Armigerous Clans

[Bugbear]

Hmmm, that's interesting. Two questions, though, to bring it back to modern times.

How is it a clan is formed today under Scottish laws or rules?
Under Scottish laws or rules, is an adopted child of a chief not able to become the chief?

On the last question, I'm not understanding how a chief would let the clan become chiefless upon his death.

[Twa_Corbies]

Hmmm, that's interesting. Two questions, though, to bring it back to modern times.

How is it a clan is formed today under Scottish laws or rules?
Under Scottish laws or rules, is an adopted child of a chief not able to become the chief?

On the last question, I'm not understanding how a chief would let the clan become chiefless upon his death.

Generally today if a clan is chiefless and wishes to have a new chief recognized, the clan may convene in a derb finne council to determine who is the next closest living heir to the last chief. Traditionally a chief could appoint a taniste to become his successor according to the old Celtic custom, but the Anglo-Norman conventions of primogeniture have somewhat replaced the Celtic system of tanistry. Under tanistry, the successor need not be the closest heir, but under the system of primogeniture, the heritable line passes to the next closest living heir.

[Bugbear]

Generally today if a clan is chiefless and wishes to have a new chief recognized, the clan may convene in a derb finne council to determine who is the next closest living heir to the last chief. Traditionally a chief could appoint a taniste to become his successor according to the old Celtic custom, but the Anglo-Norman conventions of primogeniture have somewhat replaced the Celtic system of tanistry. Under tanistry, the successor need not be the closest heir, but under the system of primogeniture, the heritable line passes to the next closest living heir.

I understand you to be saying that only a genetic heir , for lack of a better term, may be the successor to a clan chief. That, as it is now, an adopted child may not be the successor to a chief.
Is this what you mean?

[Twa_Corbies]

I understand you to be saying that only a genetic heir , for lack of a better term, may be the successor to a clan chief. That, as it is now, an adopted child may not be the successor to a chief.
Is this what you mean?

I don't know if the question of adoption per se has ever entered the determination of a clan chiefship, but in Scotland a husband may assume his wife's name and their children would carry the maternal surname; which is done in some cases where the estate of the wife is of greater consequence than that of the husband. I do know that clan chiefs may not bear hyphenated names, such as "MacGregor-Gordon" for example - they must bear the clan name alone as their surname, and there are instances where the chiefship has been passed over an individual who was a closer heir, but was disqualified for having a double-barrelled surname; the chiefship in such cases then being passed on to the next closest heir who bore the clan name alone. Chiefship also does not pass on only to the heir male, but may be confirmed upon a female provided that she keeps the clan name and is the closest heir.

[Bugbear]

I don't know if the question of adoption per se has ever entered the determination of a clan chiefship, but in Scotland a husband may assume his wife's name and their children would carry the maternal surname; which is done in some cases where the estate of the wife is of greater consequence than that of the husband. I do know that clan chiefs may not bear hyphenated names, such as "MacGregor-Gordon" for example - they must bear the clan name alone as their surname, and there are instances where the chiefship has been passed over an individual who was a closer heir, but was disqualified for having a double-barrelled surname; the chiefship in such cases then being passed on to the next closest heir who bore the clan name alone. Chiefship also does not pass on only to the heir male, but may be confirmed upon a female provided that she keeps the clan name and is the closest heir.

Hmmm, well I guess it really doesn't matter, now that I think about it, because the whole system seems to be generally geared toward the offspring, and these are somewhat silly acceptions to the general flow of things. Still, the thought did come to me, why would an aging chief with no offspring and known heirs not adopt a child to be the next chief and avoid all this chiefless clan business.

I can understand why a genetic heir would be favored over an adopted child.

I won't worry about it.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Hmmm, that's interesting. Two questions, though, to bring it back to modern times.

How is it a clan is formed today under Scottish laws or rules?

Hi Ted,
this is a pretty lengthy process, and it has been dealt with recently by Sketraw on another thread. If I come across it I'll give you the reference.

Under Scottish laws or rules, is an adopted child of a chief not able to become the chief?

If the chief of clan "X" adopted a child, that child would not be able to inherit the chiefship; it would pass to a cousin, brother, or nephew of the chief. In other words it would go to a "blood relative" of the chief, not a "stranger in blood". The adopted child could inherit everything else (except the undifferenced arms of his adopted father), but not the chiefship of the clan.

On the last question, I'm not understanding how a chief would let the clan become chiefless upon his death.

Well, sometimes the vicissitudes of life result in one dying without an immediate heir. Perhaps the brother of a distant ancestor went to Tasmania in 1850 and the families have lost all track of each other. That person's descendant may be the ex-chief's nearest living relative and as such the chief presumptive. But if he doesn't know he's the heir of the chief...

[Bugbear]

... If the chief of clan "X" adopted a child, that child would not be able to inherit the chiefship; it would pass to a cousin, brother, or nephew of the chief. In other words it would go to a "blood relative" of the chief, not a "stranger in blood". The adopted child could inherit everything else (except the undifferenced arms of his adopted father), but not the chiefship of the clan. ...

Ah! That clears it all up for me; it is only through the genetic or "blood relative." Thank you.

[Scotus]

Twa Generally today if a clan is chiefless and wishes to have a new chief recognized, the clan may convene in a derb finne council to determine who is the next closest living heir to the last chief.

As has been pointed out, this is not how a chief is determined. Only the Lord Lyon determines who the rightful chief is. If were up to the clans to decide, or if we allowed for self-appointed chiefs to emerge, claiming to be the rightful chief, this would be a recipe for chaos and strife within clans. Thankfully, the Lord Lyon is in charge of such things.

Folks, when it comes to Scottish heraldry, do yourself a favour. Don't rely on Wikipedia

I might amend this to say, "when it comes to anything... don't rely on Wikipedia.

[macwilkin]

As has been pointed out, this is not how a chief is determined. Only the Lord Lyon determines who the rightful chief is. If were up to the clans to decide, or if we allowed for self-appointed chiefs to emerge, claiming to be the rightful chief, this would be a recipe for chaos and strife within clans. Thankfully, the Lord Lyon is in charge of such things.

To add to Scotus' post, the following article on our own Sketraw's web site is worth perusing here:

http://www.clan-duncan.co.uk/clan-re...derbhfine.html

Regards,

Todd

[Scotus]

Todd:

Thanks for the link. Good article, easy to understand, etc. I'm certainly no expert on this topic. My interest in heraldry is mainly ecclesiastical.

Just from memory, I recall there is a clan that "elected" a chief. They didn't go through any of the proper channels, but basically thumbed their nose at the Lord Lyon. The man who claims to be their chief is simply that; that is, a man with claims to be their chief only on the basis of being elected.*

Clan MacAlpine is going throught the long process of finding a chief. On their Web site, it states, "Given our Clan’s ancient and unrecorded history, it is not expected that any individual can prove to Lord Lyon's stringent requirements direct descent from our former Chiefs. Thus, we must follow Lyon Court's guidelines and procedures to form an Ad Hoc Derbhfine for the purpose of finding a new Clan Leader, a Commander, who might ultimately become our new Clan Chief."

I also recall that the late chief of our clan (Sir Willliam Cumming) had to drop the hyphen in the name Gordon-Cumming in order to be recognized as the official chief of the clan. Our present chief, Sir Alistair, had to do the same.

Anyway, it's good to have order and accountability.

*Diarmid MacAulay.