Before the Beginning (800 – 1060 AD)

We can usefully start the story with Heming, King of the Jutes, who extended his territory in Denmark founding and giving his name to Hamburg (now in Germany) before signing a non-aggression treaty with Charlemagne (812) which included ceding the fortress. His descendant Guthrum killed Danish king Horic II in an abortive coup (854) which led to nomadic piracy for some years before he joined forces with the sons of Ragnar Lodbrok to form the Great Summer army which invaded what is now England. He went on to become King of East Anglia and convert to Christianity, taking the name Athelstan.

After the failed 854 coup his son Haakon sought his future in Norway marrying into the family of Eystein Glumra of Trondheim. He became the herse of Yriar. His great-great grandson was Haakon the Mighty, Jarl of Hladr and protector of Norway (970-995) who was eventually murdered by his personal slave as Olaf Tryggvasson invaded to claim the Norwegian throne. In turn, Olaf was overthrown by Haakon’s sons Eric and Swein. When Canute required Eric to help in the management of his newly conquered England, his son Haakon was quickly beaten by (St) Olaf Haraldsson who re-claimed the throne. He exiled Haakon making him king of the Hebrides (1015) to which Canute later added the Earldom of Worcester. Haakon’s son Heming was forced into exile in Ireland by the return of Edward the Confessor (1042). Internal Anglo-Saxon politics allowed his return in 1052 whereafter he held several manors and an important position as a “king’s man” before retiring to become the sub-prior of Worcester.

Heming’s son Olaf attached himself to the court of the exiled Malcolm III (Macbeth was still on the throne of Scotland) and went with him to Scotland on his return in 1054.

Pre-clan times (1060-1175)

Olaf (his name was Gaelicised as Aulay) was Malcolm III’s principal lieutenant (but, as an outsider/incomer lower in rank than the Mormaers). He had two large estates:

  1. He married Mora a descendant of Grig who history records as “Gregory the Great” from the Strathclyde royal family (which can be traced back to before Cinuit, King of the Damnonii before 400AD), but descended from Alpin on his mother’s side. From her he acquired Glen Quaich, then called Glen Freuchie.

  2. Malcolm III gave him Strathspey – roughly from what is now Castle Grant and Angach in the north to Kingussie and Ruthven barracks in the south.

At that time Moray was still in ‘enemy’ hands from Malcolm’s point of view, so Olaf’s job was

  1. to hold off any possible enemy army advancing south through Strathspey and
  2. to light a beacon at Craigelachie – the first of a chain of such beacons to warn “Scotland” of the attack.

However it is not clear that these tasks were ever tested in earnest. Olaf’s sons were to become the progenitors of all the Siol Alpin clans. Olaf was also a staunch supporter of Queen St Margaret in spreading Catholicism wherever he could.

When Malcolm III was killed, Olaf backed the Scots magnates who chose Donalbane and Edmund to rule. When King Duncan did not live up to his undertakings it was Olaf’s son, Malpeder, who killed Duncan. Some time soon after Edgar usurped the throne, Olaf was captured an executed and his lands confiscated (the price on his head some £100+ million in today’s money). Malpeder threw in his lot with Prince Aethelred, Mormaer of Moray, the true next in line by primogeniture. With the end of the Moray risings the Earls of Fife were the family’s patrons and through them acquired the let of the large church estate based at Boleskine on Loch Ness side.

The Viking line of Chiefs (1174-1325)

It was Aulay, great-grandson of Malpeder who first adopted the surname style, choosing “Grant” (Olaf Hemingsson had gone by “Grento” (probably “Grent” with the Latin ablative “o” suffix), although his Viking origins were never in doubt). His son Gregory (named after the Bishop of Moray who had installed the family at Boleskine) married Mary Bisset, granddaughter of King William the Lion who brought Stratherrick (the valley of the Farrigaig river) with her, their son Sir Laurence becoming Lord of Stratherrick when the Bissets were forfeit in 1242.

The Grants were quite adept at tacking with the wind, so that a marriage to a Comyn girl did not prevent siding with Bruce during the wars of independence. So when Bruce dismantled Comyn land holdings, the Grants were given land in Inverallan.

However just as this was getting established the Viking male line failed. However overall the line continued as the senior heiress Maud married Andrew Stewart, illegitimate son of James Stewart the 5th High Steward. [This had been viewed with considerable hostility by senior clan members, but Maud was a headstrong girl; matters were brought to a head when Maud became pregnant. Andrew was content to go along with their stipulation that he adopt the name Grant to gain their acceptance.]

All the foregoing is set out in detail in “Scottish Clans: Legend, Logic & Evidence”

Settling into Strathspey (1325-1540)

As the Grants settled into their little enclave in Strathspey it is understandable that they encountered resentment from the Comyns who were being subjected to Robert the Bruce’s “herschip” (this is an Old Norse term literally meaning “war ship” – the allusion being that the Comyns were being reduced in a way not unlike how they would have felt following a piratical raid by Viking longships). This was greatly exacerbated when Bigla, heiress of Glencarnie determined to marry John Roy Grant bringing with her lands which the Comyns wanted to reaffirm control over. This led to a 25-year feud (1410 – 1425) resulting in the killing of two Grant Chiefs, but ultimately failure for the Comyns. It had been a close-run thing and the Grants’ need for numbers was illustrated by their disposal of all their residual landholdings in Stratherrick to concentrate the family in Strathspey.

Thereafter the Grants prospered and extended their landholdings in the area and their influence. So reliable did Sir Duncan Grant prove that he was appointed Steward of Urquhart and Glenmoriston – lands which were so much bandit country that the task had defeated all comers previously. This proved so successful that the lands were erected into 3 free Baronies in 1508.

It is generally understood that it was in 1482, when a contingent was required to serve the king at the siege of Berwick, that the ordinary clansmen were required to adopt the surname Grant, but if everyone is called Grant that does not help identify one from another, so patronymics (and geographical identifiers) continued in common use, at least domestically, for many years afterwards.

In 1493 (perhaps as a reward for initial success in managing Urquhart and Glenmoriston) the lands in Strathspey were formally erected into a free barony.

As they grew in strength and prosperity so they were able to exert influence – whence the incident leading to the “Trochie” Grants.

Differences of Persuasion (1560-1694)

We are now entering territory where the historical reports are more reliable and hence, too, existing histories. This was a period of turmoil with the reformation, the Covenanters and the English Civil War (from which Scotland did not escape). However, some church allegiance was actually based on political allegiance: in this case the key was the Campbells; if they tacked one way then many in Scotland tacked the other way. Essentially there were three parties: (i) those who clung to Catholicism; (ii) those who adhered to Presbyterianism (an independent reformed church) and (iii) Episcopalians who wanted to retain Bishops and who were willing for the king to be the head of the church).

General disposition of the Grants: This caused serious rifts amongst Grants: the Chiefs appear to have been staunchly Presbyterian, while in Urquhart the balance was Episcopalian (bolstered by intermarriage, with the Keiths, the Earls Marischal, despite the distance between them) and in Glenmoriston quite a lot of Catholic sympathy remained. In Strathspey it has been rather assumed that the clansmen followed the chief, but as Chris Grant has shown recently, persuasion was a good deal more divided than that, if not actively expressed.

The Earl of Huntly started one rebellion, against Mary Queen of Scots, despite her being a Catholic and Glenmoriston supported him. Amongst those who put their heads above the parapet lands were forfeit and some even lost their heads. Meanwhile the Grants appear have been put in charge of some of these forfeit lands, but instead of trying to take advantage, they arranged for restitution (they certainly did not have the numbers to assert the control which would have been necessary).

Witchcraft: This was also peak witch-phobia times. In 1602, John Grant, the then chief, was put in charge of witch-finding in the Highlands – and in the next generation sadly too many innocent Strathspey women suffered due to the superstition of Lady Mary Stewart, wife of James Grant (chief 1637-1665) who blamed witchcraft for her many failed pregnancies.

The English Civil War: During the English Civil War and following the execution of King Charles I, the Grants backed the Scottish Government in supporting Charles II who had reluctantly agreed to accept Presbyterianism. There were Grants at the battle of Dunbar (1650) where the Scots were roundly beaten (and some Grants later transported to “the Colonies” for their pains) and after another trouncing at the Battle of Worcester a year later, Cromwell took effective control of Scotland. After the Restoration, Episcopalianism eventually came to predominate, with the future James VII serving his brother as Commissioner in Scotland, but when James was ousted Presbyterians regained the ascendancy.

Despite the vicissitudes, Grant chiefs broadly remained loyal to the crown such that in 1663 James was about to be made an Earl by Charles II; but James died before the patent was completed.

‘Resetting’ MacGregors: So far as politics were concerned there were problems for the clan due to ‘resetting’ (harbouring) proscribed MacGregors due to which substantial debts accrued. This and the politics are probably as well summarised by our 32nd Chief, Sir Patrick in his 1983 book (see Library).

The “Glorious” Revolution: All too soon there were far bigger fish to fry….. King Charles II was followed in 1685 by the Catholic James VII and II. The threat of another civil war led to James being deposed in 1688 – and sides were taken. James made an attempt to regain the throne, landing in Ireland in 1689, and Scottish supporters staged a parallel uprising. There were Grants who took the Jacobite side – and 150 Grants, particularly from Loch Ness side fought on the Jacobite side at Killiecrankie. On the other hand, the Scottish uprising was killed off at the Haughs of Cromdale in Grant territory thanks principally to the expert knowledge of the Spey possessed by members of the Clan. The final mopping up also took place on Clan territory – at the Moor of Granish and at Loch an Eilein (Rothiemurchus).

At this point the Clan and its chief reached the apogee of their power and influence. In 1694 the lands were turned into a regality, giving the chief power of “pit and gallows” throughout his lands. [The records of the Grants’ Court of Regality are held in the Scottish National Archives.]

Jacobite times and their aftermath (1700-1765)

The insurgency might have been over, but not the resentment and not the rebellion. However, it had to bide its time until its leader was ready and a political opportunity presented itself. In the immediate aftermath Scotland was in dire straits. First there was the debacle of the Darien Scheme (1698) in which at least one (Allanach) Grant (Lt. Hugh Grant, son of James Grant of Loggie) died. So many Scots lost their fortunes that negotiations were entered into resulting in the Union of the Parliaments of England and Scotland in 1707. Chief Ludovick’s son (the next chief) Brigadier-General Alexander Grant was one of the Commissioners who negotiated the treaty.

The 15: The now deposed King James VII and II had died in 1701, making his son James (“The Old Pretender”) was his heir apparent. King William III and Queen Mary (James VII’s sister) was followed by Queen Anne (James VII’s daughter) and it was Anne’s wish that her half-brother, James VII’s son James should succeed her. But when Anne died in 1714 fear of a return of Catholicism led to the now UK parliament choosing otherwise. This in turn provoked another Jacobite rebellion, the so-called “’15”. The sides were reasonably straightforwardly drawn up.

On the government side was Brigadier Alexander (to whom Ludovick had passed on the Chiefship in 1710) who had no problem raising troops in support. Alexander did this on the clear understanding that he would be reimbursed, but this turned out to be empty promises from the by now British Government.

On the Jacobite side were Corrimony and Glenmoriston. However the Jacobite Army moved south and were roundly defeated at the Battle of Preston, one immediate result of which was the capture, imprisonment and transportation (to America) of Ludovick Grant of Creichie who was later to play such a prominent part in the culture of the Cherokees. After the rebellion was over, Glenmoriston’s part was paid for by the forfeit of his estate – but it was later bought back from the commissioners by Sir James Grant, who gave it back to the Glenmoriston chieftain. Corrimony was not forfeit for the simple reason that due to debt he was not even master of his own lands, they having reverted to the Chiefs. This was another substantial payout by the Grant chiefs which was never to be recouped. [Other Siol Alpin chiefs whose lands had been forfeit were also helped out in this way.]

The South Sea Bubble, 1720: Too many Scots had been suckered into the madcap and ill-fated Darien Scheme (“it seemed like a good idea at the time”), but they failed to learn their lesson. Many with spare money invested in the equally disastrous South Sea Island Company, Chief James Grant amongst them. The failure of this company led directly to laws allowing investors limited liability which has been the foundation stone of modern capitalism. The principle is that if the company goes belly-up you do stand to lose all the money you invested in the company, but creditors cannot come to you for more. In 1720 debts could be recovered from individual share holders far beyond what they had invested. It would be an interesting research project to examine our clan chiefs’ exposure and why he was not completely ruined in the way so many others were.

It is perhaps noteworthy that the family finances were already stretched enough that young Ludovick Grant (b1707) needed to train for and take work at “the bar” as a lawyer, the first of his family to need to do so.

The 45: Following his trouncing in the 15, the Old Pretender was firmly of the view that “having another go” would be entirely dependent on gaining the support of other nations. His son. ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’, the Young Pretender, was rather more sanguine, expecting that he could find sufficient support within Britain. In 1744, James had at last gained agreement in principle for that support, from France, and travelled from Rome to northern France bent on invasion. Not for the first or last time Britain was spared invasion by bad weather in the Channel! Charles raised some money and came to Scotland.

Sir James, the Grant chief of the day was already over 65 years old when the Prince launched his campaign and he high tailed it to London leaving his son Ludovick to take charge of clan affairs. It has usually been claimed that their reluctance to become heavily involved (on the Government side) was due to its failure to reimburse them for their previous efforts, but recent research by Chris Grant has shown that in fact they were only too well aware from the start about just how split even the Strathspey men were on this matter. Eventually a small force was raised, but under duress and with some difficulty. The best that could be done was to get the key people in Strathspey to sign a Bond of Neutrality. This did not enamour the men to either side and Ludovick’s position in government favour continued to hang on a shooglie peg.

On Lochness-side Glenmoriston marched with the Jacobites to Derby, Given his ‘previous’ and that his position was entirely down to his chief buying his lands back from the Forfeited Estates Commission and giving them back to him, this was a particular betrayal. Clansmen in the Glen were very largely staunchly Jacobite (neighbouring the Camerons with concomitant intermarriage was a significant factor) and Patrick, ‘Black Peter’, Grant of Craskie was the key figure of the “7 men of Glenmoriston” who ensured the Prince’s safety after Culloden. The only reason a contingent of them was not at Culloden was that they had been dispatched to round up some cattle with which to feed the Jacobite troops.

In Glenurquhart a significant contingent joined the Jacobite army, went with it into England and were present at Culloden (April 1746). Alexander of Corrimony was injured at Culloden and then had to hide in a cave for several weeks.

After Culloden the Strathspey men were falling over each other in their rush to join in with the government forces and demonstrate how loyal they had been all along. Government troops went into Glenmoriston and there is no doubt that many revenge atrocities took place which would be accounted war crimes today. The Glenurquhart men were a wily lot and the government found itself in a cleft stick – it would take an enormous effort to round up the miscreants they wanted. So they made it a test of Ludovick’s loyalty to ensure that he brought the men in. He had a word with “Old Sheuglie” and the next day suddenly all the men being hunted appeared and were marched to Inverness. Opinion as to just what was said to whom varies. Chris Grant maintains that Ludovick made promises which he knew from the start he would not honour – in effect betraying them.

I am hesitant about this

  1. everyone involved knew perfectly well that Ludovick did not have the power to deliver on any promise that if they surrendered themselves they would be set free without further ado. Thus
  2. Ludovick may have honestly and correctly relayed a message to this effect from the army high command and THEY went back on their word and/or
  3. Ludovick may have told Sheuglie that if the men did not surrender themselves he would see to it that the glen was laid waste and that all the families concerned would be turned out of their houses in complete penury – if necessary the houses themselves destroyed. [This actually happened to a substantial extent in Corrimony and widely in Glenmoriston by Redcoats despite so many men handing themselves in – very many of the remaining people were left starving and homeless.]

However Ludovick did say that he would make a strong plea for their case – and to this end he was prepared with an aide memoire – exonerating notes from the (albeit staunch Jacobite) local minister. He made no such plea in mitigation, merely advising the authorities to “Do with them as you will.” To this extent it does seem that he went back on his word and this could be classed as a betrayal. His attempt to make some pleas in mitigation came too late. What we cannot say is what difference, if any, would have been made by making those pleas timeously in Inverness.

Whatever actually happened, the outcome was harsh – but they were rebels, they had disobeyed their chief and no genuinely innocent man went down (albeit at least some of the rebels condemned in this way had joined the Jacobite ranks only under considerable duress). The result of the surrender was detention in custody on stinking naval hulks (where Old Sheuglie died) followed by large scale transportation to slavery in Barbados from where very few returned – most died. At the trials some of even the most hardened anti-Jacobites felt that they were treated very badly; it is a great pity that Ludovick and the Sheuglies got into mud-slinging – but actually both were fairly desperate. [Much of the detail here is revealed for the first time in Chris’ book.]

The upshot of the Jacobite rebellions was the systematic dismantling of the Clan System.

Sir Ludovick had really been out of his depth – dealing with matters beyond his control. Perhaps in part he was lucky – too many of those ‘above’ him came off worse. Fortuitously, however, he had left his descendants with their means of recovery – for he had married (as his 2nd wife) Margaret Ogilvie daughter and ultimately heiress of the Earls of Seafield through whom came money to shore up his finances and those of later generations, but also the Earldom itself.

[Editorial Summary: The Grants had had to get used to “normal life” in the Highlands – with the endemic cattle lifting etc. Casualties, usually few, were accepted as part of the game. In the person of James nan Creach the Grants reached a point where they were largely on top of this situation. And they made a lot of money by controlling so many of the crossing points on the Spey. But the bitterness, violence and side-taking caused by religious division was of a different order – although it has also to be said that this itself was at least in part a reaction to the prior cruelty of the Catholic church in suppressing heresy etc. putting to a very cruel death anyone who departed from their teachings. Over some generations the Grant chiefs had expended a lot of effort and a lot of money trying to calm things down and making good the damage done by others. We have seen this done for others, but also specifically Glenmoriston. And then these people whom they had helped so generously spat it all back in their face – and they were never reimbursed. So Ludovick had every right to feel very bitter about the whole situation. In these circumstances only a saint would have behaved any better and so far as the memory of Ludovick is concerned we should bear in mind the words of Mark Anthony in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar:

“The Evil that men do lives after them, the Good is oft entered with their bones.”]

After the Clan (1745 - 1811)

Although legislation following the 45 put a formal end to much of the clan system it had been disintegrating for a while. As we have seen, some estates were really not economically viable Overpopulation meant that ordinary clansmen were increasingly trying to scratch a living from land that was really fit for no more than summer grazing; when this proved inadequate an uncomfortable, passage across the Atlantic could lead to attempts at pioneering in the new world.

For gentry too many of the estates were already occupied, so more and more younger sons had to find a future eg in the armed forces or find a “middle class” profession in the law or medicine.

Ludovick’s father, Sir James died in 1747, but as we have seen Ludovick had really taken over in 1745; after the rebellion was over, he was a spent force. He returned to London to take up his role as an MP, but retired through ill health in 1761 at the young age of 54 and handed over the estates to “the Good” Sir James in 1763. However, in the meantime he had set in process a revolution in land ownership. What had been a largely cohesive wider family cooperative structure became grimly commercial. The first casualties seem to have been the Grants of Tullochgorm who had their wadset redeemed. They had the option of staying on in Tullochgorm as tenants, but this loss of status was irksome in the extreme and they soon moved. But so penniless was he that he was unable to follow this up by redeeming the wadset on Easter Elchies which was then sold on. Other major estates left Grant hands.

(a) Town Building

As mentioned above, life for many clansmen had been one of increasingly grinding poverty and it was only set to get worse. Across the highlands lairds were not getting the rents they needed and this resulted in the Highland Clearances, a subject of at least as much subsequent bitterness as taking sides in the rebellion had been. Landlords varied as to how they treated the families they cleared. Many of the working class ended up in the slums of Glasgow and other cities where they were prey to rapacious factory owners. Again as noted, some found their way to the colonies as deck passengers and hoped for better things in the colonies/ Where a laird had shoreline some of the more enlightened were “resettled|” in newly formed fishing villages – but even here life was hard given the precarious nature of the life at sea in the small boats they could afford.

On Grant lands only in Glenmoriston was land emptied to make way for sheep, although land in Rothiemurchus was cleared to make way for deer forest. But the chief did not engage in clearance.

In 1760 Sir Archibald Grant of Monymusk took the initiative of creating a new town at his Strathspey estate at Balintomb near Aberlour and this was followed by Sir James followed suit by founding Grantown-on-Spey in 1765 (albeit partly to be able to clear away Old Grantown just SW of Castle Grant). This was followed up on 1767 by Lewiston in Glenurquart (named after his newborn son and heir Lewis Alexander) and somewhat later by Charlestown of Aberlour founded by Charles Grant of Wester Elchies – a Grant cadet – built on to an existing village. [The Gordons established Tomintoul in 1775.]

The purpose of these new settlements was to provide the local people with an alternative to leaving the area altogether and a place where modern amenities could be provided – and they were successful to a substantial extent.

(b) Seeking fortunes abroad

With the end of the Jacobite insurgency, Scots were able to play a full part in the burgeoning British Empire, making careers and fortunes for themselves. Among the more notable were:

The Fur Trade in Canada: Cuthbert Grant and others tried their luck with the Canadian fur trade, integrating themselves so well with the local community that a new “tribe” was founded, the “Métis” (which is French and really means “half-caste”) which has now been recognised as a Canadian “first nation”. Others would follow including William Grant of Trois Rivières.

The East India Company: Many Grants sought and found positions in the East India Company, most notably Charles Grant (born in 1746, the son of Alexander Grant ‘The Swordsman’) of the Sheuglie family who served as that company’s Chairman. Many others found positions there whether in civil or military service.

Caribbean Slavery: The Chieftain of Dalvey threw himself into the slave trade becoming a partner in the firm Grant Oswald which rented Bunce Island from the local king of what would become Sierra Leone and making a fortune both for the king and for themselves – so much so that the coat of Arms of the Grants of Dalvey has a black man as one of his supporters. Other Grants acquired plantations in the Caribbean and large houses were built on the proceeds.

Medical Training: One of the ironies of slavery was that the slaves were an asset with (often considerable) monetary value and so were worth “maintaining”. The result of this was that many Grants from the next level down in Society were able to learn all about the medical profession by moving to the Caribbean for their medical training – with the result that the slaves had access to far better medical treatment than the poor in the slums and even in the countryside. These newly trained doctors could then return to take up practice in the UK.

(c) Rewriting History

We noted above the way “life” treated Ludovick Grant and that given the Union of the Parliaments he was able to become an MP and spend considerable time in London. He sent his son James to Westminster School with a tutor and then saw to him having a ‘gap year’ taking the Grand Tour of Europe. So Sir James grew up in a milieu which could not be more different from that of his predecessors. Although his bride was Scottish they even got married in Bath! Given this and his father’s bad experience it was not surprising that he was not happy that he himself was a male line co-descendant with the would-be Jacobite kings.

And so it was that he hatched a plot to rewrite his own ancestry. We can see from the dates of birth of his children that a new formulation was first promulgated in 1773 as his submission to “The Baronage of Scotland” (see text in Library) – although this was not actually published until 1798. As we can see with regard to the ancestry he was careful to say no more than that it was a matter of conjecture. He removed Aulay from his position as the 1st Chief, but his key move was to remove Andrew Stewart and substituted a “Malcolm. On his side were the real inaccuracies in the MS texts only finally corrected in 2012, but the chronological problems in his own text demonstrate that he had not given any serious thought to the matter.

Hard on the heels of this nonsense in the name of the Chief himself, and actually published earlier came the entry in Rev. Lachlan Shaw’s History of Moray (1775). Sadly he was correct to disdain the chronology of the early chiefs, but he did emphasise as definitely true the grafting of Andrew Stewart into the family. Unfortunately his aspersions on the early dating were more fuel for the fire. As he was married to a Grant we might speculate as to whether he had had sight of Sir James’ statement.

There was push back soon (1782) with the Birkenburn MS specifically addressed to Lewis Alexander Grant, Sir James’ heir, written by a minister and clearly intended to correct the errors which Sir James had introduced in the hope that they would not be perpetuated by his son.

This then opened the way for further revisionism which culminated in the monstrous cover-up of Sir William Fraser’s 1883 “The Chiefs of Grant” so ably and thoroughly dissected and refuted by the late Peter Grant of East Lavant.

A series of Knockbacks (1811-1915)

Sir Lewis Alexander: Sir James’ heir Lewis Alexander seemed to be set for a stellar career. He trained for the bar and excelled. He became a Member of Parliament and made an excellent first impression. Unfortunately, however, he had an excess of what we might refer to as the wrong sort of fondness for women – resulting in his contracting syphilis at a very young age. Nowadays, especially if caught early, this poses no insuperable problem – but that is only since the development of antibiotics. In those days there was no ‘cure’ and, as continued right into World War II, the recommended treatment was mercury. Unfortunately this resulted in Lewis Alexander contracting Mad Hatter’s Disease – mercury poisoning – with the associated psychological problems which rendered him medically unfit to continue as chief or to manage the estates. Much of his life was lived as a recluse, quite the opposite of how his life had been before – all this well before he inherited the Earldom shortly after the death of his father. Although he lived to the age of 73, dying in 1840, his affairs were under the legal control of his brother.

His time as chief was notable for the last time any clan was raised in earnest. In 1820 the Fiery Cross was sent round, the war cry went up and the men of the clan mustered and marched for the successful Raid on Elgin. The purpose was to rescue the Lady Anne who was under siege in Grant Lodge from a politically hostile crowd (see Fraser vol I p 464-6)

He was so grateful to the Ogilvies both for his title and for the concomitant wealth that he changed his name to Grant-Ogilvie and matriculated arms that reflected both families (the arms quartered and two crests and two mottos). [Subsequent members of the family used ‘Ogilvie-Grant’.]

The Dowager Countess: There was no love lost between Lewis Alexander’s nephews. The elder, Sir John-Charles and his next brother Sir James. It appears that John-Charles was conservative while James was a radical. It was John-Charles who was married to Carolina Stuart, daughter of the 11th Earl of Blantyre. This was not problematic until John-Charles died in 1881 (he had inherited from his father in 1853). His heir was his son Ian Charles but he died in 1884 unmarried aged 33. This meant that the titles and the chiefship passed automatically to Sir James. The problem was that the estates had been disentailed and so on her son’s death it was the Dowager Countess Caroline who inherited all the land and all the money.

James had, of course, had no expectation of the position he would reach, he was on a limited income with limited prospects and two wives had predeceased him. So it is not a great surprise that his son, Francis William (b.1847) whose mother had died when he was just 3 went to sea and then settled in New Zealand where, after a couple of financial mishaps, he had to resort to labouring. In 1884, when he became Lord Reidhaven, he eventually received an allowance from the Dowager Countess. By this time, he had married and had a son, James. And then came 1888.

In 1888 Not only did James (the 9th Earl) die, but a few months later so did his son Francis William (in New Zealand, aged just 41 – there was a massive funeral), meaning that suddenly the 12-year-old James became the 11th Earl. 3 Earls in one year and the 5 in just 7 years. [Recent Conservative Prime Ministers come to mind!!]

Captain Sir James: Sir James, may have become the Earl but it was the Dowager Countess Caroline who still held the purse strings. Although James was now on an allowance sufficient for him not to have to work, it was in essence conditional on his keeping away from Scotland. Eventually Caroline died in 1911. Even her will was complicated; much of her fortune was dispersed and the remainder which was to go to Sir James was retained in trust until he turned 40 (due in 1916) – so in the meantime he still had to go cap-in-hand to the trustees. Given how the Dowager had kept Sir James and his family out of the loop, it could be argued that this was a good idea. A 5-year ‘reading-in’ period should have left him properly prepared to run the estate.

But no-one concerned had anticipated World War I. On mobilisation James wrote a simple two line will bequeathing everything to his then 9-year-old daughter Nina. He was killed the next year at Ypres, dying a few hours after being shot by a sniper.

Modern Times (1915 – present)

So far as the titles held by Captain Sir James were concerned, succession was not a matter of choice so much as a matter of law. His daughter Nina became Countess of Seafield (a title in the Scottish Peerage) in her own right. Both the UK titles, Baron Strathspey and the Baronetcy of Nova Scotia, came to Sir James’ next oldest brother, Trevor (3 years his junior). His early life was spent in New Zealand until 1913 when he brought his family to Britain. By this time, he must have had a substantial allowance as he was able to send his children to private schools and could afford the time to take his seat in and attend the House of Lords. He had no direct connection with Scotland.

Nina may have been the Countess, but her affairs were controlled by curators and trustees. By the Dowager Countess’ will she was not legally able to take financial control of her own affairs until 1946. The minutes of the meetings of the trustees are a matter of public record. They are in the National Archives, but have not yet been accessed.

What the Trustees thought they were doing – what her mother thought she was doing – is beyond short-sighted for they and Nina herself made no attempt to claim the Clan chiefship. Worse than that: when her arms were matriculated, she put the Ogilvie arms in the pronomial quarter. This announced her as more Ogilvie than Grant and opened the way for Sir Trevor to claim the chiefship of the Clan, which he did successfully in 1929.

Around this time The Lyon Court was undergoing a transformation. In clan times when titles and “real” money largely went together it was all about managing this. But in post-clan times it needed to renew itself. On the one hand there was a burgeoning of new “clans” being given official recognition – many of which had no direct connection to the old Highland and Border clans – on the other hand it wanted to clean up much of the mess caused by serial intermarriage whereby there was a mismatch between name and clan chiefship. The chief was the chief of the name.

So when Sir Trevor’s son, Sir Patrick, came to matriculate he was asked whether he wanted to be the Chief of Grant (with many thousands of clan members in Scotland and worldwide) or the Chief of Ogilvie-Grant (with membership probably stretching into double figures – though less today). He opted for ‘Grant’ which meant that he needed to de-hyphenate his name, but entitled him to claim the ‘original’ Grant arms. He was active in promoting kinship amongst clan members, attending gatherings in Scotland and beyond and writing a new, up to date and accessible History of the Clan published in 1983.

When Sir Patrick died in 1992, his eldest son, Sir James (then aged 49) took up the reins with enthusiasm. Suffering from dyslexia and consequential difficulties, he was nevertheless able to gather the supporters he needed and was able to return to reside in Strathspey where he was able to devote himself fully to clan affairs. Amongst his achievement were:

  • Enthusiastically encouraging the new research efforts made possible by modern technology which, inter alia, allowed us finally to refute the bogus history promulgated by his forebear the Good Sir James (see “Scottish Clans….” etc.);
  • Taking a leadership role by being one of the (if not “the”) first clan chief to allow his DNA to be used as a reference point by other clan members;
  • Forging and then formalising connections with Cherokee descendants of Ludovick Grant of Creichie and Métis descendants of Cuthbert Grant;
  • Hosting three very successful international Clan Gatherings in Strathspey (others planned falling foul of the Covid19 pandemic).

Sadly Sir James died in 2023 a few weeks before his 80th birthday.