fashion. He accepts it as indubitable, and had he refrained from giving
the grounds upon which he bases his opinion, his deservedly high
reputation as a Celtic historian might have satisfied the general reader
as to the truth of his _ipse dixit_. But the two reasons he advances are
absurd. From his own words you will learn how he disposes of the origin
of the Clan: "Of the Norman origin of the family of the Frasers it is
impossible for a moment to entertain a doubt. They appear during the
first few generations uniformly in that quarter of Scotland which is
south of the Firths of Forth and Clyde, and they possessed at a very
early period extensive estates in the counties of East Lothian and of
Tweeddale; besides the name of Frisale, which is its ancient form,
appears in the roll of Battle Abbey, thus placing the Norman character
of their origin beyond a doubt." Mr. Skene's first reason is that, "they
appear during the first few generations uniformly in that quarter of
Scotland which is south of the Forth and Clyde." Had this part of
Scotland been at that time inhabited by Normans, Mr. Skene's position
would not seem so surprising as it does; but, as a matter of fact, at
the time when the Frasers, according to Skene himself, flourished in the
south of Scotland, the population there was Celtic, and his plain
reasoning is: "The Frasers first appear in Scottish records as part of a
Celtic population; therefore they must be of Norman origin!" Mr. Skene's
second reason, while not so manifestly absurd, is equally weak. It is:
"The name of Frisale, which is the ancient form of "Fraser," appears in
the roll of Battle Abbey, thus placing the Norman character of their
origin beyond a doubt." And it is on such grounds as these that Mr.
Skene proceeds. Why, the ingenious Senachies, skilled in genealogy, if
not in the unravelling of charter deeds, could give an infinitely more
plausible statement of a continental descent. In the first place, it is
now impossible to authenticate the genuineness of the Roll of Battle
Abbey; and in the second place, if the roll were beyond question, there
is nothing to show that the Frisale whose name appears on it was the
progenitor of the Scottish Frasers. Mr. Skene does not pretend to prove
that he passed from England to Scotland and founded the family there.
But although he does not give us details, Mr. Skene's theory can be
nothing else than that Frisale, the follower of William the Conqueror,
was the same who received the lands held by the family in 1109 in the
south of Scotland from the Scottish monarch. Let us see how this theory
will bear examination. One sentence disposes of it completely and
forever. There were Frasers in possession of estates in the south of
Scotland before the Battle of Hastings, and from them Gilbert Fraser,
who figures in the Cospatrick Charter of 1109, was descended. Long
before 1109 the family had possessions in the Lothians and Tweeddale and
farther to the north. It requires no more than this statement of fact to
dispose of the Roll of Battle Abbey and the Frisale whose name furnished
the late Historiographer Royal of Scotland with an easy outlet from an
apparently difficult position. But supposing we allow for a moment the
prior occupation of the Frasers to disappear from view, and with Skene
begin at 1109 with Gilbert Fraser. Even then the case for Frisale would
be hopelessly weak. The Battle of Hastings was fought in 1066. From 1058
to 1093 Malcolm Ceanmor sat on the Scottish throne; he it would be,
according to Skene, who gave Frisale the grant of the extensive estates
of the Tweeddale Frasers. But he was the bitter foe of William the
Conqueror, who supplanted Edgar Atheling, whose sister Margaret was
Malcolm's Queen, and whose nephew, also named Edgar, reigned in Scotland
until 1107. Is it credible that Malcolm or Donald Bane, or Duncan, or
Edgar, would strip their own nobles, in times of very uncertain warfare,
of their lands, in order to bestow them upon aliens, and these aliens
the feudal vassals of their turbulent, warlike enemy? No careful reader
of that period of Scottish history can believe that to have been
possible. If it be said that Alexander I. and David I. favored Norman
courtezans with grants of land on feudal titles, the answer is that
Alexander mounted the throne not earlier than 1107, when the Frasers had
already achieved historic prominence. While these remarks may suffice to
indicate how valueless are the reasons put forward by Mr. Skene, they do
not touch other theories pointing to a French origin prior to the reign
of Malcolm Ceanmor. But these other theories having been rejected by Mr.
Skene and his school, we may conclude that they rest their case on the
statements just alluded to and disposed of.
