The title is a bastardisation of the narrative poem by Lewis Carrol; ‘the Walrus and the Carpenter’, one of my children’s favourite books. However, we chose this as it has a more serious educational meaning as there are most certainly differences in titles and the meanings of the same, although some or all may be carried by one individual.
This blog was prompted after our Chief’s Inauguration in Annandale in August ’24 and the gathering held at Annan Distillery, but we will come back to that.
So, the reason for the blog is that there is definitely confusion regarding Scot’s titles and their usage, not only in the diaspora but in some cases within Scotland itself.
A Chief of a clan may well be a Lord, and in fact may also be a laird but they are definitely not the same, and the right to carry such titles individually or in unison is well defined. As such it does not allow others to automatically claim nor in fact misuse, if there is no right to do so.
Scottish Definitions of Lairds, Lords and Chiefs:
Laird
According to the Oxford Reference: The Scots word ‘laird’ is a shortened form of ‘laverd’, an older Scots word deriving from an Anglo‐Saxon term meaning lord. By the 15th century, it was widely used by lesser landowners holding charters directly from the crown and therefore entitled to go to Parliament. However, even then lairds were clearly distinguished from the higher aristocracy or Lords of Parliament and were not, unless they held other titles, classed as members of the nobility.
In the 16th and 17th centuries, although no longer used to define one, it was commonly applied to the chief of a Highland clan with no other title, as in ‘the laird of McGregor’. Lairds were therefore a numerous class in rural Scotland, though greatly decreasing over time, relative to the ranks of nobility.
These days, a laird simply remains a Scottish title used to define a land owner of a large and often historic Scottish estate, usually with a link back to feudal times. A fine example in our own family would be Carruthers of Dormont.
Dormont is a cadet line off the chiefly line of Carruthers, who retains the Dormont estate. This estate has been in the family since 1552 when, as the 3rd son, William Carruthers 1st of Dormont received a charter of lands from his father John Carruthers 5th of Holmains. This makes Dormont a cadet line of Holmains, and most certainly the Laird of the Dormont estate.
Lord
A Lord, in Scotland during feudal times defined a feudal superior, especially a feudal tenant who holds land directly from the Monarch. These days and throughout the United Kingdom to include Scotland, the title Lord denotes a peer of the realm.
In Scotland the feudal system and all that came with it, was abolished by the Scottish Parliament in 2004. Under Scots law the Abolition Act did end the ability to obtain feudal land privileges by inheriting or acquiring the caput (land or castle) in Scotland. This is an important piece of information regarding land ownership and claims of titles, as not all estates carry the right of any title other than laird.
Laird or Lord?
So, what is the difference in today’s world? The difference between laird and Lord, although some could argue they have similar meanings, have several distinct and important key differences.
Laird is a designation as previously stated, afforded the owner of a large estate in Scotland. It is the ancient Scottish word for lord (small ‘l’, although a laird would never use the title ‘Lord’ as a designation unless entitled to do so). The ability to call oneself a laird is simply attached to the ownership of land, whether inherited or purchased. The title of laird is not however a peerage title and carries no real importance, as laird is not a member of nobility. Today, several Scottish estates sell small souvenir plots of land stipulating that the buyers may call themselves lairds/lords. This is in no way an official designation nor is it recognised as such.
Where in the past the term Laird was used by those working on the estate as a sign of respect to the estate owner, these days some, but definitely not all current owners may choose to use the title to define themselves but it is not the norm to do so it seems.
Lord within the British peerage (nobility) is a title of honour given to a marquess, a baron, an earl, a duke or a viscount. A Lord is a member of the nobility and has voting rights in the House of Lords. Some titles are hereditary, originally tied to land ownership, and handed down to descendants. As such a laird is not a Lord in the concept of nobility, but a Lord may be a laird and own a large estate.
Chief of a Scottish Clan or Family
Firstly, not all Scottish surnames were/are part of a Clan or Family who have or are entitled to have a Chief. By definition, Scottish clans and families are organic groupings inextricably connected to Scotland, its culture, law, history and society. Of those who can, many do have a Chief, nevertheless some at present do not, although progressively armigerous clans (without Chief) are now seeking to petition the Lord Lyon to resolve this. A clan or family without a Chief may simply be due to the fact that the genealogical connection to the chiefly line has been lost, at which point again through petition, a Commander may be selected through a Derbfine/Gathering, supervised by the Lord Lyon.
