|
Sir Crispin Agnew of
Lochnaw, Baronet, QC, Rothesay Herald of Arms and Chief of Clan Agnew,
also makes mention of Clan ‘septs’ in his article ‘Clans, Families & Septs’;
“It should also be
said that the various Sept lists, which are published in the various
Clans and Tartan books, have no official authority. They merely
represent some person's, (usually in the Victorian eras) views of which
name groups were in a particular clan's territory. Thus we find members
of a clan described, as being persons owing allegiance to their chief
"be pretence of blud or place of thare duelling". In addition to blood
members of the clan, certain families have a tradition (even if the
tradition can with the aid of modern records be shown to be wrong)
descent from a particular clan chief. They are, of course, still
recognised as being members of the clan.
Historically, the
concept of "clan territory" also gives rise to difficulty, particularly
as certain names or Septs claim allegiance to a particular chief,
because they come from his territory. The extent of the territory of any
particular chief varied from time to time depending on the waxing and
waning of his power. Thus a particular name living on the boundaries of
a clan's territory would find that while the chiefs power was on the up
they would owe him allegiance but - if his power declined
retrospectively at some arbitrary' date which the compiler of the list
has selected. Often the names are Scotland-wide and so it is difficult
to say that particular name belongs to a particular clan. Often surnames
are shown as potentially being members of a number of clans, and this is
because a number of that name has been found in each different clan's
territory. Generally speaking, if a person has a particular sept name
which can he attributed to a number of clans, either they should
determine from what part of Scotland their family originally came and
owe allegiance to the clan of that area or, alternatively, if they do
not know where they came from, they should perhaps owe allegiance to the
clan to which their family had traditionally owed allegiance.
Alternatively, they may offer their allegiance to any of the particular
named clans in the hope that the chief will accept them as a member of
his clan. Equally, as has already been said, with the variations from
time to time of particular chiefly territories, it can be said that at
one particular era some names were members of or owed allegiance to a
particular chief while a century later their allegiance may well have
been owed elsewhere.
In summary,
therefore, the right to belong to a clan or family, which are the same
thing, is a matter for the determination of the chief who is entitled to
accept or reject persons who offer him their allegiance.” |
