A post, as part of a larger piece, published on the internet and again by a few of our colonial cousins is titled: Coel Hen, Old King Cole, Coel the Old, Carruthers Ancestor through DNA and Genealogy, has been brought to our attention.
It states:
Coel Hen, or Coel the old, the son of Tegfan, was a Celtic ruler who lived around the turn of the fourth and fifth centuries at the time of the departure of the Roman Legions from Britain.
He imposed his power over a large area of the country, Coels territory extended over the whole of the North of England from a line joining Chester and Wash and up into what is today’s southern Scotland. Coels association with north Britain has led to the suggestion that he may have been the last of the Roman Duces Brittanniarium with his headquarters in York. Coel Hen or King Coel’s Estate was in Ecclefechan Scotland what is now days called the Carruthers Farm at Dormont (This is actually the reason Kit Carruthers should be the rightful Chief of Carruthers Clan in Scotland).
Is this an accurate representation of the facts or not. Looking at it, the post will, for reference in this article, be called ‘the piece’.
Coel Hen
Firstly it seems that the evidence relating to Coel Hen is patchy at best although, it is suspected he lived from around 350 – 420 AD/CE. He may well have been a historical figure, but again any mention of him in that sense is highly controversial amongst many historians of that period.
According to the ‘historyfiles‘ which says: from his headquarters, Coel Hen seems to have managed the territory between Eboracum and Hadrian’s Wall, all of which formed parts of the later British kingdoms or regions of Ebrauc, Deywr, and Bernaccia, and west to cover the territory of the later Rheged, (which, even later, would be divided into North Rheged, South Rheged, Dunoting, Elmet, Caer-Guendoleu, and a kingdom which, to deduce its name from the later Saxon Pecset, was probably called something like the ‘Kingdom of The Peak‘.
It goes onto say: From AD 197, Eboracum became the capital of the province of Britannia Inferior, which covered not only the entire north of Britain up to Hadrian’s Wall – essentially the former territory of the Parisi and Brigantes combined – but also a large swathe of the Midlands. The latter explains the traditional founding of a kingdom of the Cynwidion people, with a leader who hailed from the north. In the early fourth century, the province of Britannia Inferior was renamed Britannia Secunda and was reduced in size, roughly from the Humber to Hadrian’s Wall. This created the ‘Kingdom of Northern Britain’ which would be preserved in oral and written traditions in Wales.
The content of the ‘piece’ that covers Coel Hen seems to be rather common in its presentation and is shared by many different sites to include earlybritishkingdoms.com, and englishmonarchs.co.uk. Interestingly though irrelevant of where we looked, there is no mention of Ecclefechan being an estate of Coel Hen on any of these sites nor in fact in any others we have researched.
Also from the ‘Early British Kingdom site’ it states: There is an old story told in the North about Coel’s last campaign. What is now Scotland was originally inhabited by both Brythonic and Pictish tribes.
It was during Coel’s time that immigrant Irishmen of the Scotti tribe began to settle the Western coast around Argyle. Coel, fearing that these Northern peoples would unite against his domain ‘south of Hadrian’s Wall‘, sent raiding parties across his northern border to stir up discord between them. The plan, however, backfired for the Picts and the Scots were not taken in. Coel merely succeeded in pushing the two even closer together, and they began to attack the ‘British Kingdom of Strathclyde‘.
Coel declared all out war and moved north to expel the invaders. The Picts and Scots fled to the hills ahead of Coel’s army, who eventually set up camp at what became Coylton alongside the Water of Coyle (Ayrshire). For a long time, the British were triumphant, while the Scots and Picts starved. Desperate for some relief, however, the enemy advanced an all-or-nothing attack on Coel’s stronghold. Coel and his men were taken by surprise, overrun and scattered to the winds.
It is said that Coel wandered the unknown countryside until he eventually got caught in a bog at Coilsfield (in Tarbolton, Ayrshire) and drowned. Coel was first buried in a mound there before being removed to the church at Coylton. The year was about AD 420. After his death, tradition says that Coel’s Northern kingdom was divided between two of his sons, Ceneu and Gorbanian.
Alcuith, as the defensive fort on Dumbarton Rock was called, was the main stronghold of the Britons in the area and had been used for centuries prior to Coel Hen. Dumbarton itself became the capital of the Celtic Kingdom of Strathclyde.
Now saying this, the historian Ben Guy, a researcher in the School of Welsh at the University of Cardiff has has also chosen to comment on Coel Hen in his 2018 paper, ‘Constantine, Helena, Maximus: On the Appropriation of Roman History in Medieval Wales, c. 800–1250′, Journal of Medieval History, Vol 44, 2018 Issue 4.