Annalists and Clan historians have, however, gone into particulars of
the Norman-French theory. According to some the name was derived from
the _fraise_ or 'strawberry' leaves in their arms, and it was related
that they sprang from the Frezels of France. Others give different
origins; but, before laying before you the serious objections to the
Norman-French theory, it is right that I should repeat what has been in
many quarters regarded as strong circumstantial evidence in its favor. I
refer to the bond entered into, as late as the first part of the
eighteenth century, between Simon Lord Lovat (who was beheaded) and the
Marquis de la Frezeliere. Lord Lovat was a fugitive in France at the
time, and he was befriended by the Marquis. He wrote his life in French,
afterwards translated into English and published in 1796. In it he makes
the following statement:--
"The house of Frezel, or Frezeau de la Frezeliere, is one of the most
ancient houses in France. It ascends by uninterrupted filiation, and
without any unequal alliance, to the year 1030. It is able to establish
by a regular proof sixty-four quarterings in its armorial bearings, and
all noble. It has titles of seven hundred years standing in the abbey of
Notre Dame de Noyers in Touraine. And it is certain, that, beside
these circumstances of inherent dignity, the house de la Frezeliere is
one of the best allied in the kingdom. It numbers among its ancestors on
the female side daughters of the families de Montmorenci, de Rieux, de
Rohan, de Bretagne, de la Savonniere, de la Tremouille, de la Grandiere,
and de St. Germains. Through the houses de Montmorenci, de Rieux, de
Rohan, and de la Tremouille, to which the Marquis de la Frezeliere is
nearly allied, he can trace his filiation through all the French
monarchs, up to Charlemagne, King of France and Emperor of the West.
Down again through the various branches of the illustrious house of
France, M. de la Frezeliere may, without impropriety, assert his
alliance to all the royal houses and almost all the principal nobility
of Europe.
"It is demonstrated by various historians, by the tradition of the two
families, and from letters written from time to time from one to the
other, that the house of Frezel or Frezeau de la Frezeliere in France,
and the house of Frezel or Fraser in Scotland, were of the same origin,
and derived from the same blood. The Marquis de la Frezeliere, the head
and representative of the Frezels or Frezeaus in France, and Lord Lovat,
the representative of the Frezels or Frasers in the north and the
Highlands of Scotland, having happily encountered each other at Paris in
the second journey that Lord Lovat made to France for the service of his
king (1702), were therefore both of them highly gratified with the
opportunity that offered itself of renewing their alliance and declaring
their affinity in a common and authentic act of recognition drawn up for
that purpose.
"This record was executed on the one part by the Marquis de la
Frezeliere himself, by the Duke de Luxembourg, the Duke de Chatillon
and the Prince de Tingrie, the three worthy and illustrious children of
the late Marshal de Luxembourg Montmorenci, whose heroic exploits are
not less glorious and celebrated than his descent is ancient and august.
Several other lords of the house of Montmorenci, the Marquis de Rieux,
and many noblemen related by blood and marriage to M. de la Frezeliere,
joined with the Marquis in affixing their signatures to this act of
recognition. On the other part it was executed by Simon Lord Lovat, Mr.
John Fraser, his brother, and Mr. George Henry Fraser, Major of the
Irish regiment of Bourke in the French service, for themselves, in the
name of their whole family in Scotland.
"By this deed the kindred of the two houses of the Frezels or Frasers is
placed out of all possible doubt. Accordingly from the moment in which
it was executed the Marquis de la Frezeliere regarded Lord Lovat rather
as his brother and his child than as his remote relation; and had his
re-establishment in Scotland nearer his heart than his own elevation in
France."
