Big changes have come to — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Grant Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Matthew Grant (1601) and Scottish Clan Grant Connection
Posted by: Michelle Grant (ID *****5775) Date: December 01, 2012 at 16:54:11
  of 7880

Matthew Grant, The Pioneer. 3

desolate voyage, like a weary child at even-
song in its mother's arms, through every doc-
ument and manifesto which bears on the ques-
tion, there is a distinct indication of a purpose
to establish civil government on the basis of
republican equality." *

Gen. Ulysses S. Grant is a lineal descend-
ant from MATTHEW GRANT, who came from

1681. t

England to the New World in 1630. Jessie
R. Grant, Esq., the father of General Grant,
mentions in a letter to the writer that his fath-
er " used to tell him he was of Scotch ances-
try." This tradition is, probably, well found-
ed, for many of the early pioneers were of
Scotch descent, some were Welsh, and a few
v/ere Irish. The Grants are, probably, de-
scendants from the ancient Scottish clan whose
motto, " Stand fast, Craig Ellachie," well rep-
resents the spirit of the distinguished rep-
resentative of the family. The ancient High-
land clan of Grants must have been, in some
degree, a sea - faring people, for they occu-
pied a country, Invernesshire, which extend-

* E--veretfs Speeches. Vol. III. p. 242.

f Traced from the will at Hartford, by the Hon. J. H.

4 Matthew Grant, 'The Pioneer.

ed from sea to sea, and the seats of the two
highest titled representatives which the clan
has had of late years are on both the eastern
and western shores, the Earl of Seafield, a
Grant, having a seat at Elgin, near the Spey
Bay, and Baron Glenelg now deceased, a Grant
of Glenmoriston, having taken his title from
Glenelg, a town situated on the straits opposite
to the Island of Sky. Their country was di-
vided by the Loch Ness and a chain of lakes
giving easy access, on either side, to the ocean,
and Inverness, their ancient capital, has always
been an important sea-port town. It is quite
probable, therefore, that many representatives
of this clan were often found in all the ports
of England.* Indeed, on the 29th of Oc-
tober, in the same year that Matthew Grant
embarked for New England, the ship Hand-
maid, in charge of Captain John Grant, reach-
ed Plymouth with a company of passengers
for the new settlements, and the ship James
arrived, June I2th, 1632, from London, in
command of Captain Grant. The number of

* Sir Walter Scott informs us that, at this very period,
the Scotch were great travellers, and there were thousands
of them in the military service of the nations of the continent, and engaged in carrying on an extensive inland commerce in all the northern parts of Europe. Tales of a
Grandfather. Vol. II. p. 333.

"The first inhabitants of Dorchester came chiefly from
Ye Sd countys of Devon, Dorcetand Somerset, and I think
from some other places." Blake's Annals of Dorchester, p. 10.

Matthew Grant, The Pioneer. 5

pioneers in New England of Scotch descent
seems to have increased rapidly, and they or-
ganized in Boston, as early as Jan. 6th, 1657,
the Scots' Charitable Society, of which there
were twenty-seven members the first year,
among whom were James Grant, Alexander
Grant, and Peter Grant. * Direct evidence as
to the descent of General Grant from the an-
cient Scottish clan of Grants cannot easily be
procured, at this late day, but there can be
scarce any room for doubt in the minds of
those who weigh rightly the circumstantial evi-
dence. -J- It is not, however, we confess, a
question of vital importance, for General
Grant has certainly been the architect of his
own fortunes, and, in this republican country,

* Drake's Hist, and Ant ig. of Boston, pp. 88, 454. The
names of John, James, Alexander and Thomas Grant are found
in the list of Scotch prisoners sent from London in 1651, after the battle of Worcester, in the John and Sarah. N. E. Hist, and Gen.
Reg. pp. 377, 380. ( John Ward Dean, Esq.] See the account of the Clan of Grants in this work.

Alexander Allyn, "a gentleman of means and education,"
a Scotchman, resident in Windsor, married in 1693, Mary Grant, a granddaughter of Matthew Grant. She was then about eighteen years of age. Stiles' Windsor, p. 521.

f The author has no admiration of vain-glorious boasting as to ancestry, but the question must, sometimes, be considered whether the pioneers of New England were a race of serfs or the refuse of society from the old world. This subject is ably discussed by Hollister, who remarks : " From actual examination, it appears that more than four-fifths of the early landed proprietors of Hartford, Wethersfield,and Windsor, belonged to families
that had arms granted to them in Great Britain. Other settlers, in various parts of Connecticut, at an earlier or later day, bearing family names that appear never to have borne arms, are believed

Scots did travel. They did move south to England.

Also, some were conquerors. They were not Kingdom of Wessex, since the supposition is that they were in Wales before England.

Also, what about in the event of an illegitimate birth (such as when the English tried to breed out the Scots) and the surname passed through the mother? It would still make one have a Scottish connection to the clan.

Writers state that Matthew Grant's line descend from the Scotch clan of Grant. In several branches of the family there are traiditons of Scottish descent, but they are vague. Scots who emigrated to New England as early as 1630 would have been marked men. On the other hand it is known that Matthew Grant sailed from England in a ship that bore a Puritan church, gathered in the extreme south of England, that he was or soon became a member of this church, and was one of its most priminent members after the removal to Windsor, Connecticut. None of his children or grandchildren bore typical Scottish names, but instead bore the names then common among English Puritans, and which are still borne by a Grant family in the south of England. The only use of a coat-of-arms was by Samuel Grant, in 1739, in witnessing a will. Beside his signature is a seal on which is impressed the following coat-of-arms: On a chevron between three Fleur-de-lis five ermine spots. They are not the arms of any Grant family given by Burke, but Samuel being of the senior male line, would have been the most likely to possess any seal ring belonging to Matthew Grant. Whatever may have been the history of the family in Europe, in America it has been one that any member can review with honest pride.

"There was a family in MA that descended from a Thomas Grant who was born in 1601 and came across w/ the Puritans." ~ Geoff Grant

Matthew Grant came over with the Puritans. If both lines were similar, then, it is evidence that they are related, somehow and Matthew Grant's ancestry IS SCOTTISH, as well.

Matthew Grant would have been a free man, because 1.) The Grants were conquerors and were granted land from William the Conqueror, and 2.) The Grants intermarried with Bissets. The Grants (Grannd, from the Norman-French "le Grand," meaning "the big") are a Norman family introduced into the north of Scotland by the Bissets on the return of some of them from their exile of 1242. In England the Bissets and the Grants possessed adjoining lands in Nottinghamshire and were intermarried. In 1246 King Henry Ill of England granted Lowdham to Walter Byset till he should recover his lands in Scotland. The adjacent manor of East Bridgeford was then held by William le Grant, who had married Alfreda Byset, a Bisset heiress, They are first recorded in Scotland when Laurence and Robert Ie Grant appear as witnesses to a grant by the Bissets to Beauly Priory near Inverness in 1258.

The Grants were a distinct line of Grants.

Like other clans, distinct lines have different coat of arms or more than one coat of arms.
A chevron is an honorable ordinary signifying protection; it's heraldry symbolism is a reward to one who has achieved some notable enterprise, sometimes, those who have built churches or fortresses, or who have accomplished some work of faithful service. The bezant was the coin of Byzantium that represented by a gold roundle, a roundle being a general name applied to any circular charges of color or metal; it is thought that the bezant, also sometimes called a talent, was introduced into armory at the time of the Crusades and is the emblem of justice and of equal dealing among people. The sign of the bezant is borne by those deemed worthy of trust and treasure; gold signified treasure, generosity, and elevation of the mind. The mere fact that a shield or crest contains furs or pelts suggests a mark of dignity. Usually the fur coat of the weasel is represented. Ermine is white with black spots (White signifies peace and sincerity and black signifies constancy or grief). Fleur-de-lis signifies purity, light; floral badge of France, and represents sixth son as mark of difference

To summarize the coat of arms, it signifies protection to one deemed worthy of trust and treasure with dignity at peace with sincerity and steadfastness (in affection and faithfulness) with a mark of difference or purity and light.
Steadfast is a synonym for Stand Fast, which is the motto of Clan Grant. With that, there seems to be a connection to the Scottish clan Grant.

The Scots and French fought the English, and since it is the correct time period of their wars against England, the coat of arms for this line of Grants came from this war peiod. The war would have brought the Grants to England, as well.

The history of Clan Grant was not only/always a pleasant one. Clan Grant was involved in the slave-trade/transport as was other clans (Other Scots migrated to England, as well). So as Geoff has said that the Grants along the river system were there for slave trading/transporting does not take away any connection to Clan Grant. It only supports the connection to the Scottish clans.

Grants of Scotland descended from Prince Wodin who moved from Russian steppes to Norway about 600 AD.

L-47* is found from Russia to Ireland, but not below latitude 45 deg North, which includes people groups that would have settled in the Highlands of Scotland, according to Norse and Norman history.

Because of the geographical spread, it is a mix of Angle, Saxon, Jute, Frisian, Flemish, Belgae, etc.. Anglo-Saxons appeared to settle in Scotland, too.

R1bs are closely related. L-47*s have matches with L-21*s. There is not much of a difference. Very similar.

In addition, Z159 includes the area of the Russian steppes, which supports the traditional history of Clan Grant roots.

Matthew Grant is Scottish.

It is still disputed as to which Norse nation the Normans are actually descended from: Norwegians or Danes. It is not known whether Hrolf/Rolf/Rollo, the Norse founder of the duchy of Normandy, was Norwegian or Danish. Though one thing is known: the Normans were not full-blooded descendants of Vikings but a meld of Norse and Frankish bloods, both of which are of course Germanic. Norse settlers in Normandy intermarried and interbred with Frankish women as well as adopting Old French as their language, Christianity as their religion, and the Frankish form of feudalism as their system of government. After a time and certainly by the 11th century, the Normans regarded themselves as Franks.

To further explain, the Normans are a product of Frankish/Viking culture. The emphasis is on the Frankish culure rather than the Norse, but if you consider the genetic make up of the Norman population, a very large part of it would have to come from people whose ancestors were Gaulish.

The Gauls stop being Celtic soon after Caesar conquered Gaul in the 50s BC. Other than their genetic makeup there was probably nothing left of the Celtic culture to contribute to the new Frankish culture, certainly even more true with the later Normans. The only possible except are the Britains who settled in Brittany.

I have seen maps of Norse place names along the coastline of Normandy. Certainly this is proof of Norse populations. However, when taken in context with all other placenames, I suspect Norse names are a distinct minority. Just as an aside, William’s favorite town, Caen, is an ancient Celtic name.

The "Franks", who invaded/immigrated after the Roman Empire broke up, were "Germanic" people. These people and the Romano-Celtic groups thoroughly mixed after that, and that's one reason there are problems finding any distinctive genetic material. Later, because the Norse were something of a minority in Normandy, probably not a whole lot is left of their genetic legacy. On the other hand, it's still there in places. Place names give a clue that they were there, but one can't read too much into the fact that a place like Caen has a non Scandinavian name. Because maybe people liked "Caen" better than something like "Eyvindburh" or the French equivalent.

In addition, There are generally 2 groups of Germanics: The West-Germanics and the North Germancis (Viking peoples). However, both are, somewhat, related; see common pre-Christian culture (Althing, Dieties, Sagas etc).

There must have been mixing between the Gallo-Romans and the Franks, then between the "Franks" and the "Normans".

Some mistake cultural for ethnicity. Even before the Franks mixed with the Gallo-Romans they were a confederation of various tribes. When you add up all these different ethnic groups that went into making the Normans, it's much more complicated than just calling them Vikings. I think this is one of those things that most historians gloss over, opting for the overly simplistic explanation.

As far as the DNA is concerned, the y-chromossome doesn't get mixed up in the genetic recombining that occurs with each generation. That's why it is so valuable for ancestral research. The y-chromosome of a man today is, for the most part, an exact copy of his male ancestors 100s of years ago. In SOME cases that lack of change can go back tens of thousands of years. Testing is not, yet, accurate enough to differentiate between Viking, Angle, and Saxon DNA in England.

English, Scots, Welsh and Irish are very closely connected genetically; in fact, there is very little to differentiate at all - they're much closer to each other than they are to their continental cousins. West British people (people from Wales, west of England, NW England) who take the DNA test tend be ever so slightly closer to the Irish than they do to the English.

However, Scots, Irish and Welsh have more similarities. The English are more 'multi-cultural' in their genetic make up with such succesive waves of settlers with influences from Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Norman.

The Irish, Welsh, and Scots share the same genetic make up as the English, because of the huge Norman or Norse influence that they endured for centuries. There was no part of the British isles and Ireland that the Normans or Norse didn't dominate, since the Normans or Norse were very shrewd, and the men married into the local aristocracies, thus, spreading the Norman or Norse seed genetically. There is Norman or Norse ancestry to a greater or lesser degree in all the Anglo-Celtic aristocracies, peerages, and gentries throughout Britain and Ireland. Norman or Norse blood is a common element.

Also, The original population of the British Isles (prior to the Celts) plays a part.

Every country in the British isles has some history of English and Norman or Norse settlement. The Scottish lowland population is predominantly of Anglo-Saxon stock. The Anglo-Saxons delved significantly deeper into Wales than the modern border reflects. Also the immigration of Flemings to Britain was of much greater importance to Wales than elsewhere. Typical "Welsh" names such as Jenkins, Thompkins, etc, are of Flemish origin. Ireland was heavily settled - or planted - by English and lowland Scottish settlers over a period of hundreds of years. Finally, the Normans or Norse settled throughout the British Isles.

Here is anoher point to consider. It has been discovered that all the people of the British Isles are not as "Germanic" as was once originally thought.

New studies have genetically linked them to Celts from Northern Spain (such as Basques) and that this group of Celts sailed across the Bay of Biscay before the Romans arrived and constitute about 80% of British genetic makeup today. That includes the English too and that in fact the genetic difference between Scots, Irish and English is minimal at most. The studies showed that even in places where ther was supposedly strong Scandinavian or Norman influence, it made up at most 20% of genetic influence. (Except in the Orkneys and Shetlands - where they made up about 40-50% of the genetic makeup).

This is evidence that the Anglo-Saxons formed a small aristocracy that ruled and/or mingled with a large Celtic population rather than a large scale invasion and displacement by Anglo-Saxons. The same situation occured with the Normans or Norse. The question remains, "How much genetic influence did they really have?" Maybe they did not mix as much with the local populations as some might suggest and were mainly temporary settlers.

