|
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.” |
