Genealogical conundrum

[ThinBlueLine]

Greetings all,

I am not quite sure if this is the right forum for this but it is the only one that looks close. I assuse you that this does relate to Scottish clans/heritage. I am an amateaur genealogist, as many of you probably are, and I have come across an interesting knot in my family tree.
There was a female who apparently had a bastard daughter prior to her marriage. There is no data regarding the father of the bastard and all family trees I have found for the various families just treat the child as being a product of the marriage despite the child retaining the maiden name of the mother and there being a sizable difference between the birth date of the child and the marriage of the mother (around 10 years).
Here is where the Scottish heritage part comes into play. The branch of the family that comes from the husband (non-biological father of the bastard daughter) would connect me to three other clans. Would it be insincere to claim these clan connections? Or should the only claimed connections be those that are blood?
My apologies for the verbose post.

[MacLowlife]

When talking about my own ancestors, I prefer the term "illegitimate". I reserve the B word for people who are alive and vexing me.

Did the stepfather adopt this child and/or raise her as his own? I would suggest this makes her his child and connects her to his clan.

[ThinBlueLine]

MacLowlife,

As far as I can tell the child was adopted and raised as his own despite the surname not being changed, but that may just have been the custom of the time.

[HeathBar]

Are you wanting to join these different clan societies? Really this is a question that only you can answer. Historically, folks didn't lay claim to more than one clan. And even then if it was more than a generation or two back, they didn't even bother. As for myself, I haven't looked any further back than my own name for a clan connection.

[ForresterModern]

I am assuming you are asking this question because your specific lineage hails from the illegitimate daughter rather than one of the other legitimate children of the later marriage.

Most scots feel that you should only use your father's paternal lineage in deciding what clan to belong to/pledge allegiance to, and to wear that clan's tartan and that tartan only (variations not excluded---hunting, ancient, weathered, dress, etc...). Many New World folks of Scottish descent do as you are suggesting by expanding the options of clan tartans available to be worn to include all names that appear somewhere in your bloodline, as I do. So I wear Forrester Modern and Hunting, along with several MacDonald and Douglas variations (as Forrester were septs of both at various times), district and "universal" or national tartans (IoS, Black Isle, Ancient Caledonia, Braveheart, Maple Leaf), and have my first other direct relative bloodline kilt coming in the next month or so in Allen 1996 modern. I have Allens and MacMillans and other names of scottish descent all over my tree, and may as time goes by get kilts in some of those tartans but probably not.

In your case if your nearest scottish connection is through the stepfather of the illegitimate girl who is your direct bloodline, and she was part of that family in the long run whether or not she ever took his name, I would think it okay to wear the stepfather's family name tartan, and consider joining that clan. Beware, though, that there may be a few clans which are more rigid about verifying bloodlines before allowing membership, and could theoretically restrict the wearing of their tartan to members. Not very likely though.

Good luck.

jeff

[davidlpope]

Would it be insincere to claim these clan connections? Or should the only claimed connections be those that are blood?

I don't think that most clan associations really care at all how tenuous one's connection to a "clan" is. That being said, what is the benefit to claiming these "clan connections"? More "justification" for wearing a particular tartan?
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just trying to understand what purpose "making this connection" would really serve.

Cordially,

David

[St. Amish]

I don't think that most clan associations really care at all how tenuous one's connection to a "clan" is.

Ah, but then there are the ones that DO.

Clan Donald in California requires proof of heritage.

[skauwt]

Ah, but then there are the ones that DO.

Clan Donald in California requires proof of heritage.

same goes for the Chisholm clan they have three criteria that must be met before membership is allowed

[macwilkin]

same goes for the Chisholm clan they have three criteria that must be met before membership is allowed

A number of clan societies do. My clan society requires it.

T.

[sp00ky]

Interesting...

The Clan Mackenzie Society is open to..."all Mackenzies, their septs, or any of their descendants, as well as anyone who has an interest in the society.

Plus you have to have $20!