Clan CrestThe Clan McLea/Livingstone Forum

Code of
Title: Sunday Times Article 7 October 2007
Posted by: Young Bachuil
Date: 09 October 2007


by Mark Macaskill

THEY died in their hundreds fighting alongside Bonnie Prince Charlie at Culloden in a valiant attempt to restore the House of Stuart to the British throne. 

Now, more than 200 years later, Highland clans have declared war on the National Trust for Scotland (NTS) , accusing the heritage body of trampling over the memory of their fallen ancestors in a multimillion-pound redevelopment of the famous battle site. 

The clansmen are furious over plans to alter a marker commemorating the men of the Appin Regiment, which will credit only two of more than a dozen clans that fought in it. Highlanders including the MacLarens, Livingstones, McLeas, Carmichaels and Stewarts of Appin joined the regiment, which led the Jacobite charge against the forces of King George II. Its standard was the only one saved from being burned by the English monarch's forces after the Highlanders were routed in the last Jacobite uprising in 1746. 

However, the new memorial will only acknowledge the MacLarens and the Stewarts of Appin who were the principal clans of the regiment and suffered the heaviest losses. 

The decision has outraged the chiefs of other clans whose ancestors fought in the regiment. They have accused the NTS of "airbrushing" their ancestors from history. Letters of complaint have been sent to the NTS by clansmen from as far afield as America and Australia. 

"This has caused a real brouhaha," said Niall Livingstone of Bachuil, who is related to clansmen who fought at Culloden. 

"There has been little consultation with the clans and the trust is being incredibly arrogant and insensitive. It is rewriting history with impunity. Just singling out two clans diminishes the sacrifices made by the others." 

John Carmichael, president of the Clan Carmichael USA, said: "This decision is creating a great deal of resentment among American clan organisations. Their ancestors served with the Appin Regiment at Culloden and it ignores the sacrifices of the brave men from those clans who fought and died alongside the Stewarts and MacLarens." 

Writing on an internet forum, Kyle MacLea, a representative of the Mclean clan, said: "It is curious that no other clans were consulted except the Stewarts and MacLarens, those least likely to protest it. Just because nobody protested before doesn't mean it isn't right to protest it now." 

The wrangle is the latest turn in a dispute that has spanned more than four decades. The marker - which was erected in the 1950s by the Forestry Commission - originally honoured only the Stewarts of Appin and the MacLarens. However, when ownership of the site transferred to the National Trust in the late 1990s, individual clan names were removed and replaced with that of the Appin Regiment. 

Donald Maclaren, from Balquhidder, said: "The MacLaren name has been on the battlefield since the markers were put up and we told the National Trust in the politest possible way that we did not want our name deleted."

The trust has decided to return to the original inscription acknowledging the MacLarens and the Stewarts of Appin, and intends to erect a new stone marker by the end of the year. It is part of an extensive overhaul of Culloden, including the opening of a new visitor centre and the removal of all trees and fencing which were masking the original site.

Last week the NTS said its decision was based on contemporary historical accounts of the battle. As a compromise the heritage body is offering to inscribe the names of all the clans that fought at Culloden on a memorial wall at the new visitor centre.

Alexander Bennett, a spokesman for the NTS said: “Regardless of the rights and wrings, we have gone right back to what was written down by the original recorders of the battle.

“We felt that the MacLarens were deserving of having their name retained on the marker because they were one of the principal clans and their nbame was on the marker originally.  We do not wish to antagonise anybody, least of all the clans, and we have acted in good faith, but our view is that enough is enough.”

I sent in a very measured argument - but this obviously wasn't going to sell newspapers.

Kyle is taken to represent the MacLeans!  Donald Maclaren of Maclaren is not give his full style which is a bit insulting to him.

The MacColls suffered heavier losses than the MacLarens

The NTS response is interesting "right or wrong" we ain't changing.

It is interesting to note that Finlayson's map makes no mention of the Maclarens so Macphersons comments are basically wrong.

** This Thread has ended - Please do NOT attempt to resurrect it! **


Title:Date:Posted By:
Sunday Times Article 7 October 200709 October 2007Young Bachuil
   Sunday Times Article 7 October 200710 October 2007Donald (Livingstone) Clink
   Sunday Times Article 7 October 200711 October 2007Kyle MacLea
   Sunday Times Article 7 October 200711 October 2007Kyle MacLea

Return to Main Listings     Return to ANZ Listings     Return to Homepage