slowly being absorbed into this new socio-economic system: “The penetration of feudal structures into the Highlands also blurred the distinction between clanship and social systems elsewhere in Scotland and many of the greatest clan chiefs were feudal lords as well as tribal leaders.” (Devine, Thoams Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press) Feudalism in Scotland gradually declined due to legal reforms, economic shifts, and changing governance structures. The rise of commercial agriculture and urbanization also made feudal landholding less relevant. By the 18th and 19th centuries, many feudal obligations had become symbolic rather than practical. The system was largely neutered by ending “feu duties” or payment to the landowners in 1974. The final legal abolition came with the Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc. (Scotland) Act 2000, which officially ended feudal land ownership.

French-Norman Heraldry and Use of Surnames

While feudalism eventually declined, the Norman customs of heraldry and the use of surnames have survived. Heraldry is the system of granting and regulating coats of arms, originating as a way to identify knights on the battlefield and in tournaments. Surnames were influenced by Anglo-Norman naming traditions. Early surnames were often territorial, patronymic, or occupational, reflecting a person's land, ancestry, or profession. Fixed, heritable surnames became common by the 15th century. The earliest references to heraldic authority in Scotland date back to 1318, during the reign of Robert the Bruce. Each member of the Norman nobility had its own “herald” who kept a list of the symbols used by other. The “Lyon King of Arms Act 1592” raised the personal herald of King James VI and I to the national position of Lyon King of Arms, named for the depiction of a lion on his ceremonial garb. In 1672, the Scottish Parliament charged the Lord Lyon with maintaining a registry of all arms and granted him the right “to fine in One Hundreth pounds all others who shall unjustlie usurp Armes.” (Lyon King of Arms Act 1672, Legislation.gov.UK) Another Anglo-Norman convention that David I began was that of inheritable surnames. Before his time, people usually bore the names of their fathers (such as “Angus mac Donald” or Angus son of Donald); a physical characteristic or job (such as "Reid" for red-haired or "Smith" for blacksmith); or the lands they dominated (such as “Duncan de Forbes.”) Many clansmen took the name of their clan leader as their surname. “Surnames among the ordinary clansmen were used in a very loose way, and commonly adopted to accord with that of the clan chief (in return for a good meal, in the case of the 'Boll' Frasers), and abandoned again if the men drifted elsewhere.” (Duffy, Christopher. 2003. The ’45: Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Untold Story of the Jacobite Rising. London: Cassell.) “Boll Frasers” refers to the story that Simon Fraser, the 11th Lord Lovat, increased the number of his followers: “It consisted of bribing poor parents with a “Boll o’ Meal” (bag or ladle full of grain). It was about replacing the own surname with the surname of the clan.” (“Boll o’ Meal,” Clan Fraser of Lovat Association of Germany.) The other reasons for adopting a clan name were “to demonstrate solidarity, to gain favour with the Chief or Laird, to associate with a powerful neighbour, or just because there was little or no choice in the matter.” (Durie, Bruce. 2009. Scottish Genealogy. Gloucestershire: History Press.) In 1061, Malcolme Canmore, also known as Máel Coluim mac Donnchada, King of the Scots, rewarded his supporters with lands and "commandit, that ilk man half his office and landis namit efter his surname. He maid mony erlis, lordis, baronis, and knichtis." (History and Chronicles of Scotland: Written in Latin by Hector Boece, translation by John Bellenden, published 1536, reprint 1821.) However, “No surnames appear in the charters of Alexander I (1106-1153), but in the reign of his brother and successor, David I (1124-1153), we find them coming into use.” (Black, George F, and Black, Mary Elder; The Surnames of Scotland, 1946.) Even in as late as 1296, the use of surnames had not been universally embraced. In the documents known as the “Ragman Rolls” some names of Scottish nobles are refenced both by a surname and by the land to which they own title. (Excerpta Ex Instrumento Publico Sive Processu Super Fidelitatibus Et Homagiis Scotorum Domino Regi Anglie Factis A. D. MCCXCI, Etc.) The use of surnames did not become common for Scots until about the late 14th and early 15th century. For example, Alexander, 1st Lord Forbes (circa 1380 - 1448) received a grant of the lands of Edinbanchory and Craiglogy in 1402 with his place name "Alexander de Forbes " or "Alexander who owned the land of Forbes." In 1423, Alexander Stewart, Earl of Mar, granted the lands of Alford to him with the surname "Alexandrae Forbes.” (Tayler, Alistair and Henrietta. 1937. House of Forbes. Aberdeen: Third Spalding Club.) However, all members of the clan did not necessarily use the clan name. “Clan Gregor was proscribed in 1603 and many MacGregors adopted other surnames and, after the proscription was lifted in 1774, many did not revert to MacGregor. The infamous Rob Roy MacGregor… spent most of his adult life known as Campbell.” (Durie, Bruce. 2009. Scottish Genealogy. Gloucestershire: History Press 2009.) Therefore, a common surname “implies nothing about genetic heritage, and breaks the link between surname and ancestry.” (Ibid.)

