Alvis Tartan

[jbaker42j]

My paternal grandmothers maiden name is Alvis and was said to be of Scottish or Irish decent. Im trying to find out as much about the Alvis of Lee tartan as I can and if this tartan is linked to the surname.

[ardchoille]

My paternal grandmothers maiden name is Alvis and was said to be of Scottish or Irish decent. Im trying to find out as much about the Alvis of Lee tartan as I can and if this tartan is linked to the surname.

I've found this one at http://tartans.byair.net/

And Alvis of Lee is indeed listed at http://houseoftartan.co.uk/house/tfinder.htm.

And I found this one at the Tartan Ferret - very good information here.

I hope that helps.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

This appears to be a personal tartan, as opposed to a clan tartan, and would probably only apply to Mr. Alvis (presumably the former Baron of Lee) his immediate family and retainers. I note that this tartan was registered in 1985 the year the barony and castle of Lee was sold to E. Leslie Peter, an American industrialist. In 1988 E. Leslie Peter of Lee, the Baron of Lee, registered a vaguely similar tartan as "Peter of Lee Tartan". This tartan was worn by the Baron of Lee, the Lady of Lee, his son and grandchildren. It was also worn by his domestic staff, and kilts in Peter of Lee tartan were presented to persons as diverse as Prince Bhutalazie of the Zulus, and General Norman Schwartzkopf! The Baron also kitted out a local pipe band, who used to entertain the Baron's guests before dinner at the castle. And believe me, those were some dinner parties. At one, which I particularly remember, Lady Rathdown and I were the only guests present not worth at least half a billion dollars!

But back to the subject. Although Alvis of Lee is no longer the Baron of Lee, he still retains the heritable territorial title "of Lee", as does his heir. So, aside from the personal tartan of Mr. Alvis (formerly of Lee Castle in Lanarkshire), it looks as if there may not be an Alvis tartan.

[jbaker42j]

....kicks rocks.....dang, i really liked that one. Well thats why I asked. Thanks for the great info as usual. You probably saved me some money down the road. Tartan Ferret doesn't have anything for Alves either. Grandma wont be happy

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

....kicks rocks.....dang, i really liked that one. Well thats why I asked. Thanks for the great info as usual. You probably saved me some money down the road. Tartan Ferret doesn't have anything for Alves either. Grandma wont be happy

Well, you could always design a generic "Alvis" tartan based on the Alvis of Lee pattern as a Mothers Day gift for Grandma...

BTW, where'd you get your avatar? Been meaning to compliment you on it since day one.

[jbaker42j]

Well, you could always design a generic "Alvis" tartan based on the Alvis of Lee pattern as a Mothers Day gift for Grandma...

BTW, where'd you get your avatar? Been meaning to compliment you on it since day one.

I was gone for a few days but Thanks! I think I just googled MacMillan Images and found it! Lucky find!

[gilmore]

This appears to be a personal tartan, as opposed to a clan tartan, and would probably only apply to Mr. Alvis (presumably the former Baron of Lee) his immediate family and retainers. I note that this tartan was registered in 1985 the year the barony and castle of Lee was sold to E. Leslie Peter, an American industrialist. ...

But back to the subject. Although Alvis of Lee is no longer the Baron of Lee, he still retains the heritable territorial title "of Lee", as does his heir. ...

Huh?

How can this be?

If the gentleman in question still retains the territorial designation "of Lee" in his name, he should still be owner of the feudal barony of Lee (and of course that is what he would have bought in 1985, since baronies in the peerage are not capable of being sold [unless perhaps you were very tight with some one in the former Labour government.]) The connection of a feudal barony with the actual ownership of the caput, or essential piece of land, of that barony was severed in the Abolition of Feudal Tenures Act of, I believe, 2001. So he could have sold the land and kept the lairdship, as they are more usually designated.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Huh?

How can this be?

If the gentleman in question still retains the territorial designation "of Lee" in his name, he should still be owner of the feudal barony of Lee (and of course that is what he would have bought in 1985, since baronies in the peerage are not capable of being sold [unless perhaps you were very tight with some one in the former Labour government.]) The connection of a feudal barony with the actual ownership of the caput, or essential piece of land, of that barony was severed in the Abolition of Feudal Tenures Act of, I believe, 2001. So he could have sold the land and kept the lairdship, as they are more usually designated.

First we are looking at two distinctly different things: Territorial designations (lairds who may or may not be barons) and Baronies. Possession of either of these allows the holder to use the style "of X" after his name.

In the instance of E. Leslie Peter of Lee, he died several years ago and the estate, along with the barony, was sold to another gentleman whose name escapes me at the moment, but who is none the less styled "of Lee".

Mr. Alvis of Lee (who sold the barony, land and castle to Peter of Lee) retained the style "of Lee" as it had become part of his legal name by letters patent when he was recognized as feudal baron and tenant-in-chief of the Crown. The original owners of the lands and barony of Lee were the Lockharts of Lee, a designation they still retain although they have not possessed either the lands, fortalice, or barony of Lee for quite some time.

It has always been possible to sell the land and retain the barony-- or sell the barony and retain the lands. The barony of Elphinstone being one such example of a barony alienated from the land.

I hope this has cleared things up.

[bjproc]

It has always been possible to sell the land and retain the barony-- or sell the barony and retain the lands. The barony of Elphinstone being one such example of a barony alienated from the land.

I hope this has cleared things up.

funny you should mention Elphinstone, as i believe, my old boss has this barony

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

The present Baron of Elphinstone is General Bailey McCune of Coll-Earn and Elphinstone, Baron of Elphinstone, who presently resides in California. Coll-Earn is a territorial designation of non-baronial status, while the barony is that of Elphinstone.