Differences in the MacNauchtan chronologies and histories, --comparing the different charts...

Just to give you an idea of the difficulties in trying to create an accurate MacNauchtan tree. I have four, (count them: FOUR! ) histories of the MacNaughtons in front of me. I am comparing each one to all the others on each point. So here is what I get when I want a clear understanding of who exactly is the son of Baron Donald MacNauchtan…

1. Angus Macnaghten writes in his book that after Baron Donald MacNauchtan’s death his son Alexander became chief of the clan. (page 20): "Alexander, Donald’s son, was young at the time of his father’s death. (1. Crawfurd) In 1346 he received a grant from David II of lands in the Highlands and Isles” etc.
2. V.V.McNitt writes in his book that Baron Donald MacNauchtan was followed by his son, Duncan: (Page 53) “We have already been informed by Burke’s HISTORY OF THE COMMONERS that Donald’s son Duncan was one of the party that brought back the heart of Bruce after Douglas had been slain in a fight with Moors of Spain. … According to William Anderson in THE SCOTTISH NATION (Vol III, page 54) , Duncan, “was a steady and loyal subject of King David II (successor to Robert I) who, as a reward for his fidelity, conferred on his son Alexander lands in the island of Lewis”, etc.
3. Duncan McNaughton writes in his book (page 18): “Barbour’s BRUS mentions a Baron MacNauchtan as fighting at Bannockburn. This cannot have been Donald, although the Argyll Pedigree states that he was killed at that battle. The most likely candidate is an Alexander of that ilk who was a witness to a Campbell charter in about 1309. His son, another Alexander, married, (about 1360) as his second wife, Christina Campbell”, etc.
4. Matthew Cock writes in his book“ The Argyll Pedigree suggests that Donald, ‘a very brave man, who ranked among the first class of Heroes,’ according to Douglas, may have died at Bannockburn in 1314, though a grant of lands made by David II (1329-71) in 1346 to Donald’s son Alexander may have been a belated reward for his allegiance. "

I have to admit I like V.V. McNitt’s version best, with Donald having a son named Duncan who becomes chief after him, and Duncan in turn has a son named Alexander. That is the version I will put in my chart. How interesting it is to compare these four books! Matthew Cock has presented an incredible amount of new information in his book. Unfortunately not many McNaughtons have acquired a copy of it yet. I think the $54 pricetag is the reason. That is a lot to pay for a book not even an inch thick. But I guarantee it is worth the price. There is excellent research in there. V.V. McNitt’s 1951 book is huge in comparison, in two thick volumes, and wonderfully written. But some of its information is out of date. But not that much really. And those few bits of information that are out of date do not matter when the vast cornucopia of McNaughton information inside the covers is taken into consideration. Angus Macnaghten’s book has some jewels of information in it that are lacking in the others. He and McNitt corresponded back and forth as they wrote their respective works. Both were published the same year, 1951. A great many McNaughtons I have talked to own copies of Duncan McNaughton’s book, which was published in 1977. He does bring out some very good research, and some new material not found in the earlier books. But here and there we find errors too. Like on page 32 he has one of the wives of Laird John MacNauchtan, customs officer at Anstruther, as Agnes Moncrief. Well, Agnes Moncrief was the wife of a different John MacNauchtan – the one that was the son of John MacNauchtan and Anna MacLean, builders of Dunderave. But we all make mistakes. I found a spelling mistake in Matthew Cock’s book on page 22 where the word “rewarded” should have been “reward” and I wanted to write and tell him about it immediately. Haha. Because he is such a perfectionist and such an excellent scholar. I make lots of mistakes. But, it is easy to do when four different books give us four different sets of answers. In the end we just have to choose the facts that seem to make the most sense to us. It is a matter of building upon what we know, putting all four books together and considering all the facts. That is something these four authors were not able to do. Matthew Cock told me he was unable to get hold of a copy of V.V. McNitt’s book to read before writing his own. He did read Macnaghten’s and Duncan McNaughton's though. Macnaghten and V.V. McNitt did not have Duncan McNaughton's or Matthew Cock’s book to read as they assembled all their ideas and facts. So we are fortunate. We have all four books to read as we seek to decipher the history and genealogy of those ancient days. Four great minds to help us! Plus we have a great many other books as well. Plus we have the immense resources of the internet. So if we use all those resources to their best advantage we might just discover a great deal that was hitherto unknown.

 Let's have a look at some of the genealogical charts of the various McNaughton authors. First, Ian Macnaghten's chart from his 1951 book.

Ian Macnaghten's tree is very helpful. He is the only author, in my opinion, to come close to putting Shane Dhu in the proper place in history. You will notice he has Shane Dhu as the grandson of Alexander. The only problem with this is that if this were the case Shane Dhu would be too old to be the husband of Sorley Boy's sister. Sorley Boy was the youngest son of Alexander Konnell and he was born in 1505. His sister would have certainly been born close to 1505.

Ian's tree would make more sense if Shane Dhu were the son rather than the grandson of Alexander MacNauchtan, who died in 1515. Shane Dhu's birth year should then be similar to Sorley Boy MacDonnell's, around 1505. Note also that Ian Macnaghten has left the line of our ancestor, John MacNauchtan, open. He and McNitt both write that nothing is known about his descendants. There is actually a very interesting reason why this is. I will go into it later.

On the right we have Duncan McNaughton's chart from his 1977 book. It will be noted that he has figured Shane Dhu's birth to be in the neighborhood of 1552, which would have Shane Dhu marrying a woman seventy years older than himself. Duncan McNaughton gives very little mention to our ancestor John MacNauchtan, brother to Chief Alexander, other than to say his lands were forfeited after the battle of Killiecrankie. Duncan's book does have some wonderful information though in other areas. I considered putting the chart from Matthew Cock's recent book into this website along with Ian Macnaghten's and Duncan McNaughton's. But I am not sure he would approve of that, so I will simply say that he does not show the line of Shane Dhu at all. I am not sure if the reason is that his book is meant to specifically be about the Scottish McNaughton heritage, or if it is because he did not feel he could find any provable link connecting the Irish Macnaghtens with the Scottish MacNauchtans.

Well, Matthew did not mention our line either, but his book has excellent information about our ancestor John MacNauchtan, uncle of the last chief. Take this sentence from page 68 for instance: "Alasdair's younger brother, Iain must have made many Campbell enemies after giving evidence at the trial of the marquess of Argyll in 1660." (Matthew uses the oldworld names, Alasdair is Alexander and Iain is John...) What a picture that sentence gives us! The MacNauchtan castle is just three miles away from the the Campbell's towering castle of Inverary -- and there is our ancestor, John MacNauchtan, giving evidence against the great Campbell Chief that will quickly bring him to the axeman. What a neighborhood that must have been for John afterwards whenever he went to the Inverary pub for a jug of ale and a bit of conversation!