Suppression and Aggression Toward Clan Authority

The Gaelic system of clans began eroding in the thirteenth century through internal forces. The authority of the clan chiefs was openly challenged by the Scottish monarchy in the 15th through 17th centuries, through Acts of Parliament and military force. The remaining clans were suppressed and dispersed as the result of the Jacobite attempts to overthrow the British government in the 18th century. Agricultural shifts and economic upheavals in the 19th century led to forced immigration. The Gaelic system of clanship began eroding in the thirteenth century, first through mortality: “In the western Highlands the structure of local authority was further weakened as several major families died out in the male line, so disrupting a key element in the system of administrative control which had developed in the thirteenth century.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) The balance of power of other areas of Scotland was also affected: “The power of the state in eastern Inverness, Moray and Nairn has depended on the co-operation and support of three leading families and their kindred: Randolphs (created earls of Moray) Murrays and earls of Ross. In the later fourteenth century, all these families died out in the senior male line and a struggle for power began. Alexander Stewart, third son of Robert II (Wolf of Badnoch) was triumphant.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) The clan system itself was inherently unstable since “Clans competed with each other for land and tribute. One clan's gain was another's loss” and “the competitive nature of chiefly systems made the eruption and subsequent collapse of complex alliance structures a commonplace occurrence.” (Dodgshon, Robert A. 1998. From Chiefs to Landlords: Social and Economic Change in the Western Highlands and Islands, c.1493-1820. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.) The enforcement of feudalism based on royal favor and the adaptation of inheritable surnames also began dissolving the cohesion of the clans and the responsibilities between the clan members and their chiefs. This began "the long death of clanship." (T.M. Devine. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) Many of the old clans eventually died out: “The very names have in many cases vanished, and all the old traditions of the countryside which they inherited from their fathers have gone with them.” (MacBride, MacKenzie. 1911. Arran of the Bens, the Glens, and the Brave. Edinburgh: T.N. Foulis) For example, a Gaelic proverb refers to “Clann Bhridean agus clan Ennain” as being the “eldest children” in Arran. These names are no longer in use or have been Anglicized. These are amongst the old names such as “MacLouie (MacLoy or Fullarton), MacCook (in Gaelic, MacCug), MacDavid or Davidson, MacGilker” and “MacMhurrich or MacVurich (which has been whittled down to Murchie and Currie).” (Ibid.) Central Government The rule of a central government was also a factor of its demise: “As the region was drawn more and more under the rule of central authority, and as its economy was subjected to the pressures and demands of a market economy, the coherence of the clan system and its economy was gradually undermined.” (Dodgshon, Robert A. 1998. From Chiefs to Landlords: Social and Economic Change in the Western Highlands and Islands, c.1493-1820. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.) In time, the Crown also worked to assert its authority over those clans whose territory lay deep within the heart of the Highlands, but it did so more slowly and by forcing local chiefs to acknowledge the Crown as their superior and to hold land from it by charter grant, though some displacements did take place. (Ibid.) For example, the Norman monarch King James I attempted to dominate the powerful Alexander, Earl of Ross and Lord of the Isles, one of the major holdouts of Gaelic tanistry. This began a tradition of the Stewarts openly attacking the power and authority of the remaining clan chiefs. “In 1429, James I summoned 50 clan chiefs to a parliament in Inverness - and promptly imprisoned them” and “three chiefs were hanged as an example.” (Moffat, Alistair. 2015. Scotland: A History from Earliest Times. Edinburgh: Birlinn Limited.) During the reign of James III in the middle of the fifteenth century, the Lord of the Isles, John MacDonald, ruled over territories in the Hebrides, the western Highlands and the north-east. In 1462, he signed the Treaty of Westminster with Edward IV of England. The terms were that if Edward conquered Scotland, MacDonald would receive lands north of the Firth of Forth and James Douglas, 9th Earl of Douglas (who had been attainted in 1455), would receive everything else. MacDonald was accused of treason, his land was forfeited, and his title was reduced to Lord of Parliament. James IV forcibly dissolved the Lordship of the Isles in 1493 and in 1496 the King’s Privy Council ordered that the clan chiefs in the region would be held responsible by the king for crimes of the islanders. Two years later, Parliament passed the Act of Revocation of 1498 that undermined the remaining clan chiefs' titles to their lands. When James V succeeded his father in 1513, he continued to battle the rebelling clans of the Western Isles. He also subdued the families and clans of the Scottish and English borders, once the region ruled by his predecessor David I as the “Prince of Cumbrians.” After his daughter, Mary, Queen of Scots, abdicated in 1567, Scotland endured a series of regencies until her son James VI reached majority in 1579. Starting in 1587, some landowners “were required to find sureties ranging from £2,000 to £20,000 for the good behaviour of their tenants, but this sanction had only limited effect because many clansmen looked to chiefs who were not their landowners for protection. In other words, the policy did not address the complexity of Highland clanship.” (T.M. Devine. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands, Manchester: Manchester University Press.) Once James VI took the throne, he continued to assert control over the people and land of the Highlands and islands. In December 1597, the Parliament passed the act entitled “The Inhabitants of the lies and Hielandis suld schaw thair haldingis." This Act required that “all landlords, chiefs of clans, and other proprietors of land and fisheries in the Highlands and Isles, should appear in Edinburgh before 15th May, 1598, and produce their deeds.” (Mackenzie, William Cook. 1903. History of the Outer Hebrides. London: Simpkin, Marshall, and Co.) the act was designed to seize their lands since “It was well known to the King and his advisers that several chiefs had lost their title-deeds. It was well known that some of them would find it difficult, if not impossible, to find the required security for their good behaviour.” (Ibid.) With the pretense that the clans in the Highlands and Highlands were in violation of that Act, the Privy Council ratified on June 28, 1598, a contract between King James VI and a group known as the “Fife Adventurers” to “plant policy and civilisation in the hitherto most barbarous Isle of Lewis, with Rona-Lewis and Trotternish, and to develop the extraordinarily rich resources of the same for the public good and the King's profit." (Ibid.) While the resistance was at first weak, after three years of fighting, the “adventurers” were repelled: “And thus ended, in miserable failure, the first attempt to make the subjection of the island a dividend-paying concern.” (Ibid.) James VI’s next attempt to subdue the clan chiefs was in the form of the Statutes of Iona in 1609. Notably, these statutes required the chiefs to send their heirs to the Lowlands for education, prohibited clansmen from carrying arms, and the chiefs were directed to appear personally before the Privy Council at stated intervals. “The statutes were a comprehensive attempt to impose lowland values on Gaeldom, destroy the basis of lawlessness and control the perceived excesses of clanship.