Background
It is ironic that while there are still revisionist historians who claim that the name “Grant” has a French origin, the fact is that there are French people bearing the name Grant who are of Scottish origin! [Even more ironically in some branches of the family the name Grant has been corrupted to “Grand”!]
The principal of family is the Grants de Vaux. Sadly Alpin Grant de Vaux, the last Vicomte, died in 1954 (aged just 34). He is survived by daughters, grandchildren and other relatives. With France being a republic not only is there no interest in maintaining this or any other title of nobility there is no legislative interest in bringing the law up to date. [There are many UK titles also restricted to heirs male which therefore become extinct.] It is particularly sad, therefore, that had Alpin Grant lived on a male heir might well have resulted and the title would be alive today.
As the internet has exploded - so now the vicomte's claims are readily available online eg archive.org.
Vicomte Charles Grant was a refugee from the French Revolution and so wished to ingratiate himself with the then Grant Chief: the Good Sir James, who was already in the business of riding roughshod over Grant history to suit his personal sensitivities. So the Vicomte’s treatise on early Grant history reflects this need – so much so that he bought into the (wholly erroneous!) line being punted by the MacGregors of the day. Readers of the Mémoires will see how the reconnection with their Scottish roots led to the repeated use of the name Alpin in the family. Although the specifics of their understanding of their descent from Alpin was erroneous, nevertheless it is the case that they do descend from King Alpin through multiple lines.
Previous “Gaslighting” by Sir William Fraser
We should not begin our examination of this family without understanding why it is all so “new”. This is because Sir William Fraser dismissed the possibility of their existence despite the correspondence he includes in Volume II. In Volume I (p41) he says:
Some historians, notably Dr. Abercromby in his "Martial Atchievements of the Scots Nation," assert that Sir John le Grant was in 1359 appointed ambassador to France, along with Sir Robert Erskine and Norman Leslie, and that he was associated with them in the treaty signed in the new hail of the Palais Royal on 29th June 1359. Dr. Abercromby's "Martial Atchievements," etc., edit. 1715, vol. ii. p. 124. But there is a deficiency of proof for this assertion. In a French catalogue of treaties between France and Scotland, Sir Robert Erskine and Norman Leslie alone are named as the ambassadors, Report on Foedera, Appendix D, p. 126 [42] to them only are expenses paid by the Scotch Exchequer; Exchequer Rolls, vol. ii. p. 50 and Fordun names them only as appointed by the king of Scots. Fordun, edit. 1872, vol. i. p. 378 Norman Leslie received a safe-conduct to pass through England to the Continent on 24th March 1359, while, as has been shown, Sir John le Grant was at that date on the eve of a journey to Scotland on the Earl of Mar's affairs. The balance of evidence is therefore against Sir John's taking any part in the embassy to France. It is probable that an event in the history of Robert Grant, the subject of the next memoir, who certainly was an ambassador to France, has been erroneously transferred to the traditional account of Sir John le Grant.
I cannot see any good reason for this treatment, not least because he was writing over 100 years after the correspondence mentioned. Among his many failings is an arrogant refusal to recognise that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” – worse still when he had the evidence before him. So I will make no attempt to find excuses.
How it all began
We may usefully start the real story around the year 1310 - with the birth of the second of two John Grants conflated by the Vicomte. In 1316 the Grants, already a force to be reckoned with in the Highlands, got a foothold back in Strathspey at just the same time as the Gordons were given Strathbogie. Sir Adam Gordon had been based on the Scottish Borders and needed to make alliances; one way he did this was by giving his daughter to the young John Grant; this marriage probably took place some time in the period 1330x35. We can deduce this not from Fraser - who acknowledges no more than that the girl was called Elizabeth, but rather from the work on Corrimony by Sir Francis Grant - for it is he who says that a safe conduct into England for Sir John and his wife also provides for his tenants in Easter Gordon. [Easter Gordon is still a farm on the A6105 between Gordon and Greenlaw.] Thus it appears that Elizabeth Gordon brought with her the life rent of that estate.
John grew up to be a doughty knight, fighting with distinction at Halidon Hill (1333) - which will have recommended him in military circles in general and to Sir Archibald Douglas, leader of the Scottish forces in particular. Later he joined the Scots Regiment raised by William Douglas (later the 1st Earl of Douglas) in support of the French in the 100 years’ war. It was just before the battle of Poitiers (1356) that, like several others, John was knighted by the French king, John II.
The battle was a bit of a shambles (ok... not if you are looking at it from an English perspective!), made even more difficult for our Sir John by Douglas insisting that the Scots dismounted. Weighed down by their cavalry armour they were far too clumsy to fight well on foot, but they were not short of valour and acquitted themselves gamely. In the end, however, they were overwhelmed. Although Douglas himself managed to get away, the majority of the Scots were captured by the English army (which was led by the Black Prince) and were then held captive under the teenage John of Gaunt. They were taken on to Kennilworth, but behaved throughout in such true knightly fashion that they earned great respect, so that when they were ransomed, Sir John Grant was given land near Exelby, which is just South East of Richmond, and trading rights. [Sadly this story, albeit not relevant here, may well not be told for a long time because the excellent researcher, Dr Douglas Grant of Tyne and Wear was struck down and died far too young and unexpectedly by Covid 19.]