[Twenty Portrait Photographs of:
J. H. Fraser Chas. Fraser A. W. Fraser Norman Fraser Andrew Fraser
Jno. Fraser Elisha A. Fraser Dr. Mungo Fraser Dr. J. B. Fraser A. R. Fraser
Alexander Fraser John Fraser Alexander Fraser Robt. L. Fraser W. P. Fraser
William Fraser Hugh Miller W. H. Fraser Geo. B. Fraser Jas. Fraser]
THE SCOTTISH ORIGIN OF THE NAME.--Logan, author of the "Scottish Gael,"
agrees with those who claim a Scottish origin for the name. He derives
it from _Frith_, 'a forest,' and _siol_--'seed,' 'offspring.' His theory
has at least the merit of great probability, and is certainly to be
preferred to the Norman-French, unless the latter can be supported by
better evidence than has yet been brought forward. In a most interesting
volume on surnames by Mr. B. Homer Dixon, K.N.L., published in 1857,
there are very suggestive notes on the surname "Fraser." He agrees with
Logan, and he combats the Norman origin. His interest in the Clan
Fraser is one of descent from a notable cadet family, and in connection
with the origin of the name he has kindly furnished me with the
following valuable statement:--
"I differ from Skene and the older writers who derive the Frasers either
from Pierre Fraser, who came to Scotland about the year 800, and whose
son Charles was made Thane of Man in 814, or from Julius de Berry, of
Averme in the Bourbonnais, who, in the year 916, gave Charles the Simple
so delicious a dish of strawberries that the king changed his name to
'de Fraize' and gave him 'fraizes' for arms.
"According to the best authorities hereditary surnames were not used
until about the year 1000, and Arms were certainly not borne until after
the Norman Conquest, being only introduced about four score years later
at the time of the second Crusade, viz., A.D. 1146, and therefore more
than two centuries after the date of those ascribed to Julius de Fraize.
"That the last Lord Lovat believed in his Norman descent I do not doubt.
Early in the last century (A.D. 1702) he signed a bond of recognition
with the Marquis Frezeau or Frezel de la Frezeliere, declaring that
their name and origin were the same and acknowledging themselves as
relations. The Frezeaus, however, were Anjevins from near Saumur, while
the first Scotch Fraser was said to be a Bourbonnais; still both parties
were probably easily satisfied with their bond, which only went to prove
apparently more clearly the antiquity of the families, however
unnecessary, for the Frezeaus or Frezels were one of the most ancient
houses in France, and the Frasers are undoubtedly one of the noblest
families in Scotland. Burton, in his Life of Lord Lovat, London, 147, p.
104, throws discredit upon Lord Lovat's statement (Memoirs of Lord
Lovat, London) of the antiquity of the family of Frezeau de la
Frezeliere, because, forsooth, there is no account of the family in 'le
Pere Anselme,' but Moreri (Grand Dicte. Histe. Basle, 1740) says 'the
family was one of the most ancient in the kingdom' (almost the very
words of Lord Lovat), 'and one of the most illustrious of the Province
(Anjou), where they have possessed from time immemorial the seigniory of
the Frezeliere.' Moreri adds that there were Chevaliers Frezel in 1030,
and, commencing his pedigree with the Chevalier Geoffrey, living in
1270, carries it down uninterruptedly to the Marquis de la Frezeliere,
et de Monsieur Baron de Lasse, Lieutenant-General in the army and first
Lieutenant-General in the Artillery, who died in 1711.
"Both the Marquis and Lord Lovat were mistaken, however, for the Anjevin
name does _not_ signify 'strawberry,' neither does that family bear
'fraises' in their arms, but Frezeau or Frezel de la Frezeliere
signifies 'Ash of the Ash Plantation or Wood,' from the Romance word
_Fraysse_, 'an ash tree;' and in Auvergne there is a family styled 'du
Fraisse,' who bear an ash tree in their arms. Similar names to Frezel de
la Frezeliere are le Bastard de la Bastardiere, Freslon de la
Freslonniere, Raband de la Rabandiere.
"It is true that the name Frisell occurs in the Roll of Battle Abbey;
but even allowing that to be authentic, what proof is there that the
Frisell who accompanied the Conqueror in 1066, was the ancestor of
Gilbert de Fraser, who possessed large estates in Tweeddale and Lothian
in the time of Alexander I. (1107-1174)?
"This Gilbert, the first of the family mentioned, is called 'de,' but
the name was more frequently written without that prefix.
"I believe that the Frasers are Scotch _ab origine_ and repeat that I
consider the name to be Gaelic and older than the arms, which were
canting arms, such as we have a royal example of as early as the time of
Louis VII. (of 1180), who covered the shield of France with blue, the
tincture of his royal robes, and then charged the same with lilies,
derived originally from Isis, formerly worshipped in France.