The evidence suggests that England is overwhelmingly genetically Celtic and it's culture is a rich mixture of Germanic and Celtic in equal parts with some Scandinavian and some French linguistic elements.

DNA tests suggest that the vast majority are of pre-Saxon descent.

As for names, the majority of river names in England are pre-Saxon, and the same goes for major towns, i.e. London, York, Leeds, Manchester etc.

It may well be that the names of smaller villages tended to change over time, but the Norman Conquest brought in written records which pretty much put an end to this. This would explain why they tend to be more English, because whatever Celtic name a village might have had earlier (if it even existed) would often have been replaced by an English one by the time of the Conquest (due to language replacement).

However, many place names which have an apparently English meaning might actually be of Celtic origin. An example of this phenomenon is the town of York, which in Old English is Eoforwic (which apparently means town of the bear); but looking at the earlier records this is clearly just an Anglo-Saxon corruption of York's Celtic name Eborac or Ebrauc; and Edinburgh is known as Edwinesburg in Old English. If York had never been mentioned in Roman or early British writings (as in the case of most small villages in England), then everybody would assume the name York is of English origin.

The Anglo-Saxon invasion was, essentially, no different from the Germanic invasions of the rest of the former Roman world.

I'm certain, at some point, differences will be seen in the y-chromosomes of different groups, but until that happens research is confined to intelligent guesswork.

BIOGRAPHY: [Borderbund WFT Vol. 2, Ed. 1, Tree #2235, Dat e of Import: Nov9, 1997]
Research on two early lines of Grants who came to America in theearly 1600's, trace them to Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, England. I refer to the Matthew Grant born 1601 in Dorset and who with his wife Priscilla emigrated from Plymouth to Dorchester, MA on the ship Mary and John, and who was one of the founders of Windsor, CT. His father, John Grant, b. 1574(wife Alice Turberville of Woolbridge, Dorset) was the son of George Grant,son of John Grant and Jane Belford who married in Roxby in 1570. This information was reported at the 6th reunion of the Grant Family Association in NY City in 1914. This family traces back in Roxby, Yorkshire to one William Graunt living in the middle of the 15th century. there is question as to the location of Roxby, whether in Yorkshire or Lincolnshire. There is a Roxby, Lincolnshire located nine miles SW of Barton-on-Humber,Yorkshire.
Lord Strathspey's book on the History of Clan Grant traces the Chiefs of the Clan back to Sir Laurence Le Grant(1258-1266), son of William and Aldreda (Alfreda), who was sheriff of Inverness in 1263. A history of the Grants by Archie McKerrac her traces the surname of Grant to a Norman knight,Le Grant who came to England with William the Conqueror in 1066. His descendent, William Le Grant, held lands in Nottinghamshire(near Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, England) through his wife Aldreda (Alfreda) who was a member of the Bissett family who had been granted land around Stratherickand Beauly in the Moray Firth area of Scotland. An article by Maran McCormick also states the Anglo-Norman origin and that William and Alfreda (Aldreda) Bissett Grant held manor of East Bridgeford in Nottinghamshire,England. This account also states that there is a claim to descent from Kenneth MacAlpine, King of Scotland in the 9th century.
Many of our clan members who trace their families back to England are wondering about their ties to Scotland. In many cases Scots moved down to England, particularly Yorkshire, for economic reasons as this was one of the centers of the woolen trade. It might, also, be that this family might be descended from the Le Grants who settled in this corner of the Midlands of England and would be related very distantly to the Grants in Scotland. In either case if one were able to trace far enough on the Yorkshire Grants(which has already been done to the best of anyone's ability) they would find that either of the above reasons would be valid.

The fact that parts of Watertown were given to Weston in 1713, Waltham in 1738, Cambridge in the part where Christopher Grant lived in 1754 and Belmont in 1859, presented a few problems. Whether the ship bringing the Grants and others here in 1630 was named the "John and Mary" or "the Mary and John" is not important. Records show that it was called both. In Dawes and Families, "a history of some of the passengers on the "John and Mary, " "Early Settlers of Watertown" by Bond, and an article in the Boston Globe in 1927 the ship ws referred to as the "John and Mary", Grants in Scotland and England. This ancient Scottish clan name is of Norman and French Origin. It is derived from LeGrand, meaning the great, distinguished person. When Richard Grant became archbishop of Canterbury, they latinized to Richardus Magnus, thus Richard the Great. It has been learned from Robert Baine that Clan Grant is one of the Clans claiming to belong to Siol Alpine and to be descended from Kenneth MacAlpine, King of Scotland in the 9th Century. In the 13th century the Grants appear as Sheriffs of Inverness, and they exerted considerable influence in the north-east of Scotland, and supported Wallace in his struggle. John (Grant) chief of the clan, married the daughter of Gilbert of Glencairnie, and from his elder son sprung the Grants of Freuchie. His younger son was progenitor of the Tullochgorm branch of the Clan. From John Grant of Freuchie are descended the Earls of Seafield, the Grants of Corrimony and the Grants of Glenmoriston. The Grants were consistenly Royalists and took part in the notable battle on the haughs of Cromdale which gave its name to the pipe tune made famous by being played by Piper Findlater of the Gordon Highlanders at the balltle of Dargai in 1897. In the Jacobie Risings the Clan supported the Hanoverian side, but the Grants of Glenmoriston supported the Jacobite cause. Ludovic Grant, of Grant, the then Chief, married for his second wife Lady Margaret Ogilvie, daughter of the Earl of Findlater and Seafield, and his grandson succeeded to the Seafield peerage. The 8th Earl died without issue and the titles passed to his Uncle James, 9th Earl of Seafield. The 11th Earl of seafield was killed in World War I (1914-1918) and the Ogilvie honours passed to his only child, Nina, Countess of Seafield. The Chiefship of Clan Grant remains in Lords Strathapey." Pipe Music; Stand fast Craigillachie Crest Badge: A Mountain inflamed, Proper War Cry; Stand Fast Gaelic Name; Grannd, orgin of name, French Grand Plant Badge: Pine the 42nd or Black Watch Tartan is Worn......Howard Alexander

"Legend in our branch says we are descended from William the Conqueror." ~ Kelly Grant

"One of the first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Hugo Grandis of Wales. This was dated 1084, in the "Geld Roll of Warwickshire" during the reign of King William 1st of England, known as "The Conqueror", 1066 - 1087."
As mentioned earlier, Scots did travel. Also, some were conquerors. They were not Kingdom of Wessex, since the supposition is that they were in Wales before England.

"Sandi Street Research indicates that my side is related with the McGregors from the Jacobite uprising and Rob Rob Roy. But not sure if the McGregors became part of the clan because of a meeting of the clans men and a decision to make it so and not by marriage. I am not sure if there are any mixed blood lines. The DNA test sounds intriguing to me now."

The Grants (Grannd, from the Norman-French "le Grand," meaning "the big") are a Norman family
introduced into the north of Scotland by the Bissets on the return of some of them from their exile of
1242. In England the Bissets and the Grants possessed adjoining lands in Nottinghamshire and were
intermarried. In 1246 King Henry Ill of England granted Lowdham to Walter Byset till he should recover
his lands in Scotland. The adjacent manor of East Bridgeford was then held by William le Grant, who
had married Alfreda Byset, a Bisset heiress, They are first recorded in Scotland when Laurence and
Robert Ie Grant appear as witnesses to a grant by the Bissets to Beauly Priory near Inverness in 1258.
Later, as Sir Laurence le Grant, the former appears as Sheriff of Inverness, while Robert is recorded as
holding land in nearby Nairnshire. As sheriffs of Inverness, the chiefs of the Grants became established
in the Glenmoriston area around their center at Castle Urquhart on the northeastern shore of Loch
Ness, and acquired blood-ties to the native-men of the district, who held themselves connected to the
MacGregors, which may simply indicate their traditional connection to Argyle. In this connection it
should be mentioned that the arms of the MacArthurs, formerly princes in Argyle till 1427, could be
taken as a differenced version of the arms of the Grants as both color and the "Cross Moline" are
standard marks of difference to show bloodrelationship. There did exist a famous Norman family of
Grants in the early thirteenth century with the same armorial motto as the Scottish Grants:

"Stand Fast,"—Latin, Tenons Ferme. Nevertheless, the arms of the Grants, three golden antique
crowns on red, may have been inherited at the time that the Grants settled in Scotland around 1258,
hence the possible MacArthur connection (a similar inheritance of arms happened in the case of the Haldanes of Oleneagles).

In any case, since the Frasers quarter the Grant arms for their Highland inheritance (see above), they
probably inherited Lovat ultimately from a Bisset heiress, but more immediately through a Grant
heiress. Notwithstanding their growing clan following, the Grants did not gain a real foothold in the
Highlands until 1434, when their then chief, Sir lain Grant, Sheriff of Inverness, acquired a vast district
in Strathspey by marriage to the daughter and heiress of Gilbert of Glencairnie, the descendant of a
younger son of the House of Strathearn (see Chapter VI). Afterwards they came to dominate
Strathspey from Aviemore to Rothes.

In French the name Grant means "Grand" either "big or eminent". The Clan Grant can be traced to a Prince Wodine who came from Asia in the 600's and settled in Norway, building a large city. Wodine's descendants remained strong leaders in the area for centuries.
Wodine's descendant "Earl Haakon of Trondelag" was a Viking leader. The Lord High Protector of Norway is known today as King Haakon II. He ruled Norway from 970 to 995. Known for his military strategy and legendary exploits he was given the name of Haakon the Grandt after he defended himself against an ambush armed only with a tree. The clan Motto of "Stand fast" was first associated with Haakon The Grandt.

Haakon's son Hemming married Adelstein, daughter of the first Christian King of Denmark. Though the influence of his wife Hemming decided to convert to Christianity. This decision prompted him to be banished from Norway. They settled in the Viking town of Dub Linh now called Dublin. Hemming and his wife had 6 children, 2 daughters who married and returned to Norway, and 4 sons who at the beginning of the 11th century all moved to Scotland. Their son Andlaw was the progenitor of Clan Grant.

The Gaelic name of Granndaich did not grow to Clan strength until the beginning of the 14th century. The home of Clan Grant is located in the region of Strathspey. Situated between two Craig Elachies (large rocks) on the River Spey. The rocks served as wonderful sentry posts and huge fires were kindled on top of them to signal for the clan to gather or as a sign of danger. The words Craig Elachie mean rock of alarm. A mountain on fire is pictured on the Clan Crest. The old Motto of Haakon "Stand Fast" became the Clan war cry.

The oldest home of the Clan Chiefs is Urquhart Castle Built during the Norman period, on the north shore of Lock Ness. For 2 hundred years the ownership of the dwelling changed hands regularly, bouncing back and forth between the British Crown and the Clan McDonald. In 1476 it was taken by Edward 1 and held for the Earl of Huntly. In 1509 King James IV granted keepership of the castle to the "Grant of Grant". For 35 years it served as the lordly seat of the Grants as Earls of Seafield. In the mid 1500's the McDonalds tried twice more to retake the castle. By the 1600's the Grant's had abandoned it. It has been in ruins for over 200 years

The Grants were strong supporters of Robert the Bruce; with his victory the Grants holdings in Strathspey were secure. This also served to firmly establish them as Highland Chiefs. The surrounding land of Spey provided the Grant's with men and cattle, further establishing them with power and influence. In 1536 Sir John Grant built Castle Freuchie, later renamed to Castle Grant.

In 1630 Matthew Grant, a lineal descendant of the Highland Clans joined the followers of a Rev. John White. Rev. White one of the organizers of the "Massachusetts Bay Company" helped to gather over 1500 people, and 14 ships to become the "Winthrop Fleet". White concentrated on gathering people from the southwestern part of England. Rev. White never left England, but was called the "Patriarch of Dorchester" by his contemporaries. The group that Rev. White gathered chose Rev. John Warham and Rev. John Maverick to be their ministers. These people sailed on the first ship to leave England the "Mary and John" in March of 1630. Matthew, his wife Priscilla and daughter Priscilla were among the 140 passengers on this ship. In May 1630 the "Mary and John" dropped anchor, 70 days after leaving England.

Matthew and his family remained with the group in Dorchester Massachusetts. He was admitted a freeman there in 1631. Matthew's name appears in the Dorchester town records on 2 Nov 1635. Late in 1635 the group decided to move up the Connecticut Valley to settle Matianuck, now called Windsor. Matthew joined this group leaving his family behind in Dorchester though the winter, not retrieving them until April of 1636. The town records as recorded in 1640 list Matthew Grant and 54 other men as the first settlers of Windsor Connecticut.

Grant a carpenter by trade, was a prominent man in the new colony of Windsor. He held the office of Deacon of the First Church for a number of years, he was the second town clerk, recording all of the town vital statistics, land transactions, town business and church affairs He held this position for 30 years. In 1654 he compiled a 'Book or Records of Town Ways in Windsor. For many years he was the first principal surveyor laying out the town, and was select-man for several years. He was said to be a conscientious man in all of his duties both public and private, which showed in the careful notes he made as recorder. Often adding explanations or corrections. The "Old Church Records" of which Grant was the compiler are invaluable today. Matthew died in 1681 in Windsor, leaving the bulk of his estate valued as 119 lbs to his son John. Matthew was the 7th great grandfather of Ulysses S. Grant.

Normandy Roots
by Archie McKerracher

Many Scottish clans and family names have their roots in Normandy. This area of northern France was colonised by land hungry Vikings in the early 10th century. The name Normandy means Home of the Northmen. Their leader, Rollo the Viking, signed a treaty with King Charles the Simple in 911 A.D. which gave the Norsemen a permanent home on French soil.

Over the next century and a half the Vikings intermarried with the local population and adopted the French language. Rollo's descendants became Dukes of Normandy and other Viking leaders became knights who controlled their local fief from a wooden castle built on an earthen mound, and gave allegiance to the Duke. The Vikings absorbed the local culture so well that their sons had to be taught their original Norse as a second language. The Normans became Christians and built many fine abbies and monastaries. They were excellent administrators, organising society on a feudal system, and establishing laws for the government of the land. Their military prowess became renowned throughout Europe. They wore tall, conical helmets with a distinctive nose guard, shirts of chain mail, and carried long kite shape shields and battle axes. This battle garb can also be seen on many gravestones on Scotland's western seaboard where the Norse influence was also strong. In France, however, they fought on horseback and used their disicplined cavalry with devastating effect.