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) The expenses of appearing before the Privy Council in Edinburgh were excessive and the punishment for failing to comply was imprisonment for up to six months. “Sir Rory MacLeod of Dunvegan complained to James VI in 1622 that his annual appearances meant that he was away from his estates for more than half the year and this made it difficult for him to manage them effectively” and “The accounts of seventeenth century Highland families, such as the MacDonalds of Clanranald and the MacLeods of Dunvegan, indicate significant and growing outlays on expensive clothing, furniture and exotic foods.” (Ibid.) Tanistry was formally abolished by a legal decision in the reign of James VI and I. It was replaced by the English system of primogeniture, which prioritized inheritance by the eldest son. (Chisholm, Hugh, ed. 1911. "Tanistry". Encyclopædia Britannica. Volume 26, 11th edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.) Jacobite Rebellions Ironically, the remaining highland clans that battled with Scottish monarchs from 1400 onward, began to support the re-instatement of Stuart rule through a series of rebellions in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. While the Scottish Parliament accepted the Protestants Mary Stuart and William of Orange as their true monarchs in 1689, many Catholics did not. Their supporters were called “Jacobites” after the Latin name “Jacobus” for James. The rebellion was short-lived with only a single Jacobite victory. Jacobite clan chiefs agreed to swear allegiance to the new monarchs in exchange for a total of £12,000, to be divided among them as they saw fit. In 1691, the government of William and Mary offered a general amnesty to all clans who took an oath of allegiance to the new monarchs. While Scotland and England shared the same monarch, they did not share the same government until the Union with Scotland Act 1706 passed by the Parliament of England and the Union with England Act 1707 passed by the Parliament of Scotland. This creation of “Great Britain” caused unrest in Scotland that ultimately led to the Jacobite Uprising of 1715. This was also a brief affair but caused the united British Parliament to pass the 1716 Disarming Act aimed primarily at the Gaelic “highlanders.” Although only about a third of the rebelling Jacobites were actually highlanders, the Act outlawed anyone in specific parts of Scotland from having "in his or their custody, use, or bear, broad sword or target, poignard, whinger, or durk, side pistol, gun, or other warlike weapon" unless authorized. This act proved ineffectual. In 1725, Parliament passed another act for “disarming the highlands in that part of Great Britain called Scotland; and for the better securing the peace and quiet of that part of the kingdom." This ignored the fact that some highland clans such as the Campbells were loyal to the British government. On one account, only about forty clans had survived by the time of the Jacobite rebellion of 1745. “Few of the chiefs were Jacobite by principle, and those who sooner or later committed themselves to Prince Charles often did so conditionally, and were rarely given to the ideology that moved so many of the Manchester men or the eastern Scottish Jacobites.” (Duffy, Christopher. 2003. The ’45: Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Untold Story of the Jacobite Rising. London: Cassell.) Forced Emigration The clan chiefs that became feudal landlords began to accumulate a great deal of debt, stemming from the Statutes of Iona. “The problem of debt was a structural one which plagued most of the ruling families of Gaeldom. It produced various responses, including a huge increase in wadsetting (giving a pledge of lands in security for a debt), growing dependence on Edinburgh and Glasgow merchants for bonded loans and a more commercial approach to the management of lands. It was the last reaction which was of profound significance for clanship because the determination of chiefs and leading gentry to extract more income from their lands was at some point likely to conflict directly with their patriarchal responsibilities.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) A significant number of tenants in the Scottish Highlands and Islands were also evicted in a period known as the “Highland Clearances”, replacing the open fields managed on the “run rig” system which allowed shared grazing with large-scale pastoral farms. When landlords raised their rents, the tenants were unable to afford higher costs and landowners would often pay for them to emigrate. (Duffy, Christopher. 2003. The ’45: Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Untold Story of the Jacobite Rising. London: Cassell.) For example: “Archibald Campbell of Knockbuy raised his rental fourfold between 1728 and 1788 on the profits from the cattle trade. First in Kintyre about 1710 and then elsewhere on his properties in 1737, the second Duke of Argyll offered leases to the highest bidder, thus substituting competition for clanship on the largest Highland estate. In the 1730s came the first significant emigrations from Argyll, Sutherland and the central Highlands to Georgia and the Carolinas.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) Another example from 1739: “Around the same time Norman MacLeod of Dunvegan of Dunvegan and Sir Alexander MacDonald of Sleat, the two most powerful chiefs in Skye, devised a scheme to deport some of their tenants, together with wives and children, to America there to be sold as cheap indentured labour for the plantations. In the resulting scandal both of them were threatened with prosecution and it seemed that the ethic of clanship was already being abandoned in favour of profit.” (Ibid.) The primary motivation for the clearances was economic, as many of the clan Chiefs found themselves in financial debt and chose to ignore their obligations under the clan “dùthchas” system. This was the final blow in the clan system, which had been in decline since the Act of Proscription in 1746. (Duffy, Christopher. 2003. The ’45: Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Untold Story of the Jacobite Rising. London: Cassell.)