"The _fraises_ are quartered with three antique crowns, and here again
authors differ, most writers saying they are for Bisset. Even Nisbet
makes this error, although on another page he gives the arms of Bisset
of Beaufort as 'Azure a bend argent!' Others say they were granted to
Sir Simon Fraser, the 'Flower of Chivalrie,' the friend of Wallace and
Bruce, for having three times re-horsed his king at the Battle of
Methven, in 1306. This _may_ be their origin, but if so they were
probably granted to or adopted by his grand nephew and heir, Sir Andrew
Fraser, for Sir Simon Fraser was taken prisoner at this very battle,
conveyed to London and beheaded. It is worthy of note, however, that the
Grants, near neighbors and often allied to the Frasers, bear three
antique crowns, though of a different tincture. Hugh, fifth Lord Lovat,
married a daughter of the Laird of Grant, by whom, however, he had no
issue. He died 1544."
In another note Mr. Dixon says: "The court language of Scotland, at the
time this family took their arms, which are totally different from those
of the French house of Frezeau or Frezel, was a medley of Teutonic and
French."
IN THE LOWLANDS OF SCOTLAND.--But whether the derivation be from the
Romance _fraysse_, 'an ash tree,' or the Gaelic _frith_, 'a forest,' we
find the chief of the name firmly established as a powerful Scottish
noble, manifesting the patriotism and national sentiment to be looked
for in a native born baron, as early as 1109.
His name was GILBERT DE FRASER, who, in the year named, witnessed a
charter known as the Cospatrick Charter. It is generally conceded that
he is the first with whom documentary history begins. That there were
Frasers in Tweeddale and Lothian before him is certain, and the names of
some of them have survived, but with this Gilbert begins the unbroken
record of lineage which comes down to our own day. The lands possessed
by the Frasers in the south of Scotland were extensive, and the family
power was great, as will be indicated in the course of the brief
reference to it which will be here made. Gilbert had three sons, Oliver,
Udard and another whose name is not now known.
OLIVER succeeded his father and built Oliver Castle, by which his name
survives. There are many interesting descriptions of this old
stronghold; that in the Ordnance Survey Report I quote on account of its
brevity: "An ancient baronial fortalice in Tweedsmuir parish, S. W.
Peeblesshire, on the left side of the river Tweed . . . Crowning a rising
ground which now is tufted with a clump of trees, it was the original
seat of the Frasers, ancestors of the noble families of Lovat and
Saltoun, and passed from them to the Tweedies, who figure in the
introduction to Sir Walter Scott's _Betrothed_, and whose maternal
descendant, Thomas Tweedie-Stodart (b. 1838; suc. 1869), of Oliver
House, a plain modern mansion hard by, holds 1144 acres in the shire. . .
Oliver Castle was the remotest of a chain of strong ancient towers,
situated each within view of the next all down the Tweed to Berwick, and
serving both for defence and for beacon fires in the times of the
border forays. It was eventually relinquished and razed to the ground."
Oliver died without issue, and, his brother Udard, evidently having
predeceased him, the succession went to Udard's son,
ADAM, who was succeeded by his son,
LAWRENCE, on record in 1261, and who was in turn succeeded by his son,
LAWRENCE. The second Lawrence had no male issue, but had two daughters,
one of whom married a Tweedie, carrying with her Fraser lands, and the
other of whom married a Macdougall. The succession in the male line now
reverted to Gilbert's third son, whose name is lost, but who had two
sons,
SIMON and Bernard. Both these succeeded to the chiefship, Simon's issue
being female. It was after this Simon that Keith-Simon was named.
BERNARD raised the fortunes of the family considerably, and his name
frequently occurs in connection with questions of first class
importance. He was the first of the name to have been appointed Sheriff
of Stirling. He was succeeded by his son,
GILBERT, styled "Vicecomes de Traquair," or Sheriff of Traquair, father
of three historic personages, Sir Simon, Sir Andrew, and William, the
Bishop of St. Andrew's and Chancellor of Scotland, an extended reference
to whom I with difficulty refrain from making. As a prelate and a
statesman he rendered high service to his country. His brother,
SIR SIMON, THE ELDER, succeeded his father, Gilbert. He is designated
the Elder to distinguish him from his famous son, Sir Simon the Patriot.