In 1066, Duke William of Normandy, Rollo's grandson, set sail in a fleet of Viking longships to conquer England. His Army of perhaps aound 8,000 was gathered from all over northern Europe and included most of the leading Norman noble families. From the descendants of the three knights who salied with William the Conqueror -de Brus; de Baillioul; and a Broton noble; were to come the Scottish kings of Bruce; Balliol; and the ill fated Stuart dynasty.

After his victory at the Battle of Hastings, William proclaimed himself king of England and rewarded his noble followers with grants of English land. Younger knights could advance themselves by volunteering to hold estates on the wild Welsh border. One such was nicknamed 'Le Gros Venoir' - The Fat Hunter. His present day descendant, the Duke of Westminster, reputedly Britain's richest man, still lives there and his family name of Grosvenor derives from his ancestors nickname. Similarly, the very English Christian name of Algernon comes from the Norman-French 'Al Grenon' - The Moustached One.' Another nickname 'le Grand' - the Big One - was given to a knight who held land in Lincolnshire and whos descendants later moved to Scotland where "le Grand" became altered to 'Grant'. Sir Laurence le Grant was Sheriff of Inverness in 1258. The Normans delighted in nicknames and puns. Robert de Comines, who sailed with the Conqueror in 1066, and was created Earl of Northumbria in 1069, took his name from his fief in Comines in Flanders. Other Normans soon punned his territorial title into 'Cummin', an aromatic herb, and from this comes the surname of Cumming. The three aparent wheat-sheafs on the Cumming coat of arm were originally supposed to mean bundles of the herb. William de Comyn married the granddaughter of King Donald III in 1144 and thus his descendant became one of the competitors for the Scottish throne in 1291. The Comyns became the most powerful family in Scotland in the 13th century, and nearly a quarter of all Scottish earls were Cummins. Their power was destroyed by King Robert the Bruce after he won the Battle of Bannockburn 1314, although the Badinoch family survived to be become a Scottish Clan in its own right. Sir William Gordon Cumming, chief of the clan, still holds the ancestral lands of Altyre.

Some of the Normans took their title from their newly acquired estates in England. One Anglo-Norman knight styled himself 'de Graegham' after his new manor which derived from the Anglo- Saxon words meaning Gray Home. His descendants moved to Scotland where the name became altered to Graham. Another Norman took his title 'de Ramesai' from his new estates in Huntingdonshire and when his descendants moved to Scotland this became Ramsay. Another took his title from the manor of Hambledon in Licestershirer, and became altered to the historic Scots name of Hamilton. Walter de Hamilton being first recorded in Scotland in 1200. The present Duke Hamilton is head of the family.

David I, King of Scots, (1084-1153) spent much of his youth in England, and was brother in law to the Anglo-Norman King Henry I of England. He also married a Norman heiress, and greatly admired the efficient Norman administration. He was Prince of Cumbria before becoming king and gathered around him many young Norman knights who helped him control his lands. The kingdom of Scotland which he inherited in 1124 was, by contrast, a savage and wild land divided into seven provinces each ruled by a Celtic sub king. Each was prone to rise in rebellion. Thus, when David returned to Scotland as king he brought with him the young Anglo-Norman knights who had been his companions in England. He gave them grants of land and privilege and over the next fifty years they were to find most of the great families of lowland Scotland, among them being Bruce, Balliol, Boswell, Chisholm, Crichton, Comyn, Fraser, Gordon, Gifford, Lindsay, Maxwell, Menzies, Melville, Montgomerie, Oliphant, Seton, Sinclair, Turnbull, and many others.

The new Norman-Scots began to build great abbeys like Kelso, Meltrose, Holyrood, Brechin and Dunblane and brought in monkish communities from France. They established Sheriffdoms to administer justice and Burghs to regulate trading and introduced the feudal system based on land. These incomers married into the local Celtic aristocracy and in many cases acquired a ready made tribal clan who in later years would adopt their chief's territorial title as a surname. Within a generation these Norman Scots would become almost more Scottish than the original inhabitants.

Some younger sons also acquired land and took their title from local place names. The Gordons took their name form Gurdon in Berckwickshire in the Scottish borders. This word comes from the Ancient British 'Gor din' -Great Hill Fort. The Gordons were to acquire the traditional clan lands in the north in 1320 where they became so powerful the chiefs were called 'Cocks 'o the North'. Similiarly the family of Chisolm took their name from Cheseholm in Roxburghshire, also in the Borders. It means 'the waterside meadow good for producing cheese'.

Some gave their own name to the lands they acquired. A minor knight called Hugo acquired land in Renfrewshire and established a small hamlet which he called in Norman-French 'Hugo's ville' - Hugo's town. In time this became altered to the Anglo-Saxon word for a township - 'ton'. 'Hugo's ton' eventually became Huston and then the modern Houston. The bold Hugo is remembered worldwide today for after him is named the city of Houston, Texas, the mission control centre for the United States space programme. Similiarly another knight called Marcus founded a hamlet in the borderland between England and Scotland and named it 'Maccus's ville' which in time became 'Maxwell' and his family grew to be one of the most powerful in the era.

But the majority of the Scots names that derive from the incoming Norman-Scots have their roots in Normandy and the places from which they sprang are still in existence. The port of Dieppe, a popular entry point for modern Scots holidaymakers, is a good place to start. In the church of St. Jacques here is the Scottish chapel, burial place of Bishop Reid and the Earls of Cassilis and Rothes, sent to the marriage of Mary Queen of Scots to the Dauphin of France.

The main D1 road running south from Dieppe by-passes by the little village of Mesnieres en Bray from which the name Menzies comes. The first recorded of that name in Scotland, Robert de Mesnieres or Meyneris, became Chancellor of Scotland in 1249 and was granted lands around Weem in Perthshire where Castle Menzies stands today. A short detour from here is the little village of Bailleul-Neuville, original home of the Balliol family who provided two Kings of Scots -John Balliol from 1292-1296 and Edward Balliol from 1332-1333. The first in Scotland was Bernard de Bailleul in the reign of David I. Balliol College at Oxford University was establishd by John de Balliol in 1282. In the tiny chapel here lies the remains of Jeanne, sister of Edward Balliol.

Another short detour, west of Mesnieres, leads to Fresles from which derives the proud Scots name of Fraser. This is probably another pun on a place name for a similair sounding word is Fraisies meaning Strawberries and the Fraser coat of arms portrays this plant. Simon de Fresles, or Frissel, was granted land in West Lothian in 1160, and about 1360 his descendant Simon Fraser married another Norman Scots heiress and through her acquired land around Beauly where the Frasers remain today. The present 22nd chief of Clan Fraser is Brigadier Simon Fraser, 17th Lord Lovat.

Near Neufchatel en Bray is the village of Mortemer from whence come the Scottish Mortimers. Ralph de Mortemer followed the Conqueror in 1066, and his descendant came to Scotland in the reign of David I. Mortimer's Deep in the Firth of Forth opposite Edinburgh is named after Alan de Mortemer who gifted lands in Fife to the island monastery of Incholm Abbey on condition that he was burried there. Unfortunately, his lead coffin fell overboard and disappeared into the watery depths now called after him.

Back now to Dieppe, and shortly after leaving here on the coastal D75 road is St. Valery with its memorial to the 51st Highland Division which fought a gallant rearguard action here in 1940 until forced to surrender. Nearly all the survivors spent the next five years as P.O.W's. A short detour inland is the hamlet of Bosville from whence sprang the famous Norman Scots family of Boswell. They first obtained lands in Berwickshire but by marriage later acquired lands in Fife and Ayrshire.

About 10 kilometers from St. Valery is Malleville, cradle of the Melvilles. Gilfradus de Maleville received lands in Midlothian and Fife from Malcolm IV around 1155. His descendants became Earls of Leven and Melville, and the present holder of the title is Alexander Robert Leslie Melville, 14th Earl of Leven and 13th Earl of Melville.

Forty kilometers south of here on the D142 is Limesay, home of the family who were to become the Scottish Lindsays. Balderic de Limesay arrived in Scotland relatively early around 1086 in the reign of Malcolm III. Sir Walter de Lindsay was appointed a member of the Council of David I. The Lindsays acquired vast lands in Lanarkshire and became Earls of Crawford. They married into the Celtic aristocracy in 1324 and obtained land in Angus and also in the Highlands around Strathnairn. The Lindsays have featured greatly in Scottish history and the present 29th Earl of Crawford, Patrick Lindsay, is the premiere Earl of Scotland. Part of the old lands of the Lindsays of Edzell in Angus are now occupied by a US Air Force base.

Across the River Seine the coastal road continues to the medieval port of Honfleur from whence Samuel Champlain sailed in 1608 to claim Canada for the French. A few miles further on is Dives en Mer from where William the Conqueror�s fleet sailed in 1066, although the old port has long since silted up. In the church of Notre Dame here is the Battle Roll of those who sailed, and listed here are the progenitors of many Scottish families.

Further on is the seaside village of Graye from whence the name of Gray, later Lords of Kinfauns near Perth in Scotland and Warden of the Border Marches. Angus Diarmid Ian Campbell-Gray, 22nd Lord Gray, is the current head of the family. Beyond this are the Arromanches beaches where the British and Canadian troops stormed ashore on D-Day 1944. Fierce fighting took place around the seaside village Colleville-sur Mer where there is a large American War Cemetary. From the name of this village comes that of the Scottish Colville family. Gilbert de Colville accompanied the Conqueror in 1066 and Philip de Colville was granted land in Ayrshire by Malcolm IV around 1160.

A long run up the Contenin peninsula takes one to the town of St. Mere Eglise, the focal point of US Airborne landings and the scene of fierce street fighting by the US 82nd Division on 5/6th June, 1944. Further on, and just off the main Cherbourg road is Brix. At this tiny village are the grass covered ruins of a castle demolished in the 13th century. From here Robert de Brix set out with the Conqueror in 1066 and was granted estates in England. Robert de Brix came north with David I and in 1124 was given the lands of Annandale in south Scotland. His descendant married Isabella, daughter of David I, and thus their son Robert de Bruce became a competitor for the Scottish throne. It was his son, Robert the Bruce, who became King Robert I after winning Scotland�s independence at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314. East of Brix, and just off the D902, is St. Germain de Tournbeau from whence came the name Turnbull. Near Cherbourg is Neauville from where come the Nevilles, and south of here is the village of Le Rozel, cradle of the Scottish Russels.

South now to the town of St. Lo, most of which was destroyed between 3-25 July, 1944 as the US 7th Corps fought to break out to the south. Near here is the village of La Haye- Bellefond, cradle of the Scottish Hays. Haye means a Hedge, or perhaps a defensive stockade such as surrounded Norman castles. The Normandy campaign became known as la Guere de Haies due to the problems the Allies had in fighting through the thick hedges surrounding the fields. William de la Haye, Butler of Scotland and first barron of Erroll near Perth, first appeared in Scotland around 1160. He married the Celtic heiress Eva who brought him the Errol lands while his son married Ethna, daughter of the mighty Celtic Earl of Strathearn. The head of the family today is Merlin Sereld Victor Gilbert Hay, 24th Earl of Errol and Heriditary Lord High Constable of Scotland. In this capacity he ranks second only to the Queen when she visits Scotland.

Adjoining the Haye fief in Normandy is Souiles, home of the Soulis family. Nicholas de Soles claimed the Scottish throne in 1290 as a descendant of an illegitimate daughter of Alexander II but was rightly ignored. The Soulis�s held the grim and massive Hermitage Castle in the Borders. Near Souiles is the village of Aigneaux where a new castle stands on a site of the original 11th century castle Hebert d�Aigneaux. His descendants came to Scotland and settled in Galloway. The family is represented today by Sir Crispin Agnew of Lochnaw, Bt, Rothesay Herald of Arms, who is a regular contributor to this magazine. Also near St. Lo is Saint-Clair-sur-Elle whose castle has long since disappeared. This was the fief of Richard de St. Clair who sailed with the Conqueror. His descendant Henry de St. Clair recieved a charter of land around Haddington in East Lothian in 1162, and a descendant acquired the lands of Rosslyn in Midlothian. The chief of the Rosslyn Sinclairs married Lady Isobel, heiress of Caithness and the Orkneys, and was recognized as Jarl of Orkney by the King of Norway. The present chief of the Sinclairs, the 20th Jarl or Earl of Caithness, still lives there.

Heading eastwards and inland is St. Germain de Montgommery, off the D575. This hamlet with the remains of a Norman moated fortification was the fief of the Montgommerys, one of the oldest families in Normandy. Roger de Montgommerei crossed over with the Conqueror and became the 1st Earl of Shrewbury in 1071. His descendant Robert de Montgommerie (1103-78) accompanied Walter Fitz Alan, the High Steward, ancestor of the Stuart kings, from Wales to Scotland, and married his daughter. He was granted land in Renfrewshire and Ayrshire where his descendants were created Earls of Eglinton and built the huge but now ruined Eglinton Castle. The present head of the family is Archibald George Montgommerie, 18th Earl.

South of Bernay, on the N138 is Ferrieres, cradle of the Scottish Ferriers. Amfreville to the north is the original home of the de Umfravilles, a Norman family who came to Scotland with David I and married the Celtic heiress to the ancient Earldom of Angus. They lost everything after opposing Robert the Bruce.

Off the N13 road west of Caen is Rots. Robert de Rots or Ros, from whom the Lowland Rosses come, married Margaret de Brus. The cathedral town of Chartres gives its name to the Charters family while Montalet in the Seine near Meulan gives its name to the family of Maitland. Thomas de Matulent was the first to come to Scotland in the time of William the Lion. His descendants were granted the land of Lauder in Berwickshire and became Earls and Dukes of Lauderdale, building there the huge Thirlestane Castle. The present head of the family is Patrick Francis Maitland.

South of Montalet and across the Seine is Maule, the fief of the family of that name. Peter de Maule accompanied the Conqueror in 1066. Robert de Maule came to Scotland with David I around 1141. Peter de Maule acquired the lands of Panmure in Angus by marriage to an heiress in 13th century, and their descendants became Earls. A Maule heiress took their lands by marriage into the Norman Scots family of Ramsay. Simon Ramsay, 16th Earl of Dalhousie, still resides on the ancestral lands of the Mauls and Ramsays at Brechin Castle.

