|
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.” |