He states “Coel Hen’s role in medieval texts is solely legendary; there is no merit whatsoever in any attempt to assign him some historically significant role in late Roman Britain, as many over the years (excluding Geoffrey, ironically) have fruitlessly attempted to do” (pge 21 in the paper itself).
According to the University of Cambridge Repository the research paper by Guy and mentioned above: explores the ways in which the three fourth-century figures Constantine the Great (d. 337), St Helena (d. c.330), and Magnus Maximus (d. 388) were represented in texts produced in, or connected with, medieval Wales. The texts concerned may be described as genealogical, hagiographical, or literary, and were written in either Latin or Welsh between about 800 and 1250. They include, amongst others, the ninth-century Historia Brittonum, Geoffrey of Monmouth’s De gestis Britonum, and the vernacular prose tale Breudwyt Maxen Wledic.
It is argued that the appropriation of the fourth-century figures occurred in a more limited number of contexts than has previously been supposed.
Moreover, the evidence indicates that writers responsible for composing or redacting texts about these figures were far more likely to turn to earlier written texts for information on their subjects than to any contemporary oral traditions.
Fact or Fiction
So once again, in an attempt to change history to suit an agenda, the ‘piece’ suggests a link between Ecclefechan and Dormont? Is this factual or not, as it definitely is not in any of the original works we found.
Again, comments such as this show really poor research and most certainly, in the final comment regarding the status of chief, a total lack of understanding on how things actually and legally work here in Scotland.
Outcome of researching the efficay of the highlighed part of the published piece above?
Checking the validity of the posted piece in full we found and we also have to accept that there are serious questions regarding the historical authenticity and accuracy of information regarding Coel Hen himself.
However, even accepting that, what directly affects our family and causes incorrect bias in our history is in the final piece of the statement ie Coel Hen or King Coel’s Estate was in Ecclefechan Scotland what is now days called the Carruthers Farm at Dormont (This is actually the reason Kit Carruthers should be the rightful Chief of Carruthers Clan in Scotland).
Based on this nonsense, it is obvious that the records need to be put straight and some questions need to be answered correctly to ensure the public are better informed of the facts. So let’s take it step by step.
- Where does the link between Coel Hen, Carruthers of Dormont and Ecclefechan come in?
To be honest we do not know, but it seems to be another red herring, as we have found no evidence to support this statement. However once again, we are happy to look at any evidence that is purportedly being claimed.
The Dormont Estate, owned by Jamie Carruthers of Dormont, is situated in Dalton near Lockerbie, and although close, it is around 7 miles/10 kilometres from the village of Ecclefechan. The estate consists of 1000 acres of land, which is approximately a mile and a half of acreage in total. So the facts are that Dormont does not own Ecclefechan, although it was part of the larger Carruthers of Holmains estate and belonged to the Holmains branch of the family i.e, our Chiefs.
* What were the origins of Carruthers of Dormont.
In 1552, William Carruthers, the first to be named Carruthers of Dormont, was the third son of Blanche Murray and the chief at the time, John Carruthers 5th of Holmains, 1st Baron. William received a charter of lands from his father for the lands of Corsopeland and Nether Dormont. These parcels of land were part of the Holmains Estate at the time and bequeathed to a younger son of the family. As such Dormont is a cadet line of Holmains. and did not own Ecclefechan, now or anytime in the past.
- Is Carruthers of Dormont related to Coel Hen?
Although there was a Dormont family legend regarding Coel Hen, there is around 1100 years between Dormont gaining the charter, which seeded the Dormont estate, and the possible existence of Coel Hen.
There is also around 600 years between Coel Hen and William de Carruthers the first record of our name. However, if there is a link there is a link……but
Documented genealogy doesn’t go back as far as Coel Hen specifically and there is currently no evidence of Coel Hens DNA to date. Therefore, to clarify there based on the fact that Coel Hens existence is not clear, there can be no evidence that our own DNA snp shows any relationship with his.
We have however, through competent research, traced our own DNA back to its arrival in Scotland to 500 BC/CBE.
Further, there is also and just as importantly, no evidence that Ecclefechan was used as an ‘estate’ by Coel Hen.
- But, accepting this, could Carruthers still be related?
The only way to check if we were would be through a DNA link. Our DNA researchers use big Y-DNA 700 for accuracy but as no Coel Hen DNA exists, nor it seems any real evidence that he did or at least as he is portrayed, it is difficult to initiate a solid link.
However, with regards the position of hierarchy and the right to be chief, if Dormont are related to Coel Hen, and we are not aware that they are, because the Dormont line was ‘off’ the chiefly line of Holmains who remain the senior Carruthers line, Holmains would be as well. So the seniority remains.
But back to their nagging suggestion:
- Could/should Dormont be Chief?