A few kilometers north east of Rouen is the hamlet of Boissay, cradle of the powerful Anglo Norman family of Bisset. They obtained land around Beauly and built the abbey there. A Bisset heiress brought the lands of Beauly to the Frasers who hold them still.

North west from Evraux, off the N13 road, is Graveron- Semerville. From here came the Somervilles. Guildhase de Semerville had estates in Yorkshire and was granted 30,000 acres around Carnwath in Lanarkshire by David I. They built Cowthaly Castle and became Lords of Carnwath in 1445. The title became extinct on the death of the 18th Earl in 1870.

The remarkable Normans have left their mark on almost every facet of Scottish life - from Sheriffs who administer justice to feu duty paid on land. They have also passed on the name of their original fief in Normandy to millions of Scots all over the world.

How do you account for "Sir William Frazer, of Edinburgh, met General Grant upon the occasion of his being accorded the freedom of that city, while making the tour of the world, and he said the resemblance between the distinguished descendant of Matthew Grant and Sir James Grant, Earl of Seafield, was so striking as to be generally noticed and commented upon."

How do you explain oral tradition and ancedotes?:

"Though Grant's ancestor Matthew Grant appears to have been of a line long removed from the Highlands of Scotland, the family's oral tradition said they were of Scottish origin. Matthew Grant's grandson, Noah Grant, married a woman named Grace Miner, whose line supposedly descended from King David I of Scotland, thus Ulysses carried this distinguished blood from his great-great-great grandmother's line. Ulysses Grant's mother, Hannah Simpson, was of Scots-Irish extraction from Northern Ireland, and not much is known about her line.

During his around the world journeys after leaving the Presidency, Grant was in Scotland and accepted a bet that no one could make him break his famous "Poker Face". Many things were tried to in the hopes of getting a reaction. Finally, a Grant clansman in the room shouted the Grant war cry of "Stand Fast, Craigellachie!". Grant broke out in a huge smile and he happily paid up the bet.

It is said that Grant carried a small piece of the Grant tartan with him throughout the Civil War.

The Grant's were obviously aware of their family's ties to the Scottish Clan Grant. A painting of the Grant family done about 1867 or 1868 shows their little boy, Jesse Grant, holding a croquet mallet and he is dressed in a kilt, complete with Argyll jackett with gauntlet cuffs, a fly plaid, and checked stockings.

While in Scotland during his around the world journey, Grant was offered a "demonstration" of a new game called "Golf", which he had never heard of. Unfortunately the person chosen to demonstrate the game for Grant was a terrible novice golfer.

After placing the ball on the tee, the man proceeded to attempt to hit the ball numerous times, sending up huge divots in the process.

After observing this for a while, Grant said,

"The game appears to be great exercise. But tell me, what is the purpose of the little white ball?""

How do you account for Clan Grant historians knowing your theory, yet, claiming Grants (no matter what location) are one Clan?

If anyone has questions about the Clan Grant DNA project, then ask the administrators of the project as it is listed on their DNA page.

Also, a clan's DNA project would not hire anyone who did not KNOW what DNA is.

Their purpose is not to keep Ulysses S. Grant as a "feather in their hat". Their purpose is to find Scottish ancestry within their clan and to educate people about their clan to further knowledge. Although they want members, it is not about keeping them if they are not truly within their clan. Clans help people find their true clans, even if it is another clan from their own.

How do you account for gene deletions, mutations, etc. for differences? Going 100% by the study should not be the only source.

And for The Grants of Glenlochy (Stewart Chiefs, MacRobbie Grants) and for kits 25705, 42347, and 115576: "Civil War General and President Ulysses S. Grant
As of now, there are no documented descendantsof Civil War General and President Ulysses S. Grant in this project. However there are a number of signatures that identify the line of Matthew Grant (President Grant's immigrant ancestor as documented by multiple sources). Matthew Grant's genetic line, and firm paper trail, can be traced through Kit # 115576. If interested, contact him. Kit # 42347 has a 25/25 match to Kit # 115576. [GW01 - listed separately on the bottom of the YDNA results page also matches 23/25 with these two and has an excellent paper trail.] Both these lines have excellent circumstantial or documentary links that suggest that they share Matthew as a common ancestor. We should then suppose that all of the "Matthew Grant" Group are related and the owner of Kit # 25705 is close to a paper trail linking to Matthew collaterally.
It should be noted that the working hypothesis is that this group represents the "MacRobbie" Grants: a cadet branch of the Stewart Chiefs whose branching from the main line goes back to the 1300s.""

Kit 25705is tied to a branch of Grant's living in the North East of England with origins as Horse Breeders and farmers around the Dundalk area of County Louth in Ireland. Family stories have connected with President US Grant both in Ireland and his visit to the North East of England. This fired my interest in my Family origins. It appears we are directly related to the Stewart Chiefs of the Clan Grant possibly a branch of the Grants of Glenlochy related to Robert Grant the Ambassador and related to others within the project in Canada, Australia and the USA. There are a number of theories can explain how we got to Ireland. As supporters of Mary Queen of Scotts moving to escape persecution, Catholic relations during the Huntly rebellion moving from Scotland possibly with Rebel Grants of Carron, or moving to Ireland during King James I, Plantation of Ulster to gain land. The earliest possible relative I have traced, Felix Grant born in 1718 and a Catholic could also mean that there are Jacobite links to our move to Ireland. However it appears the family were established Farmers renting a great deal of Land from the Crown by then so any Jacobite link appears highly unlikley. I have several sources left to explore which hopefully will supply further links. Clearly a great deal of historical research will need to be carried out. My Branch therefore seems to be a very interesting Scottish, Irish English mix with many cousins across the Atlantic.

Kit 42347Kit 42347 descended from James Grant born 26 January 1811 In Matilda, Ontario, Canada died 14 June 1883 Norfolk, St. Lawrence, New York, His father was Julius John Grant believed to have been born 1785 either in Montgomery, New York or in Mass. His father was John Grant born around 1750 and may have lived in Albany, New York before the revolution. John Grant fled to Canada and remained loyal to the crown. His eldest son was John Grant and went to sea. His second son was Calvin and his third son was Julius John Grant. For a time they lived near Cornwall Ontario Canada. Around 1839 Julius John Grant's sons Julius, James, Jacob and John moved to Madrid, St. Lawrence, New York and by 1840 they had cleared land in Norfolk, St. Lawrence New York with the Road being called Grantville. At one time 36 Grant families lived in the area. Today some of the land is the Grantville State Forest of New York. Today some of their descendants can be found still living in the area. I believe that we are the descendents of John Grant the son of Noah Grant spoken of in the book by Arthur Hastings Grant "The Grant Family" which includes President U.S. Grant. Jesse Root Grant had a brother John Grant. All of this would mean that my GGG Grandfather was the cousin of U.S. Grant.

(I think Kit#42347 John Grant would be 2nd cousins with Jesse Root Grant if John Grant is born near 1750 as some sites say that John Kelly Grant (1799) - Jesse Root's brother remained unmarried or John Kelly Grant had an illegitimate child, but I think there was a John Grant about 1750 that would have been Jesse's 2nd cousin.)

Kit #115576 My linage: Father is Roderick P. Grant; his father is Levi Harrison Grant; his father is James George Grant (b. 1861 in Smithville Flats, N.Y.); his father is Theron Grant (b. 1815 in Smithville Flats, NY); his father is David Grant (b. 1778 in Litchfield, Conn); his father is Ambrose Grant (b. 1747 in Litchfield, Conn.); his father is Increase Grant (b. 1716 in Windsor, Conn.); his father is Josiah Grant (b. 1682 in Windsor, Conn.); his father is John Grant (b. 1642 in Windsor, Conn.); and his father is Matthew Grant (b. 1601 in England). I am looking for any information to add to ours and would really like to know where Matthew Grant lived in the UK is tied to Matthew Grant (1601-1681) who sailed to America from Dorsetshire, England and settled in the Hartford, CT area. Our line starts out like this: Matthew Grant (1601-1681), John Grant (1642-1684), Josiah Grant (1681-1762), Increase Grant (1716-1801), Ambrose Grant (1747-1816), David Grant (1778-1849), Theron Grant (1815-1871). Theron's son James was my gr-gr-grandfather and moved the family to the Akron area in the late 1800's. I'm hoping to find a connection to William Grant (b.1479) of Roxby, Yorkshire who is suppossedly Matthew's earliest descendant, and detiremine whether or not there's any connection to Clan Grant of Scotland as well as help others looking for a DNA connection with Matthew Grant.

Even if the goes back 600 years, the year 1260 is not reached, yet. In addition, Clan Grant is one of the Clans claiming to belong to Siol Alpine and descending from Kenneth Macalpine, king of Scotland in the 9th century. So no conclusion may be made on your part, then, as you are at a dead end road block.

Siol Alpin (or Siol Alpine) are the same; it is spelled both ways if you read books and articles; there is more than one way to spell many names (for example, there are over 270 ways to spell "Erwin").

IanPat said that Clan Grant descending from Siol Alpin is not just a fanciful claim.

The Clan Grant USA FAQ website uses the word "suggests" (, which is another word for claims).

"The oral history of the Clan also suggests that we descend in part from Kenneth MacAlpin, first King of Scots, making the Grants part of the "Siol Alpin" - the seed of Alpin - the seven clans (the MacAlpine clans being; Grant, MacGregor, MacAulay of Ardencaple, MacKinnon, MacQuarrie, MacFie and MacNab) said to descend directly from this ancient line."

So how can one accept oral history of Siol Alpin and not oral history of U.S. Grant? If one rejects oral history of U.S. Grant, then the oral history of Siol Alpin should be rejected, as well.

Just remember that Clan Grant even states that U.S. Grant's line is a long line removed from the Scottish Highlands, yet a Scottish Grant. History passes through family, so oral history has just much weight or no history would have been written. So to throw out his history is foolish.

When is oral history to be accepted, and when is it to be rejected?

The DNA test results (because of special rules that apply for DIS markers 385, 464 and YCA) show "probably or possibly related" of kit 25705 to kits 42347, 75185, and 54763, as well as your kit 115576.

And kit 115576 to the "R1b Group Type 2: Ancient Stewarts: Descended from High Stewards of Scotland" shows "probably or possibly related" to Kits 112014 (John W Stuart, b.1796, South Carolina, Scotland), 40333 (Robert Campbell Stewart, b.1851, Scotland, Scotland), 147822 (William M. Stuart, 1848 in Philadelphia, PA, died, Scotland), as well.

(Matthew Grant's line as well as Stewart Chiefs line are both R1b1a2.)

Therefore, relationships to these groups can not be excluded.

The "Cloud" matches are, also "probably or possibly related".

The surname "Cloud" has Scottish origins with the Clan MacLeod. Clan McLeod is supposedly from the same stock as Clan Campbell. Clan Campbell has connections with Clan Dougall/MacDougall, which has connections to Clan Stewart, as well. Therefore, since both Clan Grant and Clan McLeod have connections to the Stewarts, it would make sense that matches would be with Clan Grant, Clan Stewart, and Clan McLeod.

In comparison to Smiths, on the surface, it looks like only possibly related or not related. (By the way, Smith is a common Scottish name, as well).

He is Scottish.

Therefore, relation to Clan Grant may not be disregarded.

Also, matches to Austins do not take away from Grant being Scottish.

Austin is a sept of Clan Keith. Clans did intermarry and change surnames for protection.

Further evidence that Matthew Grant still has connections to Scottish Clan Grant.

Also, the surname Risley would not be in the direct line.

Risley would be cousins. Risleys and Grants did intermarry.

In the 1700s, Asahel Risley married Abigail Grant.

It does not take away connections to Scottish Clan Grant.

There were Clouds and Austins who moved south to England, as well; since Scots travelled and were conquerors.

Anglo-Saxons settled Scotland, as well. Being Anglo-Saxon does not eliminate Scottish origins, especially, since there were travellers and conquerors.

See "Matthew Grant's Ancestry IS SCOTTISH XII (Norse and Norman)".

DNA studies do not claim to be 100% accurate. In addition, if you compared DNA results that were tested at two different labs, then that will make your results wrong, since no two labs have the same values of interpretation.

DNA testing offers an added dimension to the paper work genealogy that people have been pursuing for years but it will not replace the value of research. If you obtain consistent DNA results from several Grants then you can tell with almost absolute certainty if another individual is or is not a Grant. However, DNA results alone will not tell with precision that you had the same male parent as another Grant (say) exactly 6-generations earlier but it will verify paper-work or clues you might have that suggests such a connection.

Unexpected Results
In DNA surname studies it is not unusual to have a participant or even a group of participants with DNA marker test results far removed from others of the surname—say, 8 to 12 mutations in the 25 marker tests from the ‘mainstream’. This is akin to a random western European origin and shows that you probably do not have a common male ancestor within the last millennium with those other groupings of your Surname. Such a deviation does not mean you are not a Grant (you are in any case legally still a Grant); but rather that we cannot definitively explain your result. Several general circumstances might lead to a major variation.

There may have been a step-son (i.e., a son through the wife’s earlier marriage) who was given the Grant name, an infidelity, an undocumented adoption, babies switched at birth, a serf or servant taking the Grant name, or an official or unofficial change of name to Grant, etc. in your heritage. These events occur 2 to 5% of the time in a generation so that almost any larger test group will have inconsistencies due to this cause. An extreme case is the Stidham Society who found that almost half of their DNA participants, 5th and 6th cousins, descended from a single “non-parental event” where the father was not a Stidham by birth.

It now known that all Grants do not descend from an individual male in a genealogically significant time frame. They have so far identified several distinct lines of Grants and expect to find more as the program matures. There are several origins of the Grant surname that occurred when surnames were introduced in the 11th to 13th Centuries. Test results that might help explain our earliest lineage would be extremely valuable.

You may have a unique result because your are the first tested male from a particular Grant line or improbably you are the only surviving male in the world of a very ancient line. This is an issue confronting the Clan as it tries to solve some of the typical objectives listed above—we might not get a meaningful sample or a critical participant to flesh out a particular line or to clarify that it is a Grant line. However, as our program will be open for many years others may later participate who have matching (near-identical) Y-DNA.

Unusual, but possible, are matches between folks with different surnames and no known genetic connection. Although especially rare in the 25-marker test, it turns out that a few surnames have Y-DNA characteristics close to the norm for a large ethic area (e.g., western Europe or Asia) and just by chance they may match a grouping in another surname. Referring to the Galbraith Chart, over 70% of the tested population havs an allele of 13 at marker DYS #393.

