Quote Originally Posted by Phil View Post
I’m afraid I seem to be rather good at that and really must try to be more considerate of the sincerely held beliefs and aspirations of others when it comes to clans, heraldry and other matters Scottish.
In mitigation I would only say that I, and I believe a substantial majority of fellow Scots, have no connection with any so-called “clan” other than an awareness of their existence as historical entities which no longer exist in any meaningful way or with any significance whatsoever to society in the 21st century. The days are not so far off when Scottish people were feudally bound to landowners as vassals and such bondsmen as miners only had this hereditary serfdom lifted in the 19th century. In fact, feudalism generally in Scotland was only abolished as recently as 1974 and I, myself, was a vassal under this system, paying feu duty to a feudal superior for the pleasure of allowing me to occupy the house I had bought.
While this serfdom may come as a shock to some raised to the “land of the free” they should try to understand how it has shaped and coloured the views of those so recently released from their feudal shackles. In particular towards those who would still seek to “lord it” over their fellow man, who live by the trappings of feudal privilege such as lords, chiefs etc., and those who try to exercise a supposed superiority by the use of arcane mediaeval flummery. There was never really anything romantic about the clan system which only existed to perpetuate the privileges of a very few land-owning individuals by holding their many clansmen in abject servitude purely for their own selfish ends. And when these ends no longer required clansmen to till their fields, tend their cattle and spill their blood on their behalf they had little compunction in dispensing with them, frequently in the cruellest ways imaginable. This is how so many found themselves dispossessed, homeless and shipped off to the far corners of the world to face an unknown and uncertain future. It says much for their hard work and determination that they survived in such hostile places and that their descendants survive to this day. It says nothing for the clan system, however, and for those privileged chiefs and other landowners who cast them aside without a further thought. You may, perhaps, understand why I completely fail to understand how anyone would wish to perpetuate something that so completely failed its adherents in the past and has nothing to offer but a simplistic romanticism nowadays.
By all means join clan societies but do so in the knowledge of what they truly represent. That is all I ask.
I'm still rather fascinated with the state of land ownership in Scotland (is it the same in England?). I worked several stints on a sheep croft in Sutherland, and when the owner told me that she owned her house but not the land it sat on... I couldn't get my head around it! Apparently all the land that her village sat on belonged to some Lady Such-and-such (given to her as a birthday present). I imagine it's like having an absentee landlord, but if the landlord is also a slum lord you're really f'd. And it's even worse cause you OWN your house and caint just up and leave... I can certainly understand Phil's frustration and cynicism after having to deal with that in a day to day real life scenario. I've certainly had my share of slum landlords.

I've often wondered myself why the clan chiefs are still "revered" or given some sort of status in British society, since there were really only a handful that were titled nobles (if I understand that correctly?). Were they ever given status as "Peers of the Realm" (I thought that had been discussed some years ago)? It has seemed to me that (especially after the '45) those of the Scottish upper echelon who could gain from joining British society did so, abandoning their Gaelic roots while reshaping their Highland traditions into a British model. That's of course putting a bit of a negative slant on it, but I would also recognise that this could be interpreted as a sense of "survival" in an era of considerable social change, too- adapt or "die" (or immigrate).

Of course from my clan's standpoint, MacGregors have been more or less landless since before the '45, so there's no notion that we (the common clansmen) were disenfranchised by our chiefs (but rather by our kings, ironically enough). Obviously the opposite is true in at least a few other cases. But I can't help thinking that by-and-large the Highland Clan System was not based on a feudal order, being Gaelic/Celtic, and that the Clan chiefs (who were not always thus by birth) were not so raised above their clan as a titular lord might be. Maybe yall would consider that the romantic version, but I've certainly read of historical accounts from 18th century observers who, being from south of the border, were taken aback that their host the clan chief was casually conversing with the labourers in the fields or what might otherwise be called common clansmen.

I'm not quite sure what I was driving at there, but I certainly find the topic interesting. I have to say that I appreciate Phil's candour- not the usual pomp and circumstance we're used to!