Revitalized Interest in Clans

The renewed interest in Scottish clans during the 19th century was largely driven by romanticized literature and cultural revival efforts. One of the most influential figures in this movement was Sir Walter Scott, whose works painted a dramatic and nostalgic picture of Highland life. His efforts culminated in King George IV’s visit to Scotland in 1822, which was carefully orchestrated to showcase Highland traditions, including tartan dress and clan identity. Additionally, the Victorian fascination with genealogy and heritage played a role in reviving clan identities. This led to the rise of clan societies, which sought to preserve and promote Scottish heritage. In the early 19th century, the popularity of Scottish culture increased dramatically through literature. “The rise in popularity of historical literature gave Scottish authors a platform for changing public perception of Scotland and an opportunity to invent a new identity for the nation.” (Khan, Caitlin and Dilawar. 2021. “Sir Walter Scott and the Reinvention of Scottish Identity,” Saber and Scroll Journal, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2021. Washington DC: American Public University System.) The first historical novel to gain popularity was Jane Porter’s The Scottish Chiefs, originally published in 1809. This fictional account of William Wallace was constructed within a social framework of her living in Edinburgh. “These living memories were forged in her childhood experiences of a new life in Scotland; her claim to have pioneered the historical novel, confirmed by her friend Walter Scott; her personal, familial, and fictional projections of her public self; and in how contemporaries returned to her, and made known to society, their reception of her personality, her deportment, and her fiction.” (Morton, Graeme. 2012. “The Social Memory of Jane Porter and her Scottish Chiefs,” Scottish Historical Review, Volume 91, Issue 2. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.) Five years later in 1814, the novel Waverley: Or, Tis Sixty Years Since burst into the British consciousness much the same as the Outlander books and TV series today. As with the modern-day equivalent, Waverley was a romantic and sympathetic tale of the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745. Although it was published anonymously, this led to the precipitous rise of lowlander novelist Sir Walter Scott with a series of novels ranging in location and time. These included fictionalized versions of Scottish history such as "Rob Roy" and "A Legend of Montrose." His romantic characterizations of the Scottish Highlands created a passion for all things Scottish. “Through transforming the rebellious Scots into a passionate, romantic and courtly nation, the literary works of Sir Walter Scott and Jane Porter altered public opinion of the past and allowed Scotland to embrace their culture in a new manner.” (Khan, Caitlin and Dilawar. 2021. “Sir Walter Scott and the Reinvention of Scottish Identity,” Saber and Scroll Journal, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2021. Washington DC: American Public University System.) Scott’s books caught the attention of King George IV who decided to visit Scotland in 1822 – the first visit of a reigning monarch to Scotland in nearly two centuries. Scott stage-managed the 21-day visit which elevated the tartan and the kilt to iconic symbols of Scotland. Twenty years later, the new monarch Queen Victoria and Prince Albert visited Scotland and continued the Victorian love affair with Scotland. Scottish History Clubs and Clan Societies Sir Walter Scott himself founded the Bannatyne Club in 1823 for publishing rare and historical Scottish texts. The Spalding Club was stablished in 1839 to publish works related to the history of the north-eastern counties of Scotland. However, the greatest impact was the development of Scottish clan and family societies. The Clan Gregor Society was founded in 1822, Clan Macpherson Society was established in 1865, Clan Macmillan Society in 1891, Clan Cameron Association in 1897, and Clan Mackenzie Society in 1899. These were created “as a means of keeping a sense of kinship among the increasingly scattered members of clans who were being drawn or driven away from their home communities by over-population, the industrial revolution or by opportunities for emigration.” (“Clan Campbell History,” Clan Campbell Society North America.) Since these societies were totally new creations, they were able to draw from a wide variety of ancient Gaelic customs, incorporate the mediaeval feudal adaptations, and develop their own modern traditions