Sometimes, there has been a mutation in recent generations and two known relatives have different DNA signatures (while most fathers, sons, brothers and first cousins have identical DNA signatures, a few have mismatches of 1/37 or 2/37); also, sometimes, the test does not lead to identifying any "new" genenealogical relatives (because few surname studies have sampled more than 1% of those alive today with the surname).

DNA projects are just in the beginning and if one has a few mutations and another member has a few mutations, then that increases the distance markers.

Since very few people have been sampled (1% within surname studies), it is not science, as the results are very skewed. The view of Matthew Grant's line not being Scottish has been around for years, but has been critiqued and proven false by historians, as well. The claim of Matthew Grant not being Scottish is just that - theory, not fact - never will be fact. So therefore, people who say Matthew Grant is not Scottish mislead people doing damage to themselves, my family and theirs, and people searching their families and for the truth, which is evil.

In addition, sub-grouping is not an exact science and since some markers rapidly mutate, you may view the results somewhat different from how they divided the participants.

A Brief History of Clan Grant


DNA evidence established in 2007 has now conclusively vindicated the Grant Seannachies of the past who were unanimous that the original Grant Chiefs were of Viking stock. The Chiefs’ ancestral lines go back to Håkon the Mighty, protector of Norway (970-995), Grig, (“Gregory the Great”) Regent of Scotland (878-889), Heming the Great, King of Denmark (fl. 810) and Alfred the Great of Wessex!

Our patriarch, Olav Hemingsson came North with Malcolm III around 1057. The Clan’s plant badge, the “Seedling Scots Pine, fructed proper”, echoes the Norse origins of the first Chiefly line. The Crowns on the Chief’s Arms represent the Spirit of Victory. In the tinctures (the colours), the vassalage to Malcolm is acknowledged.

These ancestors of the Grants were in Strathspey during the reign of Malcolm III, their main tasks being to ensure that the beacon atop Craigelachie (by Aviemore) was lit to warn the king – and the rest of Lowland Scotland – if danger threatened from the North. Our crest, the “Burning Hill proper” reflects this as does the War Cry “Craigelachie”; our Motto, “Stand Fast” reflects our attitude towards any attack coming from that direction.

These lands, together with others round Loch Freuchie near Dunkeld, were lost after 1098 when the usurping king Edgar seized the throne with Norman support and Olav was executed; but 50 years later our pre-Grant ancestors were re-established on the banks of Loch Ness at Boleskine, becoming Lords of Stratherrick for some 180 years. Several heads of the family at this time served as Sheriff of Inverness in that post’s various guises.

The name Grant was adopted as surname about 1175, although it was almost certainly a by-name from 1060. Its basic meaning is “Gritty” – and the Grants have always shown “true Grit”.

Early Diaspora

Stratherrick was not sufficiently rich to sustain younger sons in much style and soon many of those who did not stand to inherit were to be found in England and Ireland and as townspeople throughout the islands. Among these Richard Grant left Scotland to become Chancellor of Lincoln and subsequently Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Grant was the English King’s visor at York, William Grant the English King’s messenger in Ireland and another William Grant had the honour of acting as the protector of the English princess Margaret when she came to be Alexander III’s queen in Scotland. His son David was Sheriff of Stirling.

Return to Strathspey and consolidation there

In 1316 Robert the Bruce rewarded the Grants for their loyalty with the barony of Inverallan – after a gap of over 200 years they were back in Strathspey. Gradually they consolidated their position, eventually disposing of Stratherrick where the last tract of land was given up in 1420.

The ordinary Clansmen – beyond the chiefly family itself – adopted the surname when they marched off to assist the king at Berwick in 1482. But not all Grants have acquired their name in this way. Some were originally MacGregor kinsmen who adopted the name when their own was proscribed, while others, the so-called Trochie Grants were originally Farquharsons – descending from children who had been orphaned as a result of battle between Grants and Gordons on one side and Farquharsons on the other. As time went by the landholdings in Strathspey were consolidated until they stretched “between the Two Craigelachies” on both sides of the river. Controlling the crossing of the river was a major source of income and employment.

As the lands were consolidated and extended, there was room for more and more cadets (younger sons of the Chiefs). Apart from Glenmoriston and Corriemony (for Glenurquhart) mentioned below, the major subdivisions of the clan include Ballindalloch, Rothiemurchus, Monymusk, Tullochgorm, and Dalvey and the major groups from even earlier times: the Clan Allan and the Clan Ciaran. There are several other cadet lines. The Grants were so prevalent in the Strathspey area that the use of our surname was often not a great help – thus many were commonly known by by-names or nicknames or by the names of the lands they held. This was especially true of the major cadet lines mentioned.

It seems that it was not long after this that one enterprising Grant brought well bred Highland Horses (the so-called Strathavon Horse) to England and this has led to various niche breeding sites in England and even America – and, by the by was the reason that a John Grant played a part in the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 and was hanged for his pains.

New lands in the West

King James IV called upon the Grants to try to bring peace and order to the wilds of the West Highlands making them Royal Chamberlains in Glenurquhart and Glenmoriston. In 1509 this valued service was recognised when the lands were converted into Free Baronies.

[2009 marks the Quincentenary of this event – and to commemorate it, Clan Grant Society members have raised over £1000 to help the charity Trees for Life which has a major reforestation project in the area.]


The Grant Chief supported the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and was rewarded by his lands being turned into a Regality in 1694, giving him power of “pit and gallows” and earning him the nickname of “The Highland King”. The integration of the Chiefs of Grant with their clansmen is well illustrated by the famous pictures of the Champion, the Piper, the Henwife, the Fool and others which all date from this time. At the same time Grant Chiefs came to the conclusion that the political union with England was vital to economic survival – and Grants played a significant part in orchestrating this.

The Chief was unswerving in his support for the Government during the ’15. But the government did not even begin to compensate him for the expenses he had incurred at that time and so the clan stayed as neutral as it could during the ’45.

But the lairds of Glenmoriston were surrounded by and had intermarried with natural Jacobites, so they took the Jacobite cause in the ’15, resulting in his lands being forfeit for his pains, but the young Ludovick, later to be Chief, bought them all back and gave them back to his cadet, doing much the same thing for several other Siol Alpin kinsmen of different clans in a similar position.

In the wake of the Jacobite defeat at Culloden after the ’45 rising, The “Seven Men of Glenmoriston” led by “Black Peter” Patrick Grant of Craskie were crucial in keeping Bonnie Prince Charlie safe from Government hands despite a reward amounting to £30 000 - tens of millions of Pounds in today’s money. Hanoverian troops scoured the area committing many atrocities.

But many of the Glenurquhart men in particular had been forced to join the Jacobite side and Ludovick was able to secure a pardon for them provided they handed themselves in. They placed themselves in Ludovick’s charge and marched to Inverness where Government officials renegued on the undertaking given and they were put on board a prison ship whence to Barbados. Of the 80 condemned in this way only 7 ever returned to Scotland. This betrayal has been the cause of much only too understandable bitterness and it is sad that some of this was misdirected to Ludovick who, ever after, rued the way things had turned out so differently to what he had thought he had managed to negotiate.

Like most other clans in Scotland, Grants were represented in the colonies – through the East India Company and through Slavery in the Americas. While not condoning this practice in any way, it has to be said that there is good evidence that Grant slaves were treated with more humanity than many if not most others.

Foundation Stones of Scottish Culture

* It is to be noted that the earliest extant reference to a standard clan Tartan is of the Grant Tartan and belongs to the very early 1700s

* One result of profits to Scotland derived from the slave trade was the agricultural revolution initiated by Sir Archibald Grant of Monymusk – who, inter alia, introduced the turnip to the country. And so it can be said that the now traditional Scottish meal of Haggis neeps and tatties is substantially down to the Grants.

* And, of course we have not yet even mentioned the Water of Life. The Scotch Whisky trail is basically all about Grant lands – and Grant brands!

* Similarly the Grants can lay claim to a major tranche of Scottish country music – the Strathspey time signature.

After the demise of the Clan System

The defeat of the Jacobites saw the end of the Clan System as it had been understood and the end of the privileges of Regality for the Chief of Grant. But Grant lairds largely avoided the cruelty of clearance so widely practised elsewhere – the “Good” Sir James Grant founding Grantown in 1765 (first training the masons by having them work on an extension to Castle Grant) to provide an alternative way of earning a living to the poverty which had been so widespread for too long.

The Chiefs’ money problems continued - relieved in part by marriage to the Seafield heiress, Sir Lewis Alexander Grant inheriting the Earldom through his mother only a few months after he had inherited the chiefship of the clan from his father, both in 1811.

The estates were disentailed in the 1880s and then the Dowager Countess in effect exiled the Chiefs in New Zealand for some years. Another consequence of the disentailing was that when the Chiefship of the clan was separated from the Earldom of Seafield, the estates, including Castle Grant,went with the latter. And so it is that only since the year 2000 has the current (33rd) chief, Sir James Grant of Grant, Lord Strathspey, been re-establishing himself in Strathspey – only 120 years later this time!

Even if either the Norse or Normans settled the UK, it would eventually go back to the same root for family, so the clan accepting all Grants is correct in that somehow Grants are distantly related.

"It is interesting to note that some of the first occurences of the name Grant in the historical record are in the north, in Inverness, where early bearers of the surname Grant were Sheriffs. Recently, members of Clan Grant have been engaged in a debate as to the origin of the Grant surname. One theory put forward quite recently is that the Grants actually originated in the north, in Scotland, and migrated south to Nottingham and Lincoln, not vice-versa. The basis for their theory is that if the name Grant originated in England, in the south with Norman barons according the popular "Norman Origin" theory of the Clan Grant (the one most often seen in books on the clan's origin), then there should be far more occurences of the name Grant in the south - with the frequency of the name diminishing the further north one goes. This means that one should see large concentrations of the surname Grant somewhere in the south, the most likely candidate being the region of East Anglia, where the Norman theory claims the barons from whom the Grant clan sprung were by then well established.

However, as this surname distribution map shows, it seems apparent that the name Grant occurs in far greater numbers in the north - greater numbers than should seem possible if their origins were elsewhere - and this number descreases significantly in frequency the further south one goes. It's also quite interesting to note that in East Anglia the surname occurs in no greater frequency than virtually anywhere else in England! In fact, there are more Grants in Middlesex, Devon and Hampshire, as plotted here, than there are in the regions of East Anglia.

It should be noted that though some may try to argue that the assumption of the Chief's surname on the part of clansmen unrelated to the bloodline, from the 15th century on, could account for the larger numbers, this hypothesis falls apart for the following reasons:

If the surname was of English/Norman origin then it would have been well established somewhere (probably Nottingham or Lincoln) in the south by circa 1250-1270. Surname adoption in Scotland by the peasant classes came much later than it did in England (where surnames were a Norman custom). Most families in Scotland did not begin to adopt surnames (and even then usually as a patronymic - from the father's name - Williamson, Johnson, Robertson, etc) until the 15th century, and even later. The custom of adopting a chief's surname can't be shown to really have begun in any sort of earnest by clansmen until the 16th century. Any Grant family in the south would have had an approximately 300 year head start on the clansmen living in Strathspey in Scotland. This would easily show a high concentration of the surname in England, somewhere -- where it originated -- regardless of the family in Scotland. The surname distribution, shown above, shows no such thing. It is a statisical improbability, if not impossibility, that the Grant surname originated anywhere other than where the early Clan manuscripts say -- in Scotland, from Norse progenitors.
The low birthrate and high infant mortality rate in Scotland would have severely mitigated the exponential acceleration of the surname in Scotland by clansmen assuming the name. Given the higher birthrate and much lower infant mortality in England, the family in the south would have kept pace for quite a while, probably not being overtaken by the family in the north until the 1700's at the earliest. Again, the surname distribution study shows no such thing.
Additionally, the following can be said of the surname itself, which no one has been able to explain adequately:

The name "Grant" doesn't mean anything outside of Gaelic or possibly Norse (meaning "Gray haired" or possibly "Gravelly" or "Gritty", and in Norse the word Gran meaning "fur tree" -- the Grant's plant badge -- and Grandt supposedly meaning "large, tall" as does the French "Le Grand" -- though through the love of puns, the family may have played on the Norman "Grand" later on. Frazier means "strawberry" in French, and the Frasers certainly used this pun as a play on their own name, on their own arms). The original Britons (Celtic) called the river Cam "Grant" and the town of Cambridge "Grantabriga" (both places are still called this in Wales). If a family in this region assumed the name based on the river or the town , and originated there, then there should be a lot of them still living in this region. No case can be made that any family ever took their name from either the river or the town (though it's possible this area was one of the holdings of one of the original Norse proto-Grants, so there may be some remote connection here to the name).
The original Britons (Celtic) called the river Cam "Grant" and the town of Cambridge "Grantabriga" (both places are still called this in Wales). If a family in this region assumed the name based on the river or the town , and originated there, then there should be a lot of them still living in this region. No case can be made that any family ever took their name from either the river or the town (though it's possible this area was one of the holdings of one of the original Norse proto-Grants, so there may be some remote connection here to the name).
The Normans couldn't even deal with the surname Grant (which all accounts, even the earliest, show the adopters of the name used, spelled phonetically as "Graunt", "Grawnt", and "Grannt" in addition to "Grant" - as it was pronounced) which is why they changed the name of the Grant to the Cam, Grantabrigga to Cambridge, and why original Norman documents invariably list the name as "dictus Grant" (not "le Graunt" as is often stated - the earliest forms are "dictus Grant") -- dictus meaning "strange name" or "this is how it sounds but we don't know what it means". If the name were derived from "Le Grand" then the Norman scribes would have known it and used it. In Gaelic, Grand would be softened to to a "t" at the end as "Grant", but why the Normans would write the name in the Gaelic form, or a Norman family would pronounce their name in a Gaelic fashion, makes no sense whatsoever."

"The story of the origin of the House of Grant is a long and sometimes contentious one which crystallises into two versions, a Norse or an Anglo-Norman one. The story of the Norse origin is being written up by Adrian Grant as "The Early Chiefs of Grant and their Ancestors (c850-c1450). This gives an account which sets out a plausible and credible history showing how the early Chiefs could be descended from a Norse line and how this line fits into a contemporary time frame of both Norse and Scottish history. It is therefore time to re-assess the Norman version of events as both cannot be correct. I set myself four questions to answer in this re-assessment.