He took a leading part in the affairs of the nation. He, his two
brothers and a nephew, Richard Fraser, Lord of Dumfries, were four of
the arbiters in the Baliol claim to the Scottish Crown. He died in 1291,
and was succeeded by
SIR SIMON the Patriot, the greatest and most renowned of all the Fraser
chiefs. All I can say of him is that he was the compatriot, the
coadjutor and compeer of Sir William Wallace, and one of the noblest
knights whose deeds are recorded on the page of history. He has
furnished ancient and modern historians with a subject for patriotic
eulogy and enthusiastic praise. As a soldier and statesman he was
_facile princeps_. He was the hero of Roslin; he was the only Scottish
noble who held out to the last with Sir William Wallace, and was one of
the first to welcome and aid the Bruce, whom he re-horsed three times at
the Battle of Methven, where he was taken prisoner; and he was the only
Scottish knight at that time whose patriotism entitled him to the brutal
indignities of Edward's court, and a death, in 1306, similar to that of
Sir William Wallace. The Patriot's family consisted of two daughters;
the elder married Sir Hugh Hay, ancestor of the noble house of
Tweeddale, and the younger, Sir Patrick Fleming, ancestor of the Earls
of Wigton. Male issue having again failed, the succession went back to
SIR ANDREW FRASER, Sheriff of Stirling, already mentioned as second son
of Sir Gilbert Fraser, Sheriff of Traquair. Sir Andrew was the Patriot's
uncle. He is styled "of Caithness," on account of having married a
Caithness heiress, and at that point begins the interest of the family
in the North of Scotland. He was both a brave knight and a powerful
lord, and, like his brothers, bore his part valorously and well in the
senate and on the field. He lived to occupy the position of chief but
two years. He was the first chief of the family who won large
possessions in the north, while the headquarters were still in the
southern countries. The well-known Neidpath castle was one of the family
strongholds. It was a massive pile, of great strength, the walls being
eleven feet thick. It is situated in Peeblesshire and is still to be
seen. The strawberries appear in the crest of the Hays on the keystone
of the courtyard archway, a connecting link with the Frasers, from whom
it passed to the Hays of Yester, in 1312, with the daughter of the
Patriot. Before following the family to the Lovat estates, in
Inverness-shire, it may not be amiss to recapitulate the succession in
the south. It was as follows:
I. GILBERT DE FRASER, II. OLIVER FRASER, III. ADAM FRASER, IV. LAURENCE
FRASER, V. LAURENCE FRASER, VI. SIMON FRASER, VII. BERNARD FRASER, VIII.
SIR GILBERT FRASER, IX. SIR SIMON FRASER, X. SIR SIMON FRASER, XI. SIR
ANDREW FRASER.
THE CLAN IN THE HIGHLANDS.--The family extended northward by the
marriage of Sir Andrew to a Caithness heiress, through which he acquired
large estates in that country. His was a notable family of sons. The
eldest, named Simon, gave the family its patronymic of "Mac-Shimi"
(pronounced Mac-Kimmie). He (Simon) married the daughter of the Earl of
Orkney and Caithness, and it is believed by the family historians that
this marriage brought the first Lovat property to the family. It would
appear that the Countess of Orkney and Caithness, namely, Simon Fraser's
mother-in-law, was the daughter of Graham of Lovat, and that her right
in the Lovat property descended to her daughter, Simon's wife, in whose
right he took possession. Thus, we see how the names Fraser and Lovat,
now for so long a time almost synonymous, were first brought together,
and how the Frasers obtained a footing on territory which has become
indissolubly linked with their name.
Sir Andrew Fraser's other sons were Sir Alexander, Andrew and James; the
first named, a powerful baron and statesman, who attained to the office
of Chamberlain of Scotland, held previously, as we have seen, by his
uncle, Bishop Fraser. In consideration of distinguished services, he was
given in marriage Mary, sister of King Robert Bruce, and widow of Sir
Nigel Campbell, of Lochow. He possessed lands in Kincardine, of which
county he was sheriff. He was killed at the battle of Dupplin. Andrew
and James, his brothers, with their brother, Simon of Lovat, were slain
at the battle of Halidon Hill, July 22nd, 1333, and all four were in the
front rank of the soldiers of their time.