New Definitions and Traditions

The renewed interest in Scottish heritage promulgated a wide range of new traditions and definitions that embraced the concepts of ancient customs and made them relevant in the modern era. Where once the clans were required for daily survival, people began to join clans for the pursuit of kinship, heritage, and community. Clans evolved into clan and family societies, with unique histories and membership requirements. Heraldry adapted to respond to the increased desire for connection with the traditional custom of a clan chief. New Definition of Clan As noted, the original identification of a clan was through the ancient Gaelic tradition of the land, the people, and a recognized chief. As noted, “a clan without land was a broken clan.” (Dodgshon, Robert A. 1998. From Chiefs to Landlords: Social and Economic Change in the Western Highlands and Islands, c.1493-1820. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.) However, with descendants of clan members dispersed throughout the world, clan and family societies found other ways to organize and, for many of them, to legally incorporate. Most of the modern clan and family societies have chosen to use the word “clan” in their name, regardless of the cultural origins of the clans and families themselves. Some people believe that the only true “clans” are those that were based in the geographic area known as the “highlands.” However, “fourteenth century chroniclers who noted differences in culture, dress, speech and social behaviour between the Highlands and the Lowlands failed to comment on clanship as a distinguishing characteristic.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) Societies embraced the word “clan” as a short-hand way of identifying their organization as based on a Scottish kinship group, regardless of their ethnic origins. Of the 157 known clan and family societies, 146 have the word “clan” in their society name. The 23 Norman societies include Clan Hall Society, Clan Carmichael USA, and Clan Maitland Society of North America. The 12 Brythonic or Briton groups include Clan Fraser Society of North America, Clan Carruthers Society, and Clan Wallace Society. The seven with Norse origins include Clan Oliphant Worldwide, Clan Gunn Society NA, and Clan Sinclair USA. Reinventing Clan Membership Membership in the ancient clans was initially based on kinship but also included other families and individuals living on their dùthchas. “The blood ties between the ruling families and the ordinary clansmen were largely mythical but the assumption of consanguinity, suggested in the very word clann, i.e. children, gave an emotional bond which helped to cement social cohesion with clanship.” (Devine, Thomas Martin. 1994. Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands. Manchester: Manchester University Press.) A stronger connection to a clan was through the land, since clan evolution “makes nonsense of any claim that the clans were united through ties of blood. The territorial possessions of many clans were often in a state of constant flux as small kinship groups were overwhelmed and absorbed by the expansion of greater rivals, and it was inevitable that in such cases there were changes of allegiance and that individuals adopted the identity of locally dominant clans for sound reasons of security and survival.” (Ibid.) Such “birthright citizenship” is no longer possible for people spread beyond the boundaries of the original dùthchas. In addition, a clan did not consist of those of the same surname, because surnames did not become at all common until the seventeenth century when clanship was already in decline. Rather it was made up of those who followed the same chief whatever their own lineage. (Ibid.) Therefore, modern-day clan and family societies have created new ways to determine membership that are not based on their current residence on ancestral lands. Although not strictly authentic in the Gaelic sense, many clan and family societies base their membership on surnames and genealogy. For example, the American Clan Gregor Society clearly states that it is “a genealogically based Society meaning members must meet certain requirements in their family history” and “Lineal Members must be able to trace his/her ancestry to Scotland or the Americas prior to 1870.” The Society allows for “Provisional Members” who believe “they are eligible as a lineal member but lacks sufficient material to support their eligibility.” Similarly, but less restrictively, membership in the Clan Hall Society is open “to all with a Hall Surname, a Hall in your ancestral lineage, or DNA testing shows a genetic relationship with someone of Hall heritage.” While the most common determinate of clan kinship is the surname, this is not always accurate due to some historical anomalies. For example, Simon Fraser, 11th Lord Lovatt, (c. 1667 – 1747) sought to increase the number of clansmen so he offered a “boll o' meal” to change his name to Fraser. “And those 'boll o'meal Frasers’ are still known in the Aird district.” (Marshall, Sam. “Moray Firth Radio,” Am Baile – Highland History and Culture.) This evolved into the Gaelic saying “Frisealach am boll a mine” or "Fraser for a boll of meal." The name "MacGregor" was banned in Scotland during two periods: from 1603 to 1661 and again from 1693 to 1784. King James VI issued an edict enacted through his Privy Council proclaiming the name MacGregor ‘altogidder abolished’ meaning that those who bore the name must renounce it or suffer death. (“About the MacGregors,” The Clan Gregor Society.) Under this ban, MacGregors were forced to renounce their name and adopt aliases, such as Grant, Stewart, or Ramsay. The ban was eventually lifted in 1784. As a result, the American Clan Gregor recognizes as part of their clan 19 different “Documented Aliases of MacGregor from the Proscription,” 48 “Traditional Aliases with little documented evidence,” and 35 “Other Clan names that are known to have been used by the MacGregors.” (Ibid.) Having an ancestor names “Tammas” or “Thomas” is also not a determinate of membership in a specific clan. "MacTavish" originates from the Gaelic "Mac Tamhais," meaning "son of Tammas." "Tammas" is the Gaelic form of the name "Thomas." The name is historically associated with the Highlands, particularly Argyllshire. “MacThomas" originates from the Gaelic "Mac Tòmais," which translates to "son of Thomas." Clan MacThomas is historically associated with the Highlands, particularly the region of Glenshee in Perthshire. Over time, the name "MacThomas" has seen various spellings, including McThomas, MacThomais, and MacTavish. Both clans have “Chiefs of the Name and Arms” as members of the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs. Another complication of strictly using surnames for clan membership is the modern tradition of “septs” or families thought to be associated with the chiefly line. The word “sept” has been used since 1518 to denote “a branch of a family.” The first known reference to “septs and dependents” with their clans was published in 1896. (Adam, Frank. 1896. What is My Tartan? or The Clans of Scotland, with Their Septs and Dependents. Edinburgh and London: W. A. K. Johnston, Ltd.) More publications follow suit in 1908 and 1923. (Adams, Frank. 1908. The Clans, Septs & Regiments of the Scottish Highlands. Edinburgh and London: W. A. K. Johnston, Ltd.) (Eyre-Todd, George. 1923. The Highland Clans of Scotland: Their History and Traditions. New York: D. Appleton and Company.) In the later part of the twentieth century, the term “sept” fell out of favor with some researchers: “The preferred modern usage is to simply describe these as what they are – surnames of the main family and of allied and dependent families.” (Smith, Philip D. 1986. Tartan For Me!, 3rd Edition.) Other researchers noted that “the subject of septs is a contentious one” but they include a “guide to the possible connections a name may have to a recognized clan or family…” (Plean, George Way, and Squire, Romilly. 