Clan Names

[Farlander]

How did Scottish clans traditionally get their name? I believe that in most cases, the name came from the first clan chief, but not always. For example, Gilchrist was the first chief of Clan MacFarlane way back in 1225. It was not until 1329 when Parlan (the great grandson of Gilchrist) became clan cheif, did the current clan name, 'MacFarlane' (son of Parlan) come about.

Are there other clans who's name does not come from the first chief?

Who decides a clan's name? Is it part of the charter (thus the Earl, Duke or King making the charter)
or
the chief that decides
or
something that the Lord Lyon comes up with
or
something else entirely?

Would the answers to my questions vary depending on the time being discussed?

Can anyone point me to a good reference explaining these things?

[Wompet]

I think the answer varies not on the time, but on the circumstances involved.
For example, the Clan Robertson has two names.
Donnachaidh (children of Duncan), which is either derived from either King Duncan I (father of King Malcolm Canmore, first of the Canmore kings) or Duncan the Stout (the first chief), I forget which.
Robertson is derived from Chief Robert the Grizzled, who captured the assassins of King James I. King James II rewarded the chief with a barony, after which the clan was referred to as Robertson.

For specific clans, you might want to check their web pages - it's usually in the clan history section.

[EagleJCS]

.....

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Clan Scott's chief is the Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry (the Buccleuch branch of the family is recognized as the most senior). When Buccleuch was first recognized as the Chief of Clan Scott isn't recorded in the info I have found so far.

Beccleuch (like Queensberry) is a title; Scott is His Grace's family name, in the same way that Merlin Hay, Earl of Erroll, is the Chief of Clan Hay. I believe the earliest record of the Scott surname dates to a charter circa 1120. Some time around 1300 Sir Richard Scott built his residence at Beccleuch and became known as Sir Richard Scott of Becculeuch. The Earldom of Becculeuch created in 1619, and elevated to a Dukedom in 1663.

[Stratherrick]

Many clan names are uncertain of their origins, my own being one of them!

Various explanations are given for us Frasers, including the suggestion that our Scoto-Norman ancestors did something with strawberries (fraise in French)!

What I do run with is that, for all the documentary evidence of us originally coming over from Anjou in Normandy with ol' Willy's rabble, the Frasers, as we have known them for the past thousand years, developed a distinctive Highland/Gaelic take on family/clan life that is separate from their forbears. That's not to deny the French in my roots, zut alors, non! It's more that the French connection is now just one part of the Fraser make up, as it is for a lot of clans. But, the way we've lived is more akin to the local Highlanders rather than the Normans.

Confused? I am!

Slainte

Bruce (Fraser)

[EagleJCS]

.....

[gilmore]

Doh! I knew that. I posted while under the influence of a medium grade fever and wasn't thinking clearly.

Actually, until recently (the last 5 years or so?) His Grace's family name is Montagu Douglas Scott (unhyphenated). Has been since 1810. The late Duke decided to return to using just Scott as his patronymic and encouraged his children to do the same. However, the current Duke uses the modern convention of using his title (Buccleuch) as his last name when signing correspondence. I believe his children are using 'Scott', though.

...

Not quite.

The convention---the rule set out by Lord Lyon---is that the chief of a clan must bear the clan's name as his surname, unhyphenated, unadorned.

When a peer, or even a Scots baron aka a laird, signs his name, he inscribes the territorial or other designation of his title, rather than his surname. Here, the surname is "Scott," but the legal and customary signature is "Buccleuch."

[EagleJCS]

I didn't want to start a discussion on the semantics of titles and addresses and signatures, etc., etc. I was just trying to provide examples based on what I've seen in print via the clan society newsletter and on the Buccleuch websites.

I'll shut up now...

Apologies for the improper use of the word semantics above (see gilmore's reply below). It should have more properly been 'the etiquette' or 'the niceties'.

[JSFMACLJR]

When a peer, or even a Scots baron aka a laird, signs his name, he inscribes the territorial or other designation of his title, rather than his surname. Here, the surname is "Scott," but the legal and customary signature is "Buccleuch."

Not quite. A peer may sign his name using only his designation ( eg Sir Torquhil Campbell, Duke of Argyll, signs his name "Argyll" ). A feudal baron, and someone with a territorial desgnation by law must sign his name "MacL of X" so that nobody will mistake them for a peer. Only peers and bishops can sign only their title.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I was trying to show that even though the clan name is Scott, the chief is not known as the Duke of Scott, but as the Duke of Buccleuch, whereas, for example, the Chief of Haig is The Rt Hon The Earl of Haig, whose patronymic is also Haig.

Most titled nobles use their territorial designation as their title. Since the Scott's of Beccleuch have resided (or at least owned) Beccleuch since the 13th century it is only reasonable that they would take their territorial designation as their title.

Haig, who was created Earl of Haig, Viscount Dawick, and Baron Haig of Bemersyde, all in 1919, chose to keep his name rather than use the ancient territorial designation of Bemersyde, which (at least) he did append to his baronial title.

This is the thing when one is given a title by the sovereign-- they are pretty much free to take whatever territorial designation they want. Most choose the name of their estate, or the townlands where they were born, or some such similar place name. Others, with seemingly less imagination, just use their family name.