(1) When did the Norman story supplant the previous traditional clan version of a Norse origin? (2) Why has it been allowed to survive for over a hundred years unchallenged if wrong? (3) What is the basis for this claim? (4) Is this claim sustainable in the light of new evidence?

To answer the first question I needed to trawl through as many accounts of the Grants as I could find, surprisingly there are not that many, only three books have been solely dedicated to the family, The Chiefs of Grant by Sir William Fraser, The Rulers of Strathspey by the earl of Cassillis, A History of Clan Grant by the late Lord Strathspey [the only book still in print]. I did not include Isobel Grant as her short book has very little to say and I know from private correspondence that she herself had expressed some reservations as to a Norman origin. Other MS included Genealogical Collections (1729) edited by Walter MacFarlane, early traditional texts which had circulated within the clan which include The Monymusk MS, The Birkenburn MS, there were other MS circulating within the clan, The Carron MS, and the Bonhard MS both for the moment lost but believed to conform closely to other early texts. All three editions of History of Moray by Lachlan Shaw plus the editor's notes and additions to both the second and third editions, by John Grant of Elgin and J. F. S. Gordon - The Baronage by Douglas - Annals of the Parish of Elgin by Robert Young and the History of the Priory of Beauly by Edmund Batten.

From the earliest, 1729 (1) until 1877 not one writer put forward a case for a Norman origin, they either believed in a Norse one or were at best ambivalent Shaw makes a fairly typical remark when he says "From what country to fetch the Grants originally I know not." Apart from the clan MS, Batten, Fraser and Strathspey none of these authors were writing exclusively about the Grants, they only feature as a part of their work but all manage to give a pedigree.

The critical book was by Edmund Batten, published in 1877 for the Grampian Club and devoted to the history of Beauly Priory, he is the first person that I can find to put forward a case for the Grants being of Norman origin. (2) His theory was taken up by Fraser who quoted Batten in his Chiefs of Grant published just six years later in 1883. Fraser expanded on Batten's theory and was able to quote seemingly impressive source material. (2) Cassilis published a few years later in 1911 and followed the line taken by Batten/Fraser which has been the "official" line ever since, this is the version which comes up in all reference books and post 1883 works on the clans.

The answer to my first question is 1877; this was the key date when the Norse version was formally supplanted by the Norman origin.

Why this version has been unchallenged for 125 years must be conjecture, there is no way of knowing how members of the clan felt when this view was first proposed. What we can say is that when the then chief privately published Fraser's massive three volume history of the Grants as The Chiefs of Grant in 1883, Fraser very firmly stamped his credentials on the clan as their official historian. Fraser was by then the doyen of Scottish historians and knighted not long after and it seems unlikely that anyone at the time was going to set out to challenge his views. When Cassillis published what he intended to be no more than a cut down version of Fraser's work in 1911 this only helped to support the Norman claim and there it has remained to the present day.

The clan as a cohesive force had long ceased to exist and between 1883 and 1911 we had three chiefs in quick succession with Sir James Ogilvie-Grant becoming chief in 1884 and the Grant and Seafield estates being bequeathed to Caroline, Countess of Seafield - a period of upheaval within the clan. I suspect that the chiefs of that time had more to worry about than the origin of distant ancestors. The clan societies of the day were more of a social club comprised of professional people who were unlikely to rock the boat.

Only three years after Cassillis, we had the World war followed by a peace dominated by economic uncertainty and yet a further World war. This long period of time gave the Norman theory time to bed in and become established. There is no evidence that anyone during this period was in the least concerned about the origin anyway. It has only been since a post war revival in clan awareness - new societies and the late Lord Stathspey's book in 1983 that interest in our clan history began to revive. Many authors of popular Scottish and clan history simply plagiarize and regurgitate previous writers and over time what was a theory becomes by default a "fact". It should also be remembered that line went via Sir Francis Ogilvie-Grant then living in New Zealand and completely cut off from any local Strathspey lore and as effectively a "remittance man" of the Dowager Lady Caroline; he no doubt had other problems in hand than those of his ancestors.

The Norman theory survived through inertia, nobody challenged it and the longer it remained unchallenged the firmer it became until the Norse origin became more or less forgotten.

The historic basis for the claim is quite seductive and plausible, it only becomes less so when investigated more deeply. Although Edmund Batten was the first writer to propose the Norman origin it was Fraser who developed this and who is the writer general referred to by subsequent authors and students of the clan history and it is his developed version which I will refer to.

There are three strands to Fraser's argument, firstly an etymological one based on the name Grant being derived from the French Grand, (4) [the etymological argument is open to wildly differing interpretations and there are possibly stronger contenders than Grand.] the second strand based on the apparent "fact" that as the name of Grant is found recorded in England prior to Scotland this is indicative of a migration from England to Scotland. (5) And his main argument based on historical data suggesting that the Grants first went north to Scotland with Sir Walter Bisset at the end of his exile from Scotland in 1249. (6)

I propose to ignore the first two arguments because however attractive they may or may not appear the fact that the third argument, the historical one does not work on chronological grounds negates the first two as irrelevant. I will be covering these in more detail when I write up a fuller account of the Norman case, I propose here to only to detail the historical argument as put forward by Fraser and why it does not work.

It is important when discussing Fraser's work to recall his own words "the present work [The Chiefs of Grant] treats only those members of the family or the name who appear in historic times and authentic records". (7) In other words he ignores all the traditional MS although he was well aware of them and starts his history from Sir Laurence Grant, Sheriff of Inverness. 1258-66. he forgets that absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence. Only the first few pages of Vol. I of his history are concerned with what we could call the pre- recorded history of the Grants.

The historic argument is based on the story of a William le Grant or members of his family migrating to Scotland with Sir Walter Bisset in 1244 on his return from exile.The facts as told by Fraser are that (8)

"in 1242 John and Walter Bisset are forced to leave Scotland having been accused of the murder of Patrick earl of Athol at Haddington. In the following August, King Henry iii [of England] bestowed the manor of East Lowdham in Nottinghamshire, upon Walter Bisset, who went to England, while John passed over to Ireland. The object of the grant, as set forth in the charter, was to maintain Walter Bisset in the King's service as long as the later pleased. The manor of East Lowdham adjoined the manor of East Bridgeford, the property of the English Bissets, which was about this that time held by William le Grant and his wife Albreda. It is distinctly stated that William le Grant held his manors by right of his wife and in trust for her heirs, but it is an important fact that shortly before the appearance of the Grants in Scotland, in attendance on or as companions of John Biset, Lord of the Aird, a William le Grant was not only a neighbour of the Bissets in England, but was also allied to that powerful family by marriage. ......The exile of the Bissets from Scotland was not of a long duration, as Walter Bisset appears as a witness to a charter of King Alexander ii of Scotland...dated 13th Jan 1249.......John Bisset, Walters nephew, and founder of the Priory of Beauly, died between 1244 and 1258, leaving a son John Bisset, that Lord of the Aird who, in the last named year, entered into agreement with the Bishop of Moray to which Laurence and Robert le Grant were witnesses. In view of these facts, and as it is in this agreement that the Grants are first named in Scotland, the suggestion is a very probable one, that the Grants were brought to Scotland from England by John and Walter Bisset on their return from the exile of 1242. This remark is qualified by the statement of the same writer, that John Bisset, the exile did not go to England or did not remain there, and no evidence exists of his return to Scotland. But it has been shown Walter Bisset of Aboyne, who was the neighbour of William le Grant, the husband of Albreda Bisset, did return to Scotland. Laurence and Robert le Grant may have come to Scotland in his train, and after his death, which took place in 1251, they probably continued their attachment to his family. Any weight which can be assigned to the traditional accounts of the family tends to support the above statement, as it is uniformly asserted that at a very early period the Grants possessed lands in Stratherrick, and Walter Bisset was lord of that territory".

The extracts above form the basis of the claim that the family of Grant is of an Anglo-Norman origin, I have highlighted some of the text for clarity. It is a very plausible scenario particularly if it were to be the only option which it is not - the footnotes and historical facts are in the main correct but the deductions wrong and I feel sure that the survival of the theory for so long to some extent due to students accepting Fraser at face value and not investigating further. I also feel that if Fraser were alive today he would accept the new evidence without question.

The new evidence is based on a more detailed understanding of the facts behind the Batten/Fraser proposition. Walter and John Bisset were indeed exiled from Scotland by Alexander ii, being accused of implication of the death, probable murder of Patrick, earl of Athol. [This is one of history's "who dunit"s as the truth of this case has never been proved.] Both Walter and John Bisset went initially to Ireland on exile in 1242; they later meet Henry iii in Wales in the same year. (9) John was to take service with Henry iii, opting to fight in Guienne in return for a knight's fee in Ireland and takes no further part in this history.

Walter put up an ingenious argument to Henry, namely that the king of Scotland had no right to disinherit him since the king of Scotland was the liegeman of the king of England and that he Walter, was unconvicted without the king of England's assent. This was an argument that would have appealed to any king of England at that time and one which gave Henry another chance to meddle in the internal affairs of Scotland. The extended Bisset family not only held considerable land in England but were well known to the English crown with a record of royal service.

In 1243 Henry iii, granted Walter the manor of East Lowdham until such time as he or his heirs regained their estates in Scotland. (10) It is also quite true that this manor adjoined the Manor of East Bridgeford, was a property of the English Bissets. This was held not by William le Grant [Graunt] through his wife Albreda Bisset but by Warin de Basingbourn who at that date was married to Albreda, a Bisset heiress who also held the manor of Athelington [now West Allington] in Lincolnshire. Warin de Basingbourn's life can be easily verified: he came of age in c1248 (11) and died in 1269 (12) - his father also a Warin died in 1229 (13) and our Warin's son was Edmund (14) so the only possible tenant of East Bridgeford and Athelington c1243 would be Warin. I have found a date of 1240 for his marriage (15) to Albreda so if correct he was firmly in control of East Bridgeford throughout Walter's exile and until long after his [Walter's] death. It may just be a coincidence that Walter got East Lowdham at that time, it might have been fortuitously available or indeed it might have been the family connection that obtained it but its importance has been over stated due to the Bisset connection and too much read into it without further research.

As one of the main thrusts of Fraser's proposition hinges on who was or was not in tenancy of East Bridgeford at this date, a further explanation is due. The key to Fraser's thinking should have been his reading of Dr Thoroton's Nottinghamshire (1677), which gives a genealogy showing an Albreda, married to a Warin de Basingbourn. (16) It is not clear if he ever read this book although he refers to it as a footnote, because if he had he would have seen that the date given for the marriage of Albreda to William le Grant was 1293 [possibly mistakenly] shown as 21E, 1. the twenty first year of the reign of Edward the First. Fraser should have realised then that this date made his proposition untenable. The genealogy shown is poorly presented and it had been assumed wrongly that Albreda had married twice and that as a result of the second marriage there was a daughter named Beatrix, the whole genealogy of the Bisset family is further confused by the numerous women all named Albreda.

While I knew that Warin's dates were the most important I did harbour a doubt about his wife remarrying again at what would be very late in life. If the marriage was for the protection of the estate rather than pro-creation for the estate, a second marriage could still work, but there is no evidence that this happened in this instance. The crown had a nasty habit of marrying off widows and heiresses to members of the court or people who were owed a favour and one way around this was for the family to act quickly and marry off the widow to a safe person of their choosing. This practice was eventually brought to a stop as a clause in the Magna Carta. However further research (17) showed that Albreda and Warin had two daughters, Albreda and Constantia, and that Albreda married William le Graunt 1274 they in turn had a son Eustace le Grant and a daughter Beatrix..

1244, and back to Walter Bisset, he joined Henry iii on a campaign against Scotland. This seems to have been a half hearted venture and petered out at Newcastle. A Peace was made at Pontland (18) a village nearby where Walter was a witness for the English side and John Bisset the Younger of Aird, the son of the exiled John Bisset signed as a witness for the Scottish side. Walter then appears in various English state papers in the service of the crown and involved as a messenger between the king and Ireland. In 1248 Walter was captured by the Scots in the form of Alan of Galloway (19) when Dunavarty castle was captured. Walter seems to have been able to make his peace with king Alexander ii probably by turning his coat and gaining his freedom in exchange for information of English intentions. He appears to have had a good relationship with Alexander prior to his exile and it may well be that the king by exiling him saved his life. He appears as a witness to a royal charter dated 13th Jan 1249 also a deed by Gregory de Manderville in 1251(20) and was dead by1251.

The claim for an Anglo-Norman origin is not sustainable in the light of a reappraisal of the evidence.

We can see that William le Grant did not marry Albreda de Basingbourn [Bisset] until 1274 [we have two conflicting dates for this event 1274 (Du Boulay Hill and 1293 from Thoroton and I have taken the earlier date] This is 16 years after Laurence and Robert le Grant appear as charter witnesses in Scotland. (21) So we can say that Grants were recorded in Scotland well before the William le Grant marriage - in fact we could turn Fraser's argument upside down and even suggest that this William came North to South and not the other way as he proposed.

WalterBisset did not return from exile and reclaim his estates; he was captured as a traitor and subsequently in someway gained his freedom. The evidence is that Aboyne was retained by the crown (22) but he may have regained a small estate at Lessendrum. [He also interestingly seems to have held some land in Yorkshire] (23) Walter would not have been a good choice as someone to promote one's interest in Scotland at that time.

The only conclusion that we can come to is that Grants were active and recorded in Scotland before any dates suggested by Fraser for an English migration north or conversely the English Grants which he relies on are recorded after the Scottish Grants and this must rule out any suggestion of an Anglo-Norman origin at this time.

In the previous article (1) I demonstrated that the Batten/Fraser case for an Anglo-Norman origin for the House of Grant could not work on chronological grounds and therefore any secondary evidence proposed by Fraser was irrelevant. I deliberately avoided discussing these areas partly for lack of space but mainly because I did not want to confuse the chronological argument with unnecessary detail which might reduce the impact of my contention. I did however promise to return to discuss some of the other issues raised by Fraser, in relation to an Anglo-Norman origin. These issues revolve around:- Sir Laurence and Robert Grant's "arrival" in Scotland. The Prat/Bisset English and Scottish connection. An earlier migration north. The English Grants. The etymological argument.