The chiefs of the Clan Fraser date from:
I. SIMON, Sir Andrew's eldest son. He had three sons--Simon and Hugh,
who both succeeded him in honors and estates, and James, who was
knighted on the occasion of the coronation of Robert III.
II. SIMON succeeded his father, when still very young, and gave proof,
in the field, that the military genius of the family was inherited by
him. He died unmarried, after a brief but brilliant career, and his
estates and the chiefship went to his brother,
III. HUGH, styled "Dominus de Lovat." And, now, I shall keep briefly to
the line of chiefs, and shall not burden you with many personal
incidents that have come down to us, with respect to any of them, until
we come to Lord Simon, who suffered death on Tower Hill. Hugh was
succeeded by his two sons, first by ALEXANDER, the eldest, then by
Hugh, the second son. From his third son, John, sprang the Frasers of
Knock, in Ayrshire; and from Duncan, his fourth son, the Frasers of
Morayshire.
IV. ALEXANDER is described as a "pattern of primitive piety and sanctity
to all around him." He died unmarried. An illegitimate son, named
Robert, was the progenitor of "Sliochd Rob, Mhic a Mhanaich."
V. HUGH, his brother, who succeeded, acquired lands from the Fentons and
Bissets, by marriage with the heiress of Fenton of Beaufort. The names
of these lands, it will be interesting to note, forming as they do an
important part of the estates long held by the Frasers. They are:
Guisachan, now the property of Lord Tweedmouth; Comar, Kirkton, Mauld,
Wester Eskadale and Uchterach. This Hugh, the fifth chief, was the first
to assume the title of Lord Lovat. He had three sons, Thomas, Alexander,
who died unmarried, and Hugh. The first Lord Lovat was succeeded by his
son,
VI. THOMAS, whose assumption of the title is not mentioned by the family
historians, but of whose accession there is good documentary proof. The
silence of the historians, however, has led to an error in the
designation of his successors. For instance, his brother,
VII. HUGH, who succeeded him, is called Hugh, second Lord Lovat, instead
of Hugh, third Lord Lovat. This Lord Lovat had two sons, Thomas and
Hugh, the former of whom was Prior of Beauly, and died young and
unmarried. He was succeeded by his son,
VIII. HUGH, fourth Lord Lovat, who had a decisive brush with the
Macdonalds, under the Lord of the Isles, when the latter besieged the
Castle of Inverness in 1429. He was a peer of Parliament, and is
supposed to have been the first Lord Lovat to have attained to that
dignity, with the title, Lord Fraser of the Lovat. He had four sons, who
deserve mention: Thomas, who succeeded; Hugh, a brave soldier and
accomplished courtier, who was slain at Flodden; Alexander, from whom
sprang the old cadets of Farraline, Leadclune, etc.; and John, the
historian of Henry VIII., the learned Franciscan and astute ambassador.
There were also two illegitimate sons--Thomas and Hugh, the latter,
progenitor of the Frasers of Foyers, and of many other Fraser families,
known as "Sliochd Huistein Fhrangaich."
IX. THOMAS, fifth Lord Lovat, added the lands of Phopachy, Englishton,
Bunchrew and Culburnie, the last-named place from Henry Douglas, to the
family estates, which were assuming very large proportions. He had a
large family. The eldest son, named Hugh, succeeded to the estates. From
the second son, William, sprang the Frasers of Belladrum, Culbokie,
Little Struy, etc.; from James, the Frasers of Foyness; from Robert, the
Frasers of Brakie, Fifeshire; from Andrew, "Sliochd Anndra Ruadh a
Chnuic" (Kirkhill); from Thomas, "Sliochd Ian 'Ic Thomais"; John married
a daughter of Grant of Grant, with issue; and from Hugh Ban of Reelick
(an illegitimate son), came the Frasers of Reelick and Moniack.
X. HUGH, sixth Lord Lovat, was the chief of the Clan at the time of the
disastrous fight with the Macdonalds at Kinlochlochy, of which I shall
read a short description later on.[2] At this affray Lord Hugh and his
eldest son, Simon, were slain. His second son, Alexander, succeeded, and
his third son, William, was ancestor of the Frasers of Struy. His
fourth son, Hugh, died young and unmarried.