1994. Scottish Clan & Family Encyclopedia. HarperCollinsPublishers.) Some clan and family societies go beyond offering membership based on surnames. For example, Clan Forbes Chief Malcolm, Lord Forbes, states that “My own personal view is that anyone – whatever their current name – who regards themselves as in any way associated with the clan should be welcomed with open arms! In this troubled world, I think there is every reason for encouragement to be given to anyone who would like to be associated to our peaceful clan where grace is our guide.” (Clan Forbes Society.) Clan Davidson Society of North America states “While some Scottish Clan Societies are very restrictive in determining who they will allow to join their group, we in CDS-USA think that’s a pretty silly, sectarian and very outdated way of looking at this issue.” The website continues: “Most Americans whose families have been in North America for even a few generations have mixed ethnicity in their respective gene pools” and “if the information you find on our website makes your temperature rise and your heart beat more strongly and quickly, then you will probably find that joining the Society is the right thing for you to do.” (Clan Davidson Society of North America) Chief of the Name and Arms Another modern invention was the category of “Chief of the Name and Arms” in terms of coats of arms granted by the Lord Lyon King of Arms. For at least a millennium, Gaelic chiefships existed without the Norman imposition of heraldry. In the cases when clan chiefs were granted feudal lands and titles by the monarch, the designation of “clan chief” may have been included in their grant of arms. For example, the 1870 grant of arms for Donald Cameron of Lochiel states that he is “the undoubted representative and chief of the Family of Lochiel and Chief of the Clan Cameron.” The 1915 grant of arms for Robert Lister Macneil of Barra proved to be a more complex case since his older brother Paul Humphrey Macneil “became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America.” This was apparently cause enough for his father Roderick Ambrose Macneil “to assure the succession and perpetuity of the chiefship of his Clan and the honours of his house, did accordingly in the exercise of powers competent to him as Chief of the said Macneils of Barra nominate and appoint the Petitioner his second son to succeed him as Chief and did assign to him as his successor full right to the Ensigns Armorial pertaining to the Chief of the Macneils of Barra.” This recognition as clan chief is not included in all grants of arms. For example, Clan Hamilton traces its origin to the Earls of Mellent in Normandy who arrived in Britain with William the Conqueror in 1066 CE. The current Duke of Hamilton, Alexander Douglas Douglas-Hamilton, is recognized by the Clan Hamilton Society as its clan chief and is a member of the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs. However, the designation of “clan chief” does not appear in the 1900 grant of arms of his great-grandfather, Alfred Douglas Douglas-Hamilton who is styled “Duke of Hamilton, Marquess of Douglas and Clydesdale, Earl of Angus, Arran, Lanark and Selkirk, Baron Hamilton, Abernathy, Jedburgh Forest, Avon, Inverdale, Polmont, Machanshire, Daer, Shortcheagh, Duke of Brandon and Baron Dutton.” Only later in the twentieth century did the Lord Lyon create the term “Chief of the Name and Arms.” The designation hints at a clan chief but does not explicitly state the claim. The reason may well be that neither the Scottish Parliament nor the later British Parliament granted the Lord Lyon the authority to determine a “clan chief.” In fact, the Court of Session has ruled that the Lord Lyon King of Arms has no jurisdiction “to decide a disputed question of chiefship or chieftainship.” Since the Lord Lyon could not issue regulations based on law, instead he has offered “Guidance Note” based on his opinion for “Succession of Chiefs of Clans and Families.” (Morrow, Dr. Joseph J. 2021. “Guidance Note; Chiefs of Clans and Families; Succession of Chiefs; Family Conventions; Nomination of Heir,” Court of the Lord Lyon. https://courtofthelordlyon.scot/.) Most strikingly, the Lord Lyon embraces all “clans and families” regardless of their cultural origin. Some academics argue that only surnames based in Gaelic heritage may be called “clans” and therefore have chiefs. The Lord Lyon does not forbid Norman families, without such heritage, from matriculating arms as a “Chief of the Name and Arms.” Learn more here: "Scottish Law Regarding Clans and Chiefs" (https://www.cosca.scot/post/scottish-law-regarding-clans-and-chiefs) and "Becoming Chief: The State of Scottish Chiefship in the 21st Century. (https://www.cosca.scot/post/becoming-chief) Commander Lord Lyon King of Arms created another modern heraldic term called “Commander.” The increasing interest in clan and family societies in the 19th and 20th centuries developed into more attention to clan chiefs. However, many chiefly lines had died out in the preceding centuries. For example, Swene MacEwen died in 1493 and left the line of chiefs of the MacEwens of the Otter untraced. Aulay MacAulay of Ardencaple was the 12th and last chief of Clan MacAulay who died in 1767 without an heir. When no ancestor of an ancient clan chief could be determined, modern clan and family societies needed another modern tradition to assist them. Since the Lord Lyon could not issue regulations based on law, instead he has offered (Morrow, Dr. Joseph J. 2021. “Guidance Note; Chiefs of Clans and Families; Succession of Chiefs; Family Conventions; Nomination of Heir,” Court of the Lord Lyon. https://courtofthelordlyon.scot/.) The Lord Lyon’s “Guidance Note” for “Succession of Chiefs of Clans and Families” include the procedures required to elect unanimously a “Commander” for two consecutive five-year terms. If unopposed, this “Commander” may be granted the heraldic title of “Chief of the Name and Arms.” Many clan and family societies have chosen to follow these guidelines. For example, the Clan MacEwan Society approached actor and writer Sir John R. H. McEwen, 5th Baronet of Marchmont and Bardrochat, to be nominated as Commander. Sir John was appointed Commander in 2014 for an initial period of five years. In 2019 the appointment was again ratified by the Clan. On June 8, 2024, the Society held a MacEwen Family Convention in Otter Ferry, Argyll, where members of the international Clan MacEwen affirmed their support for Sir John “to Petition the Crown to commence a new chiefly line.” However, even though Clan MacAulay Association had followed these guidelines, the Lord Lyon rejected their choice for Commander and eventual chief. The Association then rejected his rejection. As a result, Clan MacAulay returned to their Gaelic roots and “established a democratic process for the election of their chief.” (Newsroom. 2002, August 3. “Clan Adopts Democratic Rule To Take A New Chief,” Aberdeen Press and Journal.) Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs Another modern invention is the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs (SCSC.) The Council was founded in 1951 by the then Lord High Constable of Scotland, the Countess of Erroll and Chief of the Hays. The group includes those who are the heads of the Name and Arms of their clan or family (or their representatives) and who have taken up membership through invitation. Its purpose is to serve as a forum to consider matters affecting Scottish chiefs and to represent their views and interests to government, media and public. Similar to the Lord Lyon, the Council does not discriminate against families that are not Gaelic and therefore not traditionally considered a “clan.” In fact, many current members trace their origins to Norman settlers who arrived in Scotland between the 11th and 13th centuries. These include the Earl of Elgin & Kincardine (Bruce), Dr. Simon Peter Carruthers of Holmains, the Lady Saltoun (Fraser), the Marquess of Huntly (Gordon), the Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Erroll (Hay), the Earl of Lindsay, the Earl of Eglinton & Winton (Montgomerie), the Earl of Dalhousie (Ramsey), the Earl of Caithness (Sinclair), and Michael Wemyss of Wemyss. While many chiefs are members of the SCSC, not all chiefs choose to join. For example, Malcolm, 23rd Lord Forbes and Premier Lord of Scotland, has chosen not to participate. Instead, he deals directly with members of his clan through their visits to Castle Forbes and through the Clan Forbes Society.