The chiefship of a clan or family is therefore in itself regulated by the Lord Lyon King of Arms by the regulation of arms. As such the title of Chief is dependent on the right to bear the Chiefly arms of that particular clan or family and this only occurs after robust analysis of the proofs. Therefore, the Lord Lyon King of Arms who, through evaluation of a petition by an individual may confirm or in fact deny that right. Without the Lord Lyons confirmation, the use or implicated use of the title of Chief of a Scottish clan or family has no legitimacy in Scottish clan culture and in fact has to be seen to be fraudulent.
Consequently, any chief that is recognised by the Lord Lyon as Chief of a clan or family, is Chief of all who bear the name, to include accepted derivations, and not only those belonging to a particular body.
A few examples of the correct usage of Laird, Lord and Chief.
The arms of the Chief/Chieftain of the Clan/Family whose hereditary seat it is, can be seen to the left.
*Bruce and Broomhall House
(Clan Chief: Andrew Bruce, Earl of Elgin)
Broomhall House is the hereditary seat of the Chiefs of the family Bruce. Consequently, if we take the Earl of Elgin as an example, he is a member of the Scottish Nobility, he is recognised as Chief of Bruce, and by virtue of owning a large Scottish estate, which has been in his family for hundreds of years, he is most certainly a laird. As such, he covers all bases, but it is not always that obvious.
Interestingly, his eldest son Charles’s title is Lord Bruce as a member of the Scottish peerage and heir to his father’s titles.
*Murray of Cockpool and Comlongon Castle
(Clan Chief: Armigerous - No Chief)
To take this a bit further, does the ownership of a Scottish castle or tower carry any access and use of a title. This depends, as we said earlier, this blog was stimulated by the gathering taking place at the Annan Distillery and through that, information regarding the owner of the Distillery came to light. The owner, who was born and raised in Dumfries, now also owns Comlongon Castle.
Comlongon Castle was, as many will be aware, the hereditary seat of the Murrays of Cockpool who rose to become Earls of Mansfield. This family, a cadet branch of the Murrays, received their lands from the 1st Earl of Moray, Thomas Randolph during the reign of Alexander III (1241-1286).
It is from these very battlements that Marion the youngest of the two orphans of Sir Simon Carruthers 10th of Mouswald, 5th Baron and last Chief of Mouswald, ‘leapt’ or was thrown to her death. The latter being the most common belief. This was after James Douglas of Drumlanrig tried to marry her off in order to absorb the Mouswald lands. He received a blank refusal, but on her death Drumlanrig did manage to claim the Mouswald lands.
However, even though the owner of the distillery also owns Comlongon Castle, and is in fact a laird of that estate, he isn’t claiming to be Chief of either Murray of Cockpool, nor in fact, although Thom(p)son is an armigerous clan, Chief of the clan Thom(p)son.
By virtue of the fact that he is also not of Scottish nobility, he is not, nor is he claiming to be a Lord.
As an aside, the current chief of Clan Murray, of which Cockpool was a junior branch, is Bruce Murray, 12th Duke of Atholl, whose family seat was Blair Castle. The current Chief lives in South Africa and is both, Lord and Chief but not laird.
*Irving of Bonshaw and Bonshaw Tower
(Clan Chief: Rupert Irving of Bonshaw)
Another example of course is our close neighbours, the Irvings of Bonshaw with records showing their existence in line with our own family, dating back to the 1100’s. This border clan is recognised as being separate from Irvine of Drum and if the genealogy is accurate, far more ancient. Their clan seat is Bonshaw Tower, which has been the hereditary seat of Irving of Bonshaw since the 1500’s.
Accepting Bonshaw Tower and the estate, like many others estates in Scotland, was sold to private buyers. In this case, in the late 1950’s. It was subsequently purchased over 30 years later by the current owners, a junior cadet line within the Irvings of Gribton & Dumfries, themselves a distant branch of the chiefly line of the Irvings of Bonshaw. As such, although the tower is no longer owned by the Chiefs it remains their hereditary seat. However, where the current owner can accurately call himself Laird if he so chooses, he couldn’t claim to be Chief of that clan and by virtue of the fact that he is also not of Scottish nobility, he is not, nor is he claiming to be a Lord.
The title of Chief again is therefore not based on ownership of a castle, tower, house or estate but on genealogy and the right to bear the chiefly arms. In this instance this process has already been conducted and a line of hereditary Chiefs of Irving of Bonshaw has been confirmed by the Lord Lyon King of Arms.
In 2014 Captain R.A.S. Irving RN was confirmed Chief following his formal matriculation of the Chiefly arms through ancestral right and on his father’s passing in 2021, his son Rupert Irving now holds the title. Although not in ownership of the tower itself, he remains Chief of the Irvings of Bonshaw.