It was this experience and the proven quality he had demonstrated which recommended Sir John Grant to King of Scots David II who appointed him in 1359 as one of an ambassadorial team to France with Sir Robert Erskine and Norman Leslie. [This story is dismissed by Fraser who had chosen to ignore key evidence.]
The establishment of the presence
Sir John Grant took with him in his entourage two nephews, William and “Tassin” (or Thomassin), sons of his brother Thomas. These two boys settled in Normandy and married local girls.
William, the elder, married Raouline de Moulineax; he was made vicomte de Caen; so far as I can understand the business part of being a “vicomte” is roughly equivalent to that of sheriff; but they were also, in effect, Lords of the Manor. The title vicomte seems to be hereditary, more or less whether or not one is a stipendiary sheriff. It should be noted that Caen was the capital of Normandy, so this was no mean appointment - and he was followed in that office by his son John. Unfortunately, William’s male line was relatively soon extinct (although more research will be required here both to check that this was really so and to identify at least the principal lines stemming from daughters).
“Tassin” is not the sort of name a Scots aristocrat would give his son, even (perhaps particularly) in the 1300s. But it does seem to be a translation of “sporran”. As we have seen Tassin’s real name was Thomas (for “Thomassin”, I think we should ready “Tommy”); it is likely that Thomas senior would have had an elder son who would stand to inherit whatever there might have been in Scotland (he was likely to have been named eg Patrick (after his grandfather), but there are alternative possibilities). William probably got his name from Thomas’ father-in-law, leaving “Tassin” to be named after his father. In any event “Tassin” is how he is referred to in France. Whether the nickname derives from his dress (even allowing that sporrans then do not bear much resemblance to those of today) or whether it derives from (i) some function as treasurer etc. or (ii) it being just a further diminutive of Thomas something else altogether we may never know.
Notwithstanding this irregular name, in 1363 he married the heiress Jorette de Quetteville, daughter of the chevalier Nicole de Quetteville. Quetteville is a village some 6 miles south of Honfleur (which is on the mouth of the river Seine opposite Le Havre). It is just to the West of Beuzeville. The family was to remain there into the 1700s. Tassin thereby became vicomte de Quetteville and matriculated arms which recognised his Grant ancestry: on a field of Ermine there is a red chevron with the three ancient Grant crowns on it. Only much later did they acquire Vaux-sur-Seuilles - and sold Quetteville.
Base map: google maps
The family prospered, spawning several cadet branches who themselves thrived, married well, matriculated arms etc. And so it is that we come to the personage of Charles Grant, vicomte de Vaux who had struck up a friendship with the Catholic and Jacobite leaning Blairfindie Grants who had found France more congenial in the aftermath of the ’45.
As an “aristo”, however, the vicomte found France rather too hot during the French Revolution and had thus sought refuge in England and in that context sought the support of the Good Sir James as mentioned above!
The University of Michigan says this of him:
Charles Grant, vicomte de Vaux, was the descendant of a family of nobles who had emigrated from Scotland to France in the 14th century. Vaux was born in 1749 on the island of Mauritius, where his father, Louis-Charles Grant, the Baron de Vaux, served as governor. As a youth, Vaux sailed to France to be educated and settled at Vaux-sur-Seulle in Normandy, and eventually became an army officer. During the American Revolution, he sided with the colonists and earned money selling supplies to the colonies and investing in ships to engage in privateering. The majority of the ships were lost, and after the war Vaux petitioned the United States Congress for compensation. Though Vaux considered emigrating to North America, he remained in France until forced by the revolution in France to flee to Great Britain in 1790. During his time as a refugee, Vaux became interested in the prospect of starting a settlement in Canada, and much of his energy during the next decade was focused on gaining permissions and raising money for the expedition. In the mid-1790s Vaux attempted to support himself as an army officer after being granted the position of colonel and permission to recruit a regiment, which he formed with other French émigrés; it was stationed temporarily in Holland. This pursuit failed, however, and the regiment was dispersed after France invaded Holland during the French Revolutionary wars. Vaux then turned to writing to support himself, publishing numerous books which included History of Mauritius and Introduction to Four New Maps of the Four Quarters, all the while still attempting to plan a Canadian settlement. Despite his constant petitioning, planning, and pleas for aid, Vaux was never able to realize his dream of moving to Canada. Little is known of the last two decades of his life, but he is thought to have died in France around 1818.
And then
The family never properly recovered from the ravages of the French Revolution – they cast around in Mauritius (then “Ile de France”) and Canada and in the UK and Algeria before settling in the Lyon area
Postscript
I do hope the family will continue an active search to establish whether a cadet line can be found and the title reactivated. Such a line would also be able to provide DNA evidence to prove the line. I congratulate wider family member Valéry Lebigot, for all his hard work establishing a very rigorously researched family tree.
See also: