|
PREFACE
SOME years ago I was induced
to investigate the history of the family to which I belong, and at first I
sought information from the various accounts of the Frasers, both manuscript
and printed, that have appeared from time to time; but I found them so
contradictory of one another, and in many respects so far at variance with
indubitable facts, that I came to the conclusion that dependence upon any of
them would only lead me into error, and that I must search for myself among
old records in order to arrive at any approximation to the truth.
In pursuing these investigations, I determined to rely on the four kinds of
evidence, which are placed below in the order of their respective degrees of
value :—
First. Charter evidence, or the mention of individuals in various degrees of
relationship to other persons in charters, royal mandates, or other
important legal or official documents. Although these are not always
conclusive as to the possession of the lands they assume to grant, or the
performance of the acts they order to be done, they are, with scarcely an
exception, trustworthy as regards the relationship of individuals when it is
noticed in them.
Second. Evidence from succession to property by persons of the same surname,
combined with due attention to dates, to the positions in which those
persons are found, and to evidence of relationship with other persons, of
whose existence and position there is certain record.
Third. Evidence from the mention of persons by trustworthy contemporary, or
nearly contemporary historians, and other authors; consideration being given
to the circumstances in which their names appear.
Fourth. Evidence from tradition, or writings of genealogists, when nothing
adverse to the statements is gathered from other and more trustworthy
sources.
When the above-mentioned four kinds of evidence have failed me, I mention
that it is so, sometimes offering a suggestion.
Although naturally my researches have been directed more especially to that
line of the family which I represent, yet they have led me to investigate
the origin of the principal other branches, and if I had found evidence that
any of them was senior to my own line, I would at once have acknowledged it,
for there can be no dishonour in the accident of birth; but since, on the
contrary, I have found from proof that the line I represent is the senior
line of all now surviving, and is descended from Sir Alexander Fraser,
Chamberlain of Scotland, who was head of the family in the time of King
Robert Bruce, I have no hesitation in asserting my own position as the head
of the family at the present day.
Some remarks upon the subject of the Highland Clan Fraser will explain their
position; for their great influence in the Highlands of Scotland during
comparatively modern times, and their possessions in those districts, have
created the belief that all of the name must necessarily be members of that
Clan, and some have supposed that the family had a Highland or Celtic
origin, a supposition in some degree countenanced by one or two writers on
the subject; especially by one who styles the town of Fraserburgh “ strange
offspring of a Highland Clan.”
But the fact is, that the origin, or formation, of the Highland Clan Fraser
cannot be dated further back than the fifteenth century, for although the
surname appears in the Lowlands of Scotland as early as the middle of the
twelfth century, none of its members acquired any permanent settlement in
the Highlands until the fourteenth century, at which time a branch, which
also held lands in Forfarshire, obtained large possessions in the districts
around Inverness, and eventually becoming very numerous, originated or
formed the Highland Clan of the name.
But the senior line, which continued to have their principal seat in the
Lowlands, and those of the surname who remained in that section of Scotland,
where Teutonic institutions prevailed, and whence the patriarchal system of
Clans and Clanships had long been banished, had nothing to do with the
origin or formation of the Highland Clan, and never belonged to it.
I have noticed, p. 130 vol. i. and p. 170 vol. ii., the extreme probability,
indeed almost certainty, that the representatives of the respective lines of
Philorth and Lovat were nearest of kin to each other in 1464, with the
exception of the six sons of the Philorth of that date; and such has been
the extinction of male descendants in the various branches of the line of
Philorth, that at the present time, with the exception of my own two sons,
my two brothers, and their four sons, numbering- eight persons in all, Lord
Lovat is my nearest legitimate male connection of the Fraser name.
My self-imposed task would have been far shorter and less difficult if I had
not found myself obliged to notice, and, as far as possible, to correct the
errors into which former writers upon the Fraser genealogy have fallen; and
although I cannot hope myself to have avoided mistakes, and facts with which
I am unacquainted may hereafter be brought to light, I have spared no pains
to establish the correctness of every statement in this history, which I
must now leave to the judgment of the reader.
In the course of my researches I became aware of an accidental oversight
upon the part of Mr. Hill Burton, in his well-known History of Scotland.
In his list of the Barons of Scotland, who in 1320 sent the famous letter to
Pope John xxil, he has omitted the name of Sir Alexander Fraser.
I thought it right to bring this omission to his notice, and upon doing so
received the subjoined courteous reply, in which, while acknowledging the
mistake, he promises that it shall be rectified at the earliest opportunity.
“Craighouse, Lothianburn,
“Edinburgh, 21s£ October 1871.
“My Lord,—I have the honour of your Lordship’s of the 11th, which only
reached me yesterday. I showed it immediately to my father-in-law, Cosmo
Innes, who said he had no doubt it was a correction of a mistake. I then
looked at the original in the Register House, and there I found the name
Alexander Fraser. I also saw how, in a careless transcription, it might be
passed over. It comes between Menteith and Hay the constable, both with long
titles : ‘ Johannes de Meneteth custos comitatus de Meneteth,’ then comes,
crushed in, ‘ Alexr Frasr.’
“In revising my book I shall not only see to the correction, but examine the
several copies of the list, so that any who are interested may be warned
against errors, o
“Permit me to express my thanks to your Lordship for favouring me with this
correction. I have occasionally received letters asking me to notice matters
of family history which do not come within my scope. But certainly no house
in Scotland that has the distinction of belonging to that group of patriots
should wittingly let it be dropped out of remembrance.
“I have the honour to be, your Lordship’s very obedient servant,
“Lord Saltoun.”
“ J. H. Burton.
At pages 89, 90, 91, of vol. i., I have referred to the error of certain
heralds of the seventeenth century, hi blazoning the arms of “Lord Fraser of
old,” and of Fraser Lord Lovat, as five “frays” placed saltircways. It was
not until after those remarks were printed that I met with a copy of Sir
David Lindsay’s work on Heraldry, of date 1542, which showed me that those
heralds could claim his high authority for their statements.
But it also showed me that, whether originated by himself or before his
time, Sir David Lindsay participated in the error; and it confirmed my view
of the cause of the error having been the quarterings in the Yester arms;
for the field of those quarterings on the shield of Hay Lord Yester, at page
56 of Sir David Lindsay’s work, and that of the shield of “Fraseir Lord
Frasere,” at page 59 (the “Lord Fraser of old” of the heralds), are both
sable ; and as the field of the arms of Sir Simon Fraser, filius, whose
daughter and co-heiress brought those quarterings into the Yester shield,
was also sable (pp. 84, 95, vol. ii.), this affords additional evidence that
the mistake originated through ignorance of the true ancient bearings of the
Fraser family, as borne by that Sir Simon and his contemporaries of the
name, viz., six rosettes or cinquefoils placed 3. 2. 1, and of their
reduction from six to three placed 2.1, on the failure of the eldest male
line during the fourteenth century (pp. 85, 86, vol. i.), and in the
erroneous belief that the quarterings in the Yester shield represented those
ancient bearings, as borne by the father of the heiress who brought them
into the family of Hay.
It was my intention to have restricted this work within the limits of two
volumes, but having in my possession a considerable number of letters,
written by the late Lieut.-General Lord Saltoun during his military services
in various parts of the world, it was suggested that selections from these
might prove of interest, and hence a third volume has been added.
These letters range from the first entrance of Lord Saltoun upon active
military service to within a few days of his decease ; and they evince
throughout the manly straightforwardness, the strong, good-sense, the firm
self-reliance, the obedience to the dictates of duty, the cheerful and
contented temper, the sympathy with his fellow-man, and the warm affection
to those more nearly connected with him that formed his character, while the
last letter, written by a friend who was present at the closing scene of his
life, shows how calmly and fearlessly this brave and good man rendered his
spirit to God who gave it.
For the letters written to Lieut.-Colonel and Mrs. Charles Ellis, I am
indebted to the kindness of the late Lady Parker, widow of Vice-Admiral Sir
Charles C. Parker, Bart., and sisterin-law of Mrs. Charles Ellis; and to Mr.
Francis Bayley, through whom I received them, I am also indebted for many
valuable hints during my researches.
It may be of interest to point out the striking similarity between the early
career of the late Lieut.-General Lord Saltoun and that of his distinguished
ancestor, Sir Alexander Fraser the Chamberlain, though separated by an
interval of five hundred years.
Either was born towards the close of a century; Sir Alexander about 1285,
Lord Saltoun in 1785. Either lost his father at an early age. Either
commenced an active military career at a similar time; Sir Alexander in 1306
when he joined Bruce, Lord Saltoun in 1806 in the expedition to Sicily.
Either passed the next eight or nine years of his life in almost constant
warfare. Either took part in the decisive victory that insured success to
the cause for which he fought; Sir Alexander at Bannockburn in June 1314,
Lord Saltoun at Waterloo in June 1815. Either married at a similar period;
Sir Alexander about 1315-16, Lord Saltoun in 1815. Either, after a few
years, was left a widower.
But there the parallel ends, for the former, while leaving issue, fell in
battle at a comparatively early age; and the latter, while be had no child,
nearly attained to the allotted threescore and ten years of man’s existence.
Although I cannot flatter myself that the subject of which I have treated
will be of much interest to the general public, I hope there are some to
whom these volumes will afford pleasure, and serve as a record of the family
to which they belong, or with which they are connected by ties of kindred or
friendship.
I have to offer my best thanks to those friends who have afforded me
assistance during my labours, among whom are Sir Alexander Anderson, Mr. W.
F. Skene, Mr. Thomas Dickson, and Mr. Hugh Fraser. From the Authorities at
the Record Office and the British Museum in London, and the General Register
House and Advocates’ Library in Edinburgh, I have also experienced much
kindness, and I must mention with gratitude the help and encouragement I
received from the late Mr. Cosmo Innes, and the late Mr. Grant Leslie; and last not least, my thanks are due to Mr. William Fraser, himself the author
of many valuable Family Histories, who has given me not only the benefit of
his great experience and vast research, but has also led my unaccustomed
footsteps through the thorny paths of the press.
SALTOUN.
Philorth, June 1879.
Volume 1 |
Volume 2 |
Volume 3 |
