McLea in Apprenticeship Records

[Kyle2 MacLea]

Thanks, Donald!

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Kyle, Colonsay is south of Mull if that is any help. So it is within the general area I am researching for my Livingstones. It is interesting how we all connect one way or another to MacLeas or Livingstones. Some even to Dr. Livingstone. In some ways I am so close and yet so far in my research goals regarding my Livingstone ancestor. I have access to a private papers, letter and journals that end up giving me complete details of my ancestors movements from Scotland in 1812 to British North America. I know the name of ship, who was on the boat and when they arrived where and what they did, almost everything which is great. My only remaining research problem is this? Was my ancestor Miles Livingstone born abt. 1775 born at Morvern as he stated in his 1812 marriage record or was born and baptised across the Loch on the neighbouring Isle of Lismore in 1775 as the Lismore Baptismal records of that year seem to indicate. My late cousin William Livingstone Clink was of the oppinion that Miles was born on the Island a son of Donald Livingstone and Christian Campbell, but he had no proof of that. It is interesting that Miles travelled to British North America in 1812 via Bowmore, Isle of Islay where Miles kin had found work, with two other Livingstons, a Donald Livingston Jr. who is believed to have been his brother and a cousin Donald Livingstone (1791-1876) son of Neil Livingstone. Of course I am greatly interested in the ancient family research that Niall and Robert have undertaken and that of others before them, but figuring out whether my great-great-great grandfather Miles Livingstone was from Movern or Isle of Lismore is one of my greatest research challenges at the moment. Reading other people's postings I realize we all have our research challenges to be sure. Its all the more frustrating for me when one comes so close to locating Miles family origins at Morvern/Isle of Lismore, but not being able to get past this one problem. At least I was able to zero in to right area in Argyll with what info I have gathered over the last couple of years. regards Donald

[Rob Livingston2]

Hi Guys, I think you are making a little too much out of this spelling thing.

[Andrew Lancaster4]

"Both good Argyll families with a interesting clan history one way or another dont you think?" Yes, in general in the DNA project we see many overlaps between us and the rest of the clans of the region, as you would of course expect. But for a smaller clan that has a big DNA project, the MacLeas show surprisingly many different familiy lines. I think this is evidence that the standard theory is correct, and that the clan was once much bigger. "I would not like to try and identify who was a Campbell for instance and who was not. Very difficult process I would imagine." Actually, I might be wrong but I get the impression that the Campbells have a surprisingly consistent DNA pattern amongst their chiefly lines and many other rank and file. Of course there are also many other DNA lines in the clan, but not with the diversity of say the clan Donald, or the MacLeans. Best Regards Andrew

[Andrew Lancaster4]

I pretty much agree Rob. The null hypothesis for spelling patterns in the 18th century is that they were not invested with much meaning. I remember one genealogist joking that it depended upon how the person mumbled on the occasion being recorded. Still, when you say that all these names were pronounced the same, I suppose you mean within a small area, like Lismore versus Mull. I think there is evidence that there were big differences between different parts of Scotland. I also think that the late 19th century spelling in Forfar which I gave as an example of an exception must demonstrate some deliberate spelling variations, because as mentioned incomers from other parts of Angus-shire did not use the same spelling as the locals, but here we are talking about a much more recent event when people were likely to be spelling for themselves a bit. (The are still Levistons in the phonebook nearby, but they have not answered letters.) In the early 19th century in Forfar they had all kinds of spellings, just like everywhere else. I search in Scotlands People using L*V* Regards Andrew

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Kyle, You probably don't know about this but there was a "Livingstone" recorded among the Earl of Argyll's soldiers in 1685 apparently from Kilchatton in Argyll. ROb actually pointed this out to me a while back. It is presumed that he of the Maconleas of Kilchatton. This does not throw off my theory as I do acknowledge that a few Maconleas were using the name in the lowlands from about 1641 when Sir James Livingston of Skirling was at the Island of Lismore. What is interesting is that if this is infact one or our Maconleas he is the first one of our clan I have come across to oppose a Stuart. In this case it was James II who Argyll and army opposed with the Duke of Monmouth. I doubt this is a Lowland Livingstone opposed to the Stuarts living at Kilchatton in the highlands. I agree this probably is one of our Maconleas using the Livingstone name. Some of the Lowland Livingstones as I previously mentioned were Jacobites, but others were Presbyterians opposed to Charles II and his successor King James ll. This Maconlea from apparently from Kilchatton must of been a Presbyterian from the highlands perhaps in contact with those Livingstons opposed to the Stuarts and supporting the Duke of Monmouth's revolt. No doubt an interesting story coming from Kilchatton if we knew it. I am sorry that some have left this site, they obviously have much knowledge and insight to contribute to the discussion and to the ongoing family research. It is great loss to the forum, but my hat is off to you for staying the course. Anyone who has studied our history at any length know that Morvern MacLea's dont give up easily. It must be same with your MacLeas. regards Donald