Although we originally thought it viable, we found that there are a number of well researched points that would prevent it being the case:
- The Holmains line, as the senior line since the extinction of Mouswald, is still very much viable i.e. heirs exist.t
- The proven genealogy shows Dormont are a Cadet/Junior line to Holmains. Therefore couldn’t even be considered chiefs unless the Holmains line fully died out.
- Dormont’s arms carry the border around the Holmains arms, thus again stating through their registered heraldry that they are a cadet line of Holmains.
- Holmains have been chiefs since 1548 after their direct ancestors, the Carruthers of Mouswald line became extinct.
- Dormont as a cadet in their own right didn’t exist until 4 years later in 1552.
- Holmains are descended from John Carruthers, King’s Chancellor for Annandale to David II in 1349, father of Roger Carruthers, 1st of Holmains. John was the younger brother of Thomas, 1st of Mouswald and great-grandson of William, first recorded of our name.
- Dormont, received their charter from John Carruthers, 5th of Holmains and 1st Baron in 1552.
- The Lord Lyon, having analysed the evidence and proofs presented by both Holmains and Dormont and after two court hearings of the Lyon Court, declared and confirmed Peter Carruthers of Holmains, Chief of the Name and Arms of Carruthers – i.e. again clarifying and accepting Holmains as the senior line of Carruthers and therefore our Chiefs.
- The current laird of Dormont has two sons, Kit being the younger as such would not be the immediate heir to the Dormont estate and territorial designation.
Dormont are therefore down the line of succession to all of Holmains, although they remain a well honoured cadet line of our family and even after the Holmains estates were lost, they remained and remain Lairds of the Dormont estate.
NB: As such, our genuine wish remains that if Carruthers were ever to have a ‘hereditary Chieftain’ i.e. carry two feathers, Dormont would accept the title. They would be the first and only real choice to hold that position in the family.
‘Chief of Carruthers Clan in Scotland‘
Once again this really does show very weak research and an obvious lack of understanding of Scottish clan culture and most certainly of border riding families. Saying all this, as Carruthers, let us not forget a total disrespect for our Chief, our name and our rich heritage by making this bizarre statement.
There is no ‘Chief of Carruthers Clan in Scotland‘ as there is only one clan and family Carruthers in the world. Not two, six or ten but only one.
We are Scottish and the ancestry of all Carruthers goes back to the origin of our name in Scotland. Therefore by definition and to quote ‘Highlander the movie’, ‘there can only be one‘, in this case only one ‘Chief for all Carruthers worldwide‘.
It is well documented that Carruthers originated in Annandale, southwest Scotland, not anywhere else and as such we remain a Scottish clan and family, whether Scottish by birth and or through Carruthers ancestry. By its very nature there is only one Carruthers family, with one origin, and therefore it has to stand to reason that there can only be one chief. The Chief of the Scottish border Clan and Family of Carruthers is Peter Carruthers of Holmains is our/the Carruthers Chief, whether you live in Scotland or anywhere else overseas.
It really is that simple!!!
The Lord Lyon’s Guidance
The Lord Lyon clarifies this fact and clearly states :
While a clan or family association, society or other corporate body may be created that body is created only in support of a clan or family. That body is not itself the clan or family. That is an important distinction.
The chiefship of a clan or family is regulated by the Lord Lyon King of Arms by regulation of arms. The Lord Lyon does not regulate the leadership of associations, societies or other corporate bodies created in support of a clan or family. That is an internal matter for the association, society or corporate body itself. TD
Any chief recognised by the Lord Lyon as chief of a clan or family is chief of all who bear the name of the clan or family and not only those belonging to a particular body.
At the end of the day Carruthers are a proud and ancient Scottish clan and family we can say that withour fear of contradiction based on our history, heritage and culture. So once again, utilising the unreferenced works of others, snippets of information are fitted in and fiction is offered to fit an agenda.
Holmains for all sorts of reasons, have been Chiefs of Carruthers since the 1500’s, with a proven line going back at least to the 11th century, and this is not going to change anytime soon.
People of whatever nationality, both Scots born and of Scots ancestry who retain pride in who and what we are, now have enough information to make a choice: fact over fiction / sense over nonsense. Our history in both Dumfriesshire and Scotland as a whole is well documented and it is richly interwoven into the same.
If the facts regarding our ancestors are really not good enough, and if you hunger to be related to Scottish, Irish or Viking Royalty, King Arthur, Old King Coel or even Caratacus even though the information is obviously inaccurate, that remains a choice. As such, you may be misguided to think that this is the place for you.
It is part of our function as your Society, to accurately inform and pass on evidenced based information regarding the Scottish Border Reiver Clan and Family of Carruthers, and we will continue to the best of our ability, to do so.
Promptus et Fidelis
