Opinion on Border Reivers as clans etc

[Foreversearchingforanswer]

In the 16th and 17th centuries most Lowlanders would have regarded the Highland clans as a bunch of dangerous savages

We still do.

[mosstrooper]

I see a lot of references here to the Jacobite uprising of the Clans and mentions of the Highlanders, neither of which have anything to do with the Border Reivers who predated all that stuff by many centuries, by the time the Battle of Culloden came around the Border Reivers were long gone.
I am a Kerr, a famous Border family who arrived in Scotland in the 14th Century in the form of two brothers Ralph & John, the family split in two, one using the long form name Kerr, and established Ferniehirst Castle, the other used the shorter Ker and established first of all Cessford Castle then a greater place called Floors Castle in Kelso, both of which still exist, where the 11th Duke of Roxburghe, Charles - Innes Ker lives today in the largest inhabited house in the UK. and that includes all the places owned by Her Maj. Charles & Diana used to come there to hide themselves away.

The Ker's were Wardens of the Middle March right on the Border with England. It pains me to read statements like this "Border Reivers were simply murderous thugs who had no allegiance to anyone." written by poorly educated and illinformed persons simply quoting what others have said before them, without knowing anything about what the Border population on both sides faced on a daily basis. If people want to call the Kerr's - Ker's a Clan or a Border Family or a Reiver that's fine with me, but please, not Murderous Thugs, I'm sure the present Duke of Roxburghe would take issue with that. and with this post, Foreversearchingforanswer

James Kerr.

[barryd]

Richard Nixon - 37th President of the United States 1969-1974

One wonders if he ever knew about his Scottish background.

[Mojo47]

Hi again all,

Thank you again for all you opinions.And as stated already, the intention of this thread is not to upset or cause arguments.
With view to Mr Kerr’s comments, I’m sure nobody is intending to insult you or your ancestors.
However, these views I believe have also been expressed by authors who I presume have some level of education and have done their research.Or are they uneducated?
As for people calling themselves clans or whatever, surely if this is in fact historically wrong they are also guilty of being uneducated ? And saying you’re ok with such things is ignoring your own heritage and in doing so also acting the same?
I am, as I have already mentioned, no expert on the subject and hope to gather enough opinions to then go on to form my own.
Certainly on the subject of the ‘clans’, author Alistair Moffat seems horrified enough to mention it one of his books.
This question all started due to my own internet searches to clan societies which have raised some degree of suspicion.And a desire to find out some degree of truth.
Using William Wallace as an example.You don’t have to search very far before you hit a bunch of people claiming direct decent.Despite the fact (as far as I am aware), he never had children.
I am just aiming to discover some truth.Nothing more.Finally.Thank you for your opinion.All are welcome!

[Foreversearchingforanswer]

and with this post, Foreversearchingforanswer

But, to your point, did the Kerrs seize a lot of land (including church lands) during the reformation.

[Guy Etchells]

I see a lot of references here to the Jacobite uprising of the Clans and mentions of the Highlanders, neither of which have anything to do with the Border Reivers who predated all that stuff by many centuries, by the time the Battle of Culloden came around the Border Reivers were long gone.
I am a Kerr, a famous Border family who arrived in Scotland in the 14th Century in the form of two brothers Ralph & John, the family split in two, one using the long form name Kerr, and established Ferniehirst Castle, the other used the shorter Ker and established first of all Cessford Castle then a greater place called Floors Castle in Kelso, both of which still exist, where the 11th Duke of Roxburghe, Charles - Innes Ker lives today in the largest inhabited house in the UK. and that includes all the places owned by Her Maj. Charles & Diana used to come there to hide themselves away.

The Ker's were Wardens of the Middle March right on the Border with England. It pains me to read statements like this "Border Reivers were simply murderous thugs who had no allegiance to anyone." written by poorly educated and illinformed persons simply quoting what others have said before them, without knowing anything about what the Border population on both sides faced on a daily basis. If people want to call the Kerr's - Ker's a Clan or a Border Family or a Reiver that's fine with me, but please, not Murderous Thugs, I'm sure the present Duke of Roxburghe would take issue with that. and with this post, Foreversearchingforanswer

James Kerr.

As a well educated (in one of Scotland's best performing independent schools) and a very experienced researcher, I stand by what I wrote.

You must be reading a very sanitised family history if you do not think the Kers were murderous thugs. They even fought amongst each other!
It is well documented the bitter Ker feud only ended with the marriage of William Kerr of Ferniehurst to Anne Kerr of Cessford.

Those days were savage to say the least, people were tortured and killed and revenge reaped in a similar manner. The Kers did not sit back and behave like 21st century gentlemen writing in disgust to the Times they knew it was kill or be killed, no matter what you may like to think.
After the recapture of  Ferniehurst Castle do you think the Kers allowed their English prisoners to leave under a flag of truce?

Cheers
Guy

[imchad]

I agree with James Ker's sentiments. All too often we judge past generations with the standards of today. The Reivers were living a precarious life in a time when the law was not upheld as today.  However, it was not all about murder and mayhem. Most of the time the Reivers stole cattle and other belongings and then gave the owners the opportunity to buy them back. At times history has confused the Reivers with 'authorized' raids conducted by one side against the other. Scotland and England were at loggerheads many times during the centuries.

[Mojo47]

Most of the time the Reivers stole cattle and other belongings and then gave the owners the opportunity to buy them back

Wouldn’t this be considered as thuggish behavior at the very least?

Anyway, we all seem to be getting away from the original question or questions:

Reiving families:

Tartan?

Chiefs?

Bagpipes?

All the regalia associated with the above ?

The general opinion seems to be a fairly big NO to the above.

Who benefits from the above?

To be continued

[Craclyn]

Unfortunately it is very popular in the USA to search for clan affiliations, wear kilts and other tartan goods and erroneously claim coats of arms for their Scottish ancestors. These misunderstandings of clan history have also spread to include the Border Reivers. A rather prolific industry has been built up to supply such whimsical approaches to family history.