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Rob, Thanks for your interesting comments. Perhaps the missing e is just not terribly significant in the baptismal records, I was just surprised that the Baron's family and other Livingstones on the Island were recorded as Livingston for that stretch of time. Maybe I was looking for something that wasn't there. There are some interesting theories out there about the e. My father is convinced that Myles Livingston born 1775 at Cloihlea on the Island is in fact his great-great grandfather and at 88 I don't want to argue with him about it. I was able to determine that Miles traveled with a brother who was referred to as Donald Livingston Jr. as well as another Donald Livingstone who was a cousin. So like the Myles in the 1775 Lismore records his father appears to have been a Donald Livingstone. ALso I knew my Miles was born between 1775 and 1780, but have been told by others more familiar with the Selkirk Records that my ancestor was in fact born in 1775. Miles actually stated a few days before he left for British North AMerica he was a native of Movern, but we do know that his family moved to a few locations before leaving Scotland. My original understanding was Movern to Isle of Islay and then British North America, but it could have been Isle of Lismore, Movern, Isle of Islay then British North America. His father didn't have much to say about the people from the old country. My grandfather's oldest brother was naturally named Miles. Grandpa just told my Dad in the 1920's when he was a boy that the Livingstons had been royalty. That of course made absolutely no sense to me until I realized he might have been referring to the Baron of Bachuil. My Dad's great-grandmother might well have told her Clink children in the 1800's that her father's Livingston family were related to a Baron who to them was kind a Royalty or aristocrat. Anyways it is just a theory. Yes I agree Rob the reformation must of had a big impact on the Baron of Bachuil and he was on shaky ground as was Scotland for that matter in those days. Quite obviously those who subscribed to the view of John Knox would have little use for the religious traditions and the position of the Baron of Bachuil rooted as it was in the Catholic Church. The Campbells who had in 1518 and 1544 made agreements and acknowledged the ancient rights of the Baron of Bachuil were by the time of the reformation agressively expanding their power and land at the expense of the smaller clans. By the late 1500's Sir John Campbell of Cawdor's son Donald Campbell further reduced the Baron's land holding i should think. So things were not looking good for the Baron at this time. It was probably a lucky break that Sir James Livingston of Skirling, Baron of Biel arrived on the Island in 1641. I mean here was a guy that the Baron of Bachuil could relate to. He was Episcopalian and a personal representive of Prince Charles 1. He was granted all of the former lands of the Church in Argyle and was in effect the superior to Baron. At the same time obviously the two were respectfull of each other and may I suggest to you that a bond of friendship developed between them and the two families. It was probably the objective of the Baron of Bachuil to convince the Baron of his loyalty to the King and to secure ancient family title for his family. Whether there was any formal document in writing between I do not know, but it is my notion that perhaps such a formal agreement and bond between the two did take place in 1641 or 1642 while Sir James was a resident on the Island. As was the way of the old clans perhaps some understanding was made as to Baron MacLea and other MacLeas using the name Livingston in the Lowlands. Certainly there was no future for the Baron of Bachuil as a radical Presbyterian. Yes it is worth reminding everyone how poor our clan really was and that the Barons of Bachuil had themselves suffered greatly at the hands of the Campbells over the years and the English after Culloden. Dr. David Livingstone speaks quite openly his 1857 autobiography of his own childhood poverty and that of his family. I very much enjoyed reading your insightful and interesting response to our discussion here and I hope (we hope) to hear from you again in the near future Rob. Kyle, Andrew and I can't hold the fort all on our own. We need your expertise. regards Donald

[Kyle2 MacLea]

Dear Donald, Thanks again for the note.

[Andrew Lancaster4]

Yes, this is a fairly leisurely forum and people usually come and check back after a while. I think there is no major loss of participation? Andrew

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Kyle, Yes I believe we all in our own way contribute to the ultimate success of the forum. No question some of us are more knowledgeable or articulate on the subject of the clan, but I think somewhow we are all part of an extended family if you like. An ancient family called McLea Livingstone. I hope people aren't losing interest. I realize that some of the old theories regarding the MacLea Livingstone origins are being challenged and it is probably good to challenge old ideas from time to time. Rob Livingston has certainly taken on this task in a big way and has been working on Livingstone research for some time with Niall Livingstone I understand.