Modern Clans and Chiefs

The evolution of clans continues today with the institutions of clan and family societies. While the ancient Gaelic clans were critical for physical survival, today people attempt to “find my clan” to establish kinship, to connect with their Scottish heritage, and to join a welcoming community.

Since they are reinventions of the extinct tribal units, these societies can draw from a wealth of authentic traditions from the Picts, Gaels, Britons, Vikings, and Normans, as well as the more recent traditions. No matter their ethnic heritage, more families are creating clan societies to celebrate their common heritage. In addition, the Lord Lyon, King of Arms, is creating more “commanders” and “chiefs of the name and arms” to satisfy the need for ceremonial positions in the traditional style.

Heritage

When people join clan and family societies, they are looking for a sense of connection with their heritage. This heritage includes traditions, culture, and values passed down from previous generations, such as historical sites, artifacts, language, and customs. In a broader sense, it represents identity and continuity, shaping how communities and individuals understand their past.

Societies provide that sense of connection in many ways:

Historical Research & Documentation: Many societies collaborate with historians and genealogists to verify clan histories, ensuring that information is based on credible sources rather than myths.
Archival Preservation: Maintaining records, manuscripts, and artifacts in digital or physical archives helps safeguard historical accuracy.
Expert Consultation: Engaging scholars specializing in Scottish history and heraldry ensures that traditions are correctly interpreted and presented.
Collaboration with National Institutions: Working with organizations like the National Records of Scotland or the network of Scottish Family History Centers.