I started my research with an open mind; I was in the Anglo-Norman camp in so far as I gave it any thought at all, having been brought up with this version of the origin. So like most of us my history of the Grants started with Sir Laurence who is portrayed as the first Grant in Scotland and the father of the House of Grant, whereas he is actually the first Grant found in Scottish recorded documents, not necessarily the same thing. In some accounts it is hinted that he had a father named Gregory who is depicted incorrectly as having been sheriff of Inverness (2) there has been no explanation where Gregory or Laurence and his brother Robert came from except to presume that they had migrated north with Walter Bisset after his exile in 1244 and were related to William le Grant of Lincolnshire wife of Albreda Bassingbourn.

If Laurence Grant and relatives had migrated north on or around 1244, which we now know they didn't they could have been little more than opportunists or fairly penniless knights; there are only two records so far found of any of that name holding land in England (3) at or near to that period and compared to Scotland, English records of the period are prolific. We know Robert the assumed brother of Sir Laurence obtained from Sir John Prat [whose sister is believed to have been Marjory, who married Gilbert of Glencairnie the younger] a charter to the land of Clonmanache on the Findhorn. The charter is undated but believed to be about 1258, two of the witnesses were Sir John Bisset of the Aird and Sir William, son of Augustine. The charter states that there had been past disputes over this land between Robert Grant and Sir John Prat's father [un-named]. (4) So only 14 years after their supposed arrival they are seen to be acquiring land but as these disputes had been with Sir John's father it suggests an earlier interest in the land possibly up to a decade back which would put the Grants in the Findhorn area disputing land rights maybe only 4 years after their supposed arrival in Scotland, I find this hard to accept. Fraser (5) also accepts that Robert le Grant had resided sometime prior to this date in Moray. More telling still is the date of Laurence's role as Sheriff [1263] (6) just 19 years after the family's supposed arrival in Scotland. This does not add up - in theory there is no reason why this could not have been achieved in this time scale but I think the reality is somewhat more complicated.

Had Laurence arrived in Scotland in time of war or unrest he might well have been imposed on the population as Sheriff but there are no grounds to suspect this was the case. The role of Sheriff which later generally became hereditary was at this period a direct appointment from the king, The sheriff was the king's man and it is inconceivable that anyone would be appointed who was not known and close to the king. Inverness at that time included all of Ross, Sutherland and Caithness, in effect most of Northern Scotland wherever the king's writ ran, except for the Western Isles and the North East coast. The job description for this role would have required someone who held the king's trust, an ability to manage the local barons both in a political and military sense, powers of leadership, military prowess and, last but by no means least, knowledge of the people and territory that he was Sheriff of. The appointment of Laurence Grant as Sheriff, a first generation migrant in preference to established barons and families of standing would, I am sure, have produced jealousies which would have made his job untenable and the king would have been well aware of this in making the appointment.

None of this suggests to me a first generation newcomer; it suggests someone who had a stake and background of the area long enough to be able to compete with the local barons and to hold his own ground. And as we know that Laurence was indeed Sheriff (7) the only logical conclusion is that he and his family were already well established in the locality and had been there long enough to have earned the trust of the king and the respect however grudging of the other established families of note and power. The connections between the Grants and Bissets in Scotland are not in dispute, we have shown that the supposed English connection does not work in the way that Batten and Fraser proposed. Cassillis quotes Fraser who in turn quotes "Calendarium Genealogicum"(8) as showing a family of the name of Prat holding lands in Nottingham and proposes that the Bissets, Prats and Grants in the person of William le Grant were all near neighbours in England as well as in Scotland. He therefore makes the assumption that they all went north together to make their fortunes.

The inquisition post mortem which Fraser quotes concerns a Walter Prat of Retford, in Nottinghamshire and identifies his seven year old son Adam as his heir. This document can be dated to 1278, which is 34 years after Walter Bisset's supposed return to Scotland and 15 years after Laurence was first appointed sheriff of Inverness. It was also 4 years after William le Grant married Albreda de Basingbourn. While Retford is approximately 25 miles from East Bridgeford and where Bissets and Grants lived it is entirely possible that they might well have known each other but there is no evidence that that these Prats were in anyway connected to the Prats already established in Moray, as equally there is no firm evidence linking these Grants with the Grants in Scotland, of which more later.

The Prats were of Flemish extraction and while there was a steady trickle of Flemmings into England and Scotland for a long period the main impetus came when Count Eustace, ii. of Boulogne came to England in 1066, his followers were rewarded with land by William, i. They moved into Scotland as the Flemish influence increased, originally as a result of the marriage of Maud de Lens to David i, of Scotland, and again when Mary daughter of Malcolm iii, married Eustace of Boulogne. When Henry ii of England oppressed those Flemmings who had supported Stephen de Bois, some returned home and some like the Boulonnais from the East Midlands went north to Scotland where they already had relatives and were made welcome. In summing up we can say that there were Prats in the Nottinghamshire area around the time of the Bisset exile but the only known record is some 34 years after the event. The evidence produced so far is circumstantial at best and cannot be taken as proof of any connection between the Grants and Prats already in Scotland and those in England. The interpretation put on this single document is at best optimistic but more a case of trying to make the "evidence" fit a pre-determined result.

A scenario which could account for an Anglo-Norman origin would be if the Grants were indeed Anglo-Norman but had made the south north migration at an earlier date; this is a purely speculative theory as I can find no evidence to support this idea. In 1175, William the Lion of Scotland returned to Scotland having been captured by English forces while mounting a very opportunist raid on England, in an effort to regain Northumberland for the Scottish crown. Everyman's hand was raised against Henry, ii of England, led by those of his own sons; Henry was seen as Christendom's bad guy after the death of Thomas a Becket. William saw this as his opportunity to regain Northumberland but was captured at Alnwick in 1174 and eventually taken as prisoner to Falaise in Normandy where he was forced to make peace with Henry. In December 1174 the Treaty of Falaise (9) was signed between England and Scotland at Falaise. Although glossed over by most Scottish historians this was a humiliating agreement for the Scots (10) William not only became liegeman to Henry but he committed in this treaty "every man of respect of Scotland.....all the bishops, abbots and clergy ...." The submission of the Scottish Church to the English Church and so on, a complete feudal take over.

William was released before Christmas 1174 and returned to Scotland with the promise to Henry that he, the Bishops and Scottish nobles would meet Henry, at York the following year when they would all personally swear their fealty to Henry and his son. (11) We know that as he went back north he collected various Anglo-Norman knights to serve him in Scotland. Fraser tells us that among these were Bissets, Balliols, Bruces and others (12) Some of these knights may well have been known to him from his period of holding the Honour of Huntingdon, at one time the largest Earldom in England, traditionally held by the heir to the Scottish throne as a gift of the king of England. William, who himself was culturally more Norman than Scottish would have had no difficulty in recruiting knights with the prospect of acquiring land and prestige in a new land. And we can be reasonably sure that Henry also had an interest in some of these knights, the Bissets were in English and Norman service and Manasser Bisset was Henry's steward, it is probably that it was his brother Henry who went north, although we know that Bissets had been active in Scotland before this date. (13)

If the Grants had been among these knights even as retainers of the Bissets it would have been a more logical time to migrate and puts their arrival in Scotland 75 years earlier than the Batten/ Fraser proposition. The consequences of this earlier date would have made Laurence and Robert, third or even fourth generation Scots depending on the age of the first migrant, and comfortably account for Laurence being Sheriff as it answers all my previous objections and reservations. Third generation Grant, aligned to the Bissets, knowing their patch, holding property and known to the king suddenly makes sense, for a member of an increasingly powerful family to hold the position of Sheriff. It also accounts for Laurence's father Gregory, who we can take as second generation, married to Mary Bisset, daughter of John Bisset of the Aird who gets Stratherrick as a dowry. (14) Alan Grant, traditionally Gregory's father then assumes the role of first Grant, he fits the role of first named chief by the traditional numbering sequence and with a life span say 1155-1210 fits the role of the first Grant going north aged approx 19.

It's an intriguing idea but lacks any supporting evidence - it ignores the prospect of a Scandinavian origin and the fact that so far no one of the name of Grant has been found in England at this early date, although hereditary surnames were still in their infancy. However were there to be no Scandinavian theory this idea of an earlier migration would make more sense than Fraser's later one.

We now have to try and account for the "English Grants," Why, because as various individuals named Grant appear in English records at an early date the inference has been drawn by some that this is evidence that Grants were more prominent in England than Scotland and further proof that they originated first in England. Accepting the dearth of Scottish records surviving from this period we are left with the first recorded name of Grant surviving in Scotland as 1258 when Laurence and Robert le Grant are recorded as witnesses. (15) I think in view of some of the text in this document we can very safely assume that Grants were in Moray by 1248, so in order for the English Grant theory to hold we would need to be looking for a substantial number of Grants recorded in England prior to say 1248. They don't exist. The earliest named Grant I have so found in England is an Ivo le Grant, 1222 his nephew John and a Heyne le Graunt all in Lincolnshire followed by Richard le Grant. Chancellor of the diocese of Lincoln 1228, (16) later Archbishop of Canterbury, all the other named Grants are either un-dated or post 1248. The jury is still out on whever or not Richard le Grant was or was not a Grant, in his favour we now know that the first bishop of Moray, Richard of Lincoln, a clerk in orders to William the Lion, who on becoming bishop adopted the rules and structure of his alma mata, Lincoln. If Richard had been a Grant and taken Holy Orders it would not be surprising for him to turn up in Lincoln and had he done so it would also be reasonable to assume that he brought members of his family or friends south with him. However some serious doubt is cast on his being a Grant, the Dictionary of National Biography also refers to him as Richard of Wethershed, possibly either from Sussex or Suffolk the exact location cannot now be identified. It is also suggested that he was known as Le Grand from his stature or Magister Richardus Magnus, so great care must be taken in assuming him to be a Scottish Grant.

That there were Grants recorded in England at an early date is not in dispute, however their exact status is unclear, some were clearly domiciled in England but for how long we have no idea, some were probably itinerant, traders, merchants, soldiers. They represent a statistically insignificant number to indicate anything, were many more dateable Grants to be found in England prior to 1248 they could still only be seen as an indication of an origin from England, supporting evidence to more conclusive primary evidence, is totally lacking. The most likely answer for the majority of these Grants found in England at this time would be either migration south probably via trade, military service or marriage. It is entirely possible that some people derived their name from the nickname Grand, as in large or huge, as surnames became fixed their heirs took on this name by default; and although called Grant they did not have - nor did their heirs - any connection with the Scottish family of Grant. A significant number of surnames are derived from nick names. (17)

We need to consider the history of surnames; every surname had a meaning once even if today we are unable to say with complete certainty what that meaning was. In general terms the origin of a surname is seldom an official affair, they mostly derive from either a personal name, an occupational name, a place name, a pet name or nick name. Hereditary surnames are considered to have become settled in England by 1400 but most are very much earlier than that. During the reign of Edward I of England (1272-1307) the country was taxed to pay for his wars in Wales and Scotland and the names of those who paid these taxes, many thousands were written up by individual village and form part of the "Subsidiary Rolls". (18) And in the case of Grant, it is entirely possible that some people derived their name from the nickname Grand, as in large or huge, as surnames became fixed their heirs assumed this name which became hereditary. In the past writers have tended to equate the Anglo Norman word Grand in terms of impressive, noble, or splendid rather than its correct derivation of large, tall, huge. If this was indeed the case it would account for some English families widely separated by distance to end up carrying the hereditary name of Grant, derived from a historically acceptable nick name but having no blood connection with any Scottish Grants.

This leads us neatly to where does the Scottish name of Grant derive, the Etymological argument. The basis of this is that the meaning or derivation of the word Grant comes from a source generally assumed to be linguistic, crudely put, "sounds like". This is a game everyone can play; the proponents of an English East Anglian origin have put forward place names which carry part or all of the word Grant, as have the proponents of a Scandinavian or Scottish indigenous origin. Many of these names seem at first glance to be quite convincing and may in the end prove to have some merit however so far none in my opinion have that knockout argument that carries real conviction. There is no question that the name has a meaning but the exact derivation remains elusive. Can we exclude the Anglo-Norman derivation, "Grand"? Not entirely as at the same period that hereditary names were becoming the norm in Scotland the court and nobility were still part of the wider Norman culture and heritage and we can not rule out the possibility that the nick name principle of Grand worked as well in Scotland. If however we ignore any thought of any Anglo-Norman influence we come back to a derivation from a place or person native to Scotland, many have been put forward and could be right but so far we lack sufficiently convincing evidence to back any as being possibly the origin. My personal view is that a Scandinavian derivation of the word is unlikely, no obvious or convincing one has been found and if one accepts the chronology of the Scandinavian origin by the time "Andlaw" (Grant) was active and he would have been the first candidate to be called Grant; the Scandinavian link was already getting weak. There is no evidence that Andlaw spent any significant time in Scandinavia although he would have been raised in its culture and custom. I think that the most likely derivation is from Scotland but for the moment I am keeping an open mind as to where.

Akin to the etymological argument is the Heraldic one; this is where components of the Arms of Grant are used to produce an argument inferring an origin of the family to suit the proposer. While I do not dispute that there must be a meaning to the three Crowns, they are not unique in heraldry and do appear elsewhere. My concern is in trying to place a meaning on a heraldic symbol which pre-dates formal heraldry. If the Lord Lyon knocked on your door and told you he was preparing Arms for you, what would you like to depict, I am sure that most of you would arrive at some pictorial symbol which reflected something personal to you and your family and no doubt the Grants did the same and while their symbol could be almost a folk memory, I still think that for us to try and put a meaning on it is dangerous and time wasting.

Part one of this paper demonstrated that the principle evidence put forward by Edmund Batten and Sir William Fraser, as to an origin of the House of Grant as a result of a migration north around 1244 does not stand stricter scrutiny. Part two expands on the secondary evidence used by Fraser, which also brings the 1244 migration into doubt. I have shown that the assumption that Sir Laurence and Robert Grant were early migrants is extremely unlikely and the reasons why I believe this. I have also questioned the Bisset-Pratt-Grant relationship as proposed by Fraser. A scenario for a migration 75 years earlier has been shown as a possibility but with no evidence to support this theory. I have put forward reasons why it could have been possible for people to have carried the name Grant in England but have no relationship with the Scottish Grants and have briefly discussed the Entomological argument and the dangers of inferring too much from the Grant Arms. In conclusion I find the evidence for an English or Anglo-Norman origin to be non-existent and the proposal for such an origin by Sir William Fraser to be false. Rightly or wrongly and however flawed the traditional version of the origin of the House of Grant circulating within the clan until displaced by Fraser in 1883 must be reconsidered as the basis for such an origin."

