The gradation of ranks considered in reference to the clan or tribe
may be briefly described. The highest dignitary was the _righ_ or
_king_, who in point of birth and station was originally on a footing
of equality with the other chiefs, and only derived some additional
dignity during his life from a sort of regal pre-eminence. “Among the
ancient Celtæ the prince or king had nothing actually his own, but
everything belonging to his followers was freely at his service;” of
their own accord they gave their prince so many cattle, or a certain
portion of grain. It seems probable that the Celtic chief held the
public lands in trust for his people, and was on his succession
invested with those possessions which he afterwards apportioned
among his retainers. Those only, we are told by Cæsar, had lands,
“magistrates and princes, and they give to their followers as they
think proper, removing them at the year’s end.”[126] The Celtic
nations, according to Dr Macpherson, limited the regal authority to
very narrow bounds. The old monarchs of North Britain and Ireland
were too weak either to control the pride and insolence of the great,
or to restrain the licentiousness of the populace. Many of those
princes, if we credit history, were dethroned, and some of them even
put to death by their subjects, which is a demonstration that their
power was not unlimited.
Next to the king was the _Mormaor_, who seems to have been identical
with the _Tighern_[127] and the later _Thane_. As we have already
indicated, the persons invested with this distinction were the
patriarchal chiefs or heads of the great tribes into which the
Highlanders were formerly divided. But when the line of the ancient
mormaors gradually sank under the ascendant influence of the feudal
system, the clans forming the great tribes became independent, and
their leaders or chiefs were held to represent each the common
ancestor or founder of his clan, and derived all their dignity and
power from the belief in such representation. The chief possessed
his office by right of blood alone, as that right was understood
in the Highlands; neither election nor marriage could constitute
any title to this distinction; it was, as we have already stated,
purely hereditary, nor could it descend to any person except him who,
according to the Highland rule of succession, was the nearest male
heir to the dignity.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account