Society members also become more concerned with their family legacy, what they leave behind for the future. It can be material—like wealth or achievements—or intangible, like values, ideas, and influence. Legacy is often shaped by choices and actions, making it something deliberately created rather than simply inherited. Clan and family societies can strengthen their connection to their modern-day legacy in Scotland through several meaningful approaches:

Preserving Historic Sites: Many clans maintain ancestral lands, castles, churches or monuments that serve as tangible links to their heritage. Supporting restoration efforts and promoting visits to these locations help keep the legacy alive.
Participating in Cultural Events: Organizing Highland games, clan gatherings, and heritage festivals in Scotland fosters a direct connection between modern members and their ancestral homeland.
Encouraging Sponsorship: Some clans engage in charitable work or environmental conservation efforts in Scotland, reinforcing their ongoing presence and impact.

Community

A sense of community is vital for members of a clan or family society because it fosters belonging, preserves shared heritage, and strengthens cultural identity. Historically, clans were more than just family units—they were social structures that provided protection, support, and a sense of purpose. In modern times, this sense of community helps members connect with their roots, celebrate traditions, and ensure the continuity of their cultural legacy.

Here are some examples of how societies develop and nurture this community:

Cultural Events and Gatherings: Hosting clan tents at Scottish festivals and highland games and conducting clan gatherings allow members to come together, celebrate their heritage, and build relationships.
Ancestral Tours: Tours of Scotland provide a tangible connection to the past, allowing members to walk in the footsteps of their ancestors and experience the landscapes, landmarks, and traditions that shaped their heritage. Many societies visit historical sites, castles, museums, heritage centers, and significant landmarks. These trips strengthen relationships among members, creating shared memories and reinforcing the sense of community within the society.
Cultivating Personal Connections: Developing friendships with clan and family members living in Scotland creates an enduring bond. Keep in touch through social media and build a sense of a broader family.
Digital Platforms: Creating online forums, social media groups, or virtual events can connect members across the globe, making the community accessible to those who can't attend in person.
Genealogical Research: Supporting members in tracing their ancestry and understanding their connection to the clan can foster a personal sense of belonging.
Youth Engagement: Organizing activities for younger members, such as storytelling sessions or cultural competitions, ensures that traditions are passed down to future generations. These events will also strengthen relationships with their parents and grandparents.

These efforts not only celebrate the past but also adapt to the present, ensuring that the clan remains a vibrant and inclusive community.

Clans are continuing to evolve. The future of clan and family societies will be shaped by a blend of tradition and modernity, as they adapt to contemporary challenges while preserving their cultural heritage. Here are some examples:

Collaboration: Clan and family societies can collaborate with each other on projects of common interest, especially since more members may be involved in several clan societies. One example is the Loch Lomond Project sponsored by Clan Colquhoun International Society (CCIS), involving seven clans and families historically connected to the Loch Lomond area: Colquhoun, MacArthur, Hunter, Graham, Buchanan, MacFarlane, and McEwen. Another project was the Clan Campbell Society North America effort to rejuvenate the Clan Community in the Rocky Mountain Region by coordinating “Clan Conclaves” at local events with multiple societies.
Diversity: Modern clans may focus on inclusivity, welcoming members who share an interest in the clan's heritage, even if they lack direct ancestral ties. This approach can broaden participation and ensure the clan's relevance in a diverse world.
Youth Engagement: Engaging adults under 30 is vital for clan and family societies to ensure their cultural heritage and traditions remain vibrant and relevant. Younger generations bring fresh perspectives, energy, and adaptability, which are essential for evolving clan practices to fit modern contexts. However, they also have different interests than the older generation of members. These include sports, music, popular culture, career development, and networking. They are also more comfortable with modern business practices and social interactions based on technology. Societies need to adapt to these interests and methods of communication.
Leadership: Clan and family societies face several leadership challenges as they navigate the future, particularly in balancing tradition with modernity. The key challenge is the ability to adapt and “let go” of their roles in order to allow for another generation to lead. However, their mentorship is critical to ensuring that younger generations are prepared to take on leadership roles. Societies must also address the need for inclusivity, ensuring that members from diverse backgrounds feel welcomed and valued. This includes engaging women, younger members, and those from the global diaspora. Traditional leadership structures may need to evolve to incorporate modern governance practices, such as transparency, accountability, and democratic decision-making, while still honoring cultural heritage. With increasing globalization, maintaining a strong sense of clan identity while adapting to a rapidly changing world is a significant challenge. Leaders must find ways to make traditions relevant to contemporary life.
Advocacy: While changes within their societies are critical, they must also assess the opportunities and threats outside their own organizations. Clan and family societies must take on a more active role in generating support from Scottish cultural institutions such as the National Trust for Scotland, the Scottish Government, and other heritage organizations. The National Trust for Scotland Foundation USA solicits donations from clan and family societies in exchange for a small discount for National Trust for Scotland membership. However, they provide little support or information regarding the clans and families whose heritage sites they manage. Likewise, the Scottish Government regularly exploits the Scottish diaspora in the United States for promoting business in Scotland. Unfortunately, their tangible support is negligible. For example, of the estimated 40 million people worldwide who are part of the Scottish diaspora, about 25 million (or at least 60%) reside in the United States. However, only £7,165 or 14% of the £50,000 in grants awarded in 20024-2025 through the Scottish Government’s “Scottish Connections Fund” went to American nonprofits. Two-thirds of that (£4,855) was granted for a project to promote Scottish (not American) musicians.

COSCA continues its dedication to serving the Scottish heritage societies as we share our successes, build our leadership, and face the future with confidence.

Learn more here: COSCA Member Services