The heresay that Grants migrated south to north has just been disproved in the above message post.

But IF Grants migrated south to north (though, they did not) or north to south (as accepted they did), either way, they are one family, distantly related to family that held Clan Grant lands. It is ONE family - a SCOTTISH family at that.

It was a Grant that went south with William the conqueror who was granted land in England moving north to south.

Another nickname 'le Grand' - the Big One - was given to a knight who held land in Lincolnshire and whos descendants later moved to Scotland where "le Grand" became altered to 'Grant'. Sir Laurence le Grant was Sheriff of Inverness in 1258. The Normans delighted in nicknames and puns.

They probably may be of Norwegian extraction, but came into England, 'with 'William the Conqueror from Normandy, and from
thence into Scotland. It is uncertain where their first establishment was, in Scotland. The earliest mention of the name is in an agreement, recorded in the chartulary of Moray, between Archibald, Bishiop of Moray, and John Byfeth, with regard to his lands of the Ard, to which Domini Laurentius et Robertus Grant are witnesses: it is dated 1228. This Jojm was probably the father of Walter Byfeth of Strathharkk, or Strathharic, mentioned in Rymer's Fcedera; and the prefumption is, that thefe Grants, refided in that part of the* province of Moray, at that period.

In 1270 Henry III. of England gives a protection to William le Graunt, to go to the Crusades.

In 1288 Peter le Graunt fights, among others, an obligation of the King of Arragon to the Prince of Salerno.

In 1297 John de Graunt and Rodulpk de Graunt, with many of the Magnates Scotia, are included in an order of Edward I. of
England, to serve in war against France. They are discharged from prison on this condition, and were dependent on John Corny n, Lord of Badenoch, and David de Graham.

In 1302 Edward I. addresses letters to, many in Ireland, to prepare with men and horses, for engaging in the Scots war, and
amongst others to William le Grant and John Comyn.

In 1335 Edward III. of England grants a safe conduct *p John Graunt miles, to come to, and return from London. Some of our
historians say, that this John Graunt was Scots ambassador in France, and' negociated a treaty with that nation. In 1363 Edward III. grants a safe conduct to John de Graunt, de Scotia miles, and to Elizabeth his wife, to come to England, and have ten persons, horsemen and footmen, in their retinue. At this period, many persons received such fate conducts, but with no such numerous retinue to any, but to Robert de EVfkyne miles. , . In 1366 Edward III. grants a safe conduct to John Gtant miles de Scotia, with six horsemen.

In 1380 the chartulary of Moray , informs us, that A. Stewart, Lord of Badenoch, holds his court at Kingufy, and among others that attended is Male ol me le Graunt. In 1385 forty francs, or livres tournois, are given to Robert h D Graunt^

Graunt, Efcuier. They are part of 40,000, sent from France, to be distributed among the Scots nobility. '• '

In 1394, in a bond of manrent between Thomas Dunbar, Earl of Moray, ^and Alexander, Lord of Lochaber, Malcolm de Graunt
'had a twenty mark land, probably in Strathhefic, as appears from the chat tulary of Moray.

In 1417 Peter le Graunt Cappellanus is included in a prote&iort to the clergy of Normandy, from Henry V. of England.

In 1415 Simeon le Graunt, curate of the church of CrohTy, is mentioned in a protection to part of Normandy, by Henry V.'of • England.

In 1420 the King of England secures their property to many in Normandy, who had swore fealty to him, and, amongst- others, to "William le Graunt"

In 1496 the community of Provins, and the neighbouring cities, ratify a peace between the Kings of France and England : many sign it, and, among others, jsohan Graunt dit Hqnnepon.

All these facts, where the authority is not quoted, are extracted from Rymer's Fcsdera. Boethius mentions, that foon after 1424, Henry Graunt was one of the honourable perfons, who attended Margaret, daughter of James I. of Scotland, into France, on her marriage with Lewis, fon of Charles VII.

These detached facts prove, that the name of Grant was known in Spain, France, England, and Scotland-, in which last country some of- them had risen to consequence, as appears from the safe ' conducts and retinues allowed.

By this, rank and diftindlion were ascertained in these days. But these facts, being unconnected, give no regular information concerning individuals, or the heads of the family. However, this in some measure is supplied by a series of charters, in possesion of the family of Grant, from the era of William the Lion, downwards.

In this series^ of writs, the first grant mentioned is, Robert le Grawnt, who obtains the lands of Cloumanachs or Culmony in *Ardclach parish, from John Prat, who, by other charters, was a. miles, and had Daltely in Morayia, or Daltulich. One of the wit-uefles to this charter was John Byfet, 2nd was granted about the 1268. ,

The next is John le Grawnt> who in v *1346 is appointed by Jolin, Randolph, $hap~ *• JfcOVJliJCE, OF uokax« **

Randolph, Earl de Moray, heritable keeper of the cattle of Tarneway, and of his forest, beyond the bounds of his park: he also gets the lands of Dovely. It is dated at Elgin, and is given under the great seal of the Earl's chancery.

r The next mentioned is Patrick It Grawnt> laird of Stratharthoe, who gives his davoch of Kildreke and half davoch of Glenbegis, in
fcis lands of Jnneralyane, to William, called Pilch) burgefs of Inverness, and his heirs by Margaret, daughter of Patrick, his wife>
which failing, to return to Patrick and his heirs. By this deed k appears, that Patrick's father, who is not named, had been invest in
Inveralyan. It is not dated 5 but Alexander, bilhop of Rofs, is a. wituefs, who came to that Yee about 1357, and wasbifhop in 1404,
In 1419/a noble woman, Elizabeth ly Grant y Domina de Stratharachy declares in a deed, that {he had never given away these
lands, but, now does it tocher dear son James Macintoche, and gives him all the title {he ever liad to them, in feu or heritably.

In 1464 an inquest at Inverness, of the most rcfpe&a.ble gentlemen finds,, that Gilbert of Glencharn'y, grandfather of Duncan
Graunty miles r, died invest in the lands of Kunnyngais, and that the said Duncan is lawful heir of the said Gilbert.

King James II. grants an order, founded on an inquest of a jury, to invest Duncan le Grant, son and lawful heir of Matilda of Glert-
cherny, in the fifth part of the barony of Rothes, Wifeman, and Burnemikity, in both the. Fochabris, the half of Imefton, and two
marks yearly out of the town of Thprnhill. This order is said to have been granted, because the earldom of Moray was then in the
hands of the Crown. It is dated the 29th year of our reign^ -which *is 1488. *

To discover who this' heiress, Matilda of . GleRcharny, and h&c father Gilbert were, we are to look backj and among this series of
charters, we find—

That William the Lion, after 1187, confirms the grant made by Gilleb. de Stradhern, to GiUriJl his son, of Kinnebethin and Glan-
carnen, to be held of the faid Earl and his heirs, in feu or heritably. . ^ . . . -
The title of Earl of Strathern is among the most ancient in Scotland. It is thought to have originated in the reign of Malcolm Ilf.
Earl Fertith.died in 1 \*]t. They were Strather» of Strathern 3 a^cl
the title continued in the family till the reign of Robert I.; t wii*n
■ * ' D i Johana

In fact, it was a Grant that went south with William the conqueror who was granted land in England moving north to south (Scotland to England), NOT vice versa.

More Scottish history and ancestry.

A few kilometers north east of Rouen is the hamlet of Boissay, cradle of the powerful Anglo Norman family of Bisset. They obtained land around Beauly and built the abbey there. A Bisset heiress brought the lands of Beauly to the Frasers who hold them still.

It is an either...or statement, meaning that I separated Norse OR Norman, instead of equating them.

If they were Norse who settled Scotland, then migrated south and were conquerors, they still descend from the same ancestors and are the same family.

If they were Norman who settled England, then migrated north, they still descend from the same ancestors and are the same family.

So all Grants are one clan/family.

"That same root between the Norse and the Normans was about 10,000 years ago. FYI." ~ Geoff Grant

"There were (could have been) Norman conquerers of Wales in the time period between c.1200 - 1415. Sir Laurence le Grant was Sheriff of Inverness in 1258.

Grant, Graunt, Grante have all fallen under suspicion of being derivations of the Norman LeGrand." ~ Don Grant

"Believed to be descended from the Norman race, the Normans were frequently, but mistakenly, assumed to be of French origin. They were more accurately of Viking origin. The Vikings landed in the Orkneys and Northern Scotland about the year 870 A.D. under their king, Stirgud the Stout. Thorfinn Rollo, his descendant, landed in northern France about the year 910 A.D. The French King, Charles the Simple, after Rollo laid siege to Paris, finally conceded defeat and granted northern France to Rollo. Rollo became the first Duke of Normandy, the territory of the north men. Rollo married Charles' daughter and became a convert to Christianity. Duke William who invaded and defeated England in 1066, was descended from the first Duke Rollo of Normandy. By 1070, the Norman nobles in the north of England were in rebellion. Duke William took an army north and laid waste most of the northern counties. King Malcolm Canmore of Scotland invited many of the displaced nobles to his court and gave them grants of land. About 1130, the Earl of Huntingdon, heir to the Scottish throne, later to become King David of Scotland also offered land to his Norman friends in England, particularly in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk and the lower midlands.

Younger knights could advance themselves by volunteering to hold estates on the wild Welsh border. ... Another nickname 'le Grand' - the Big One - was given to a knight who held land in Lincolnshire and whos descendants later moved to Scotland where "le Grand" became altered to 'Grant'. Sir Laurence le Grant was Sheriff of Inverness in 1258. The Normans delighted in nicknames and puns.

(I originally published this as a reply on another thread, but thought it deserved it's own topic since it seems an interesting discussion that many Grants are interested in):

It seems one of those questions that will never be answered, since the records are lost. The historians in the U.K. have put together a good theory using resources that Fraser didn't bother with in the 19th century.

Still, it's all just "theory". The earliest documented Grant chief in Scotland is Lawrence le Grant in the late 13th century. But I agree with the historians in the U.K. that the evidence is certainly there for Gregory and for the Grants having been there for at least a century or two before (which is roughly when surnames came into vogue).

Some clans are now initiating DNA projects wherein the members of the chief's line and the cadet families are submitting their DNA to a database. Clansmen can submit their own DNA and thus a large database of DNA records can be built up for a clan showing the various paternal lines. This might be the best solution for a clan as large and ancient as Clan Grant.

In reality, though, it make little difference (at least to me) whether the Grants went north to south or south to north. Even the Normans were Vikings, and there's certainly no shame in having Norman origins or blood. (The Normans were *not* French). Without question the Grants (assuming Norman origins for a moment) almost immediately married into the Scots/Pictish/Celtic people of the region. So the "Scottishness" of the Grants is a non-issue to me no matter which way it went.

It's certainly one family, as the spelling and pronunciation of the name prove out. If the name were "le Grand" or a derivative, it should have stayed that way in England, but it *didn't*. The name is invariably spelled (as it was pronounced) "Graunt" or "Grawnt" or "Grant" for as far back as most records go. Both in England and in Scotland. Supposedly the Celts softened the "d" to a "t" sound, but how does that explain the name being pronounced in the Celtic way in England? (It should have stayed "Grand"). That, to me, is the most telling proof that the name (and family) has one common origin and it is *not* a derivative of "le Grand" though the meaning of the name (as Rand pointed out) may be the same in the Scandinavian and Celtic as it is in French ("Grand", "Great" - meaning "large", "big", "eminent").

The River Cam (from which Cambridge got its name) was originally the Caer Grant or Granta in the old Saxon and the Clan Grant History site points out that this was a site of Olav Hemingson's holdings in the 10th century IIRC. So it's still possible the Grants went south to north (much earlier) and they left their name (or took it from) the River or region of their original holdings.

Some scholars have commented on the fact that the Grants of England held different arms than the Grants in Scotland but I'm not sure this holds any water. The arms of the Grants in England were three lions rampant azure on a field argent with a chief of azure. Their motto was "Stand Sure". The motto was obviously the same, and the undifferenced lion rampant is the symbol of Scotland (the red lion rampant became the arms of Robert the Bruce). The Clan Grant History site pionts out that the undifferenced lion rampant was attributed to Dervoguilla (sp) who was a wife of an early Grant chief.

All of this, combined with my study of surname distribution, to me is unquestionable proof that the Grants are one family with a common origin. The only question is did they originally establish themselves in the south and head north or vice versa, and to me, that's merely an academic point/argument, though it's a lot of fun to debate.

- Scott Grant
Webmaster and West Coast Historian
Northern California Commissioner

Therefore, no matter either Norse or Norman who settled the UK, it would eventually go back to the same root for family, so the clan accepting all Grants is correct in that somehow Grants are distantly related.

Even if Grants are in England and Wales, they are still of Clan Grant as they are distantly related.

Best guess is Norman conquerers of Wales. Right time period c.1200 - 1415.
Sir Laurence le Grant was Sheriff of Inverness in 1258

It is foolish to disregard history!

Matthew Grant had a sister Miriam/Mary Grant who married Thomas Dibble.

Matthew Grant wrote in his diary about an only sister. His sister is Miriam/Mary Frances Grant who married Thomas Dibble.

"In Windsor, Conn. there are many records preserved concerning Thomas in the land, vital, probate, town, and church records; as well asin the dairy of Matthew Grant, his next door neighbor.
I find the wife of Thomas, mother of his children, referred to only as sister dibble. His second wife was widow of John Hawkes (killed by the Indians), and secondly widow of Robert Hensdale. Matthew Grants Diary, page 94 gives a list of persons now living (dated 1677) that came from Dorchester in full communion.
Thomas second home lot in Windsor, Conn. was on the Palisado (village green or common), the third house N.E. of the church, between the homes of Mr. Grant and Mr. Phillips.
Windsor, Conn. Town Votes, Vol. 2. pg. 7 states; "Those of the Dragones that have received pouches of Thomas Deble, which he got made and is to be paid by ye town".
In 1676 Thomas Deble and Abram Deble are listed among those who gave monies to the poor of other colonies.
The will and inventory of Thomas Deble are preserved at the Conn. State Library, Hartford, Conn. Photostats may be obtained there for a small fee.", VanBuren Lamb, Jr., "Line of Henry Dibble.""

Notify Administrator about this message?

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network