Notwithstanding this and the fact that the Chief does not own the estate and cannot call himself laird, he does retain the territorial designation ‘of Bonshaw’ and bears their arms as Chief of that clan.
*Irvine of Drum and Drum Castle
(Clan Chief: Alexander Irvine of Drum)
Looking at the Irvines of Drum, the estate and title were granted by Royal Charter to William of Irvine, 1st of Drum – descended from a 2nd son of Irvings of Bonshaw – by Robert the Bruce in 1323, to be erected a barony a year later in 1324, which has carried through to the 27th of the line.
Interestingly, the charter to the Forest of Drum came 3 years after Thomas Carruthers, 1st of Mouswald received his charter of lands from The Bruce in 1320, beginning the chiefly line of Mouswald, which was also erected a Barony in 1452.
Drum Castle stayed in the Irvine family for 650 years until it was taken over by the National Trust of Scotland in 1976. However, although not owned by Irvine of Drum, it remains the hereditary seat of that highland clan.
In this instance Alexander Irvine of Drum is not a laird nor a Lord but by his ancestral right, remains Chief of the highland clan Irvines of Drum and 27th of his line, again retaining the territorial designation ‘of Drum’ and bearing the arms of the same.
*MacLeod of Rassay and Raasay House
(Clan Chieftain: Roderick Macleod of Rassay)
Another example is the Isle of Raasay and Raasay House, seat of the Chieftains, MacLeods of Raasay. Raasay was a cadet branch of the Macleods of Lewes through the second son of Malcolm Macleod 9th of Lewes. They ruled the island from the 1518 to 1823.
The Macleods first of Raasay were given the lands by their father, Malcolm Macleod 9th of Lewes in 1510 but in the early 19th century the estate and island were sold into private ownership, which included the hereditary seat of Raasay House. The original house was burnt to the ground by government troops following the Battle of Culloden (1746). However it was rebuilt by John MacLeod 11th of Raasay and added to by his son and grandson. Sadly, this increased the debt to the family and the estate was sold privately in 1843, but is now owned by the Highlands and Islands Development Board.
In the 19th century, after the sale of the estate, MacLeod of Raasay emigrated to Australia, settling in Tasmania where the current Chieftain resides. Roderick John Macleod is 18th of his line and brother to the present Chief of Macleod of Lewes.
The current Raasay House still exists as an A listed building, but functions as a hotel, however it remains the hereditary seat of the Macleods of Raasay.
Because the current chieftain no longer owns the estate, which is now in trust as a charity and although he maintains his ancestral territorial designation, Roderick is not a laird, nor a Lord but is a Chieftain of Clan Macleod through his ancestral right and through confirmation by the Lord Lyon. As such he bears the arms of Macleod of Raasay.
To summarise
A laird is not automatically a Lord, nor a Chief
A Lord is not automatically a laird, nor a Chief
A Chief is not automatically a Lord, nor a laird
Owning an estate or building, which was once held by a Scottish clan or family or includes the hereditary seat, does not make that individual a Chief. It does however, if they choose to use the title, make them a laird. It is the bearing by an individual of the Chiefly arms of a clan or family through ancestral right, that defines the Chiefship. This is decided on by Lord Lyon who is tasked, after analysis of the proofs, with ensuring they will be borne by an individual worthy to do so.
A Chief carries the title by ancestral right and bears the Chief’s arms with only the Lord Lyon confirming or denying the right to bear those arms, it is therefore not linked to the ownership of a hereditary estate or family seat.
If the Chief’s family has held a territorial designation over the centuries, by permission of the Lord Lyon, the designation stays with the Chief even if the lands were lost to the Chief’s family i.e.
- Peter Carruthers of Holmains, hereditary Chief of Carruthers (Scottish Borders)
- Rupert Irving of Bonshaw, hereditary Chief of Irving of Bonshaw (Scottish Borders)
- Alexander Irvine of Drum, hereditary Chief of Irvine of Drum (Highland & Islands)
- Roderick MacLeod of Raasay, hereditary Chieftain of the MacLeod of Rassay (Highland & Islands)
Lords on the other hand remain titles of nobility in Scotland and in fact the rest of the UK, to the point that buying small plots of lands to certain companies does not make you a Lord nor a Lady.
In all cases, because it would be both unlawful and highly disrespectful, it is very unusual for titles to be used in Scotland by act or implication when an individual has no right to use them. However, there are cases within the diaspora where false claims, either by accident or design, have and are being made.
This blog is an attempt to help those less informed to better understand the use of these three titles and their demarcation within Scottish culture, in order that accuracy within our Scottish heritage regarding our clan and family culture, remains paramount.
