Архитектура Аудит Военная наука Иностранные языки Медицина Металлургия Метрология
Образование Политология Производство Психология Стандартизация Технологии


King David in world history —



the first, of course, being King

David of Jerusalem (ca. 1000

b.c.e.). As we shall argue, this

did not come about randomly,

but resulted from the Scots royal

family’s belief that they did, in

fact, descend from the Jewish

King David. We will argue that the

family was of Jewish patrilineal

ancestry and faith, but of western

(Sephardic), rather than Semitic

and Middle Eastern, genetic

descent.

 

Traveling farther down the James Carnegie (1692-1750), the 5th Earl of Southesk, was

a staunch Jacobite supporter of the Royal Stewart family.

This caricature shows him to have an extremely prominent

nose. Courtesy Scottish National Portrait Gallery.

 

 

Canmore genealogy, we find additional Flemish, Dutch, and French wives entering the

royal household, along with Hebrew and Mediterranean names such as Ada, Isabel, and

Yolande joining with the continued use of Alexander and David. The last descendant of

King Alexander and Queen Sybilla was Adam, a rebel who died in 1186. Oram comments

on the Judaic tenor of the latter Canmores:

 

 

David projected an image of the king as lawgiver. Law codes attributed by tradition to David

form the basis of medieval Scots law and the foundations of a system of sheriffdoms for the

local administration of law were laid down by the king. But David was no remote figure....

Elred wrote of the king sitting at the door of his hall to receive petitions from the humblest

of folk.... To an extent it was a cultivated image, to be seen most clearly in the portrayal of

David in the initial letter of his grandson’s great charter to Kelso Abbey. There sits David,

long-haired and bearded, presented as Solomon alongside the youthful and beardless

Malcolm IV....

 

Although he continued to patronize the established [religious] orders, such as the

Benedictines and Tironensians, and founded one further Augustinian monastery at Cam-

buskenneth, most of his favour

was targeted towards the new

and even more austere Cister-

cian monks.... In 1136... he

brought a colony of Cistercians

from Rievaulx in Yorkshire to

Melrose in Tweeddale [p. 46].

 

As will be discussed subse-

quently, the Cistercian order in

many ways appears to be mod-

eled on Judaic religious pre-

cepts. 11 The entry of Jewish

religious imagery into Scotland’s

culture is further indicated by the

six-pointed Star of David mark-

ing the coinage of King Alexan-

der III (1249-1286).

 

 

The Borders,

 

Alistair Moffat (2002)

 

Moffat’s work focuses on the

part of southern Scotland lying

directly above the English border.

Because this part of the country

was frequently a point of conten-

tion between England and Scot-

land, it was often marred by vio-

lence. Yet it also served as a haven

for persons of marginalized status

 

William Gordon, physician at King’s College, Aberdeen

(1632-1640), was educated at Padua University. We propose

that Gordon was of Sephardic Jewish descent. Courtesy of

Aberdeen University.

 

 

seeking to escape persecution for religious or political reasons. Quick dashes from one

side to the other could be made by those seeking to avoid arrest for any variety of offenses.

And as Moffat notes, the area was also one that early on was well acquainted with the

Mediterranean. In 687 c.E., monks at Lindisfarne raised up a shrine to one of their bish-

ops, Cuthbert. To commemorate him, a special text of the four gospels was created:

 

A gospel book of such richness was no small undertaking.... Eadfrith’s palette for the illus-

trations sometimes traveled immense distances; lapis lazuli came from Afghanistan, indigo

from the Mediterranean, kermes (carmine red) from North Africa and folium (pink) from

the south of France.... Though the other famous gospels of the period from Kells and Dur-

row in Ireland are profoundly Celtic in their look, Lindisfarne is much more influenced by

the Mediterranean; Roman lettering, Byzantine painting, and a Near-Eastern [Middle East-

ern] style of decoration [p. 125].

 

Obviously, Scotland of the 600s was not an isolated outpost; it had trading ties across

the Mediterranean and the Middle East. 12 There is strong archeological evidence for a

lively Atlantic and Mediterranean trade in Scotland between the fall of Rome and birth

of the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne, though historians are hard put to explain

it. The annals of Iona, the Holy Island, are full of references to contact with Gaul. The

widespread distribution of Mediterranean pottery from the fifth and sixth centuries

throughout the British Isles is a puzzle. “It is not possible, from the archaeological evi-

dence, to estimate the intensity and duration of this ‘trade’ with the Mediterranean, ”

writes an expert on the pre-history of Europe. “The question is incapable of resolution.”

The earliest group of imports appears to have come from North Africa, the coasts of

Turkey and Egypt, via Carthage, the Straits of Gibraltar and the Portuguese ports in the

Tagus and Mondego estuaries (Cunliffe, pp. 477-79).

 

This connection was enhanced greatly by the entry from 1100 C.E. onward of traders,

merchants, and nobles from France, Hungary, and the Low Countries during the reign

of King David I. At Selkirk in southern Scotland, David granted lands to a group of

French monks. Signing the charter were the following noblemen: “Robert De Bevis, Robert

de Unfraville, Walter de Belebec, Robert de Painton, Cospatric brother of Dalfin, Hugh

de Moreville, Pagano de Braiosa, Robert Corbet, Reginald de Muscamp, Walter de Lind-

sey, Robert de Burneville, Cospatric the Sheriff, Cospatric son of Aldeve, Uchtred son of

Scot, Macchus, Colbanus, Gillemichael, Odardo Sheriff of Bamburgh, Lyulf son of

Uchtred, Radulph the Englishman, Aimar the Gallovidian, Roger de Leceister and Adam

the Chamberlain” (p. 147)— a mixed bag indeed!

 

Other noble families residing along the Borders at this time had also come from

mainland Europe. They included the Avenels, de Soules, Riddells, Baliols, and the pro-

genitor of the Stewart family. It was a nobility, as Moffat observes, that was multilingual,

sophisticated, well traveled, and intensely endogamous. And additionally, we propose,

of Jewish religious affiliation.

 

Although Scotland is often depicted as being a primitive and rural country during

medieval times, this assessment rests on an inaccurate perception. As Moffat writes:

 

It is highly likely that there was a market at Roxburgh [Scotland] for some considerable time

before 1113.... What converted a local market... into an international trading center was the

dynamic trade in wool and hides. The stimulus for this change came from Flanders and

Northern Italy where cloth and leather goods began to be produced in industrial quantities

for re-export as well as domestic consumption. What created this demand for raw wool and

hides was not new technology, but the first effective deployment of merchant capital....

 

The sequence was simple. Merchants from the cities of Bruges, Ghent and elsewhere

had sufficient capital to buy bulk quantities of wool and hides at the summer and autumn

markets at Roxburgh, and the abbeys of Melrose and Kelso could guarantee that these raw

materials would be available.... With 5% of the total Scottish wool clip..., the Cistercians

at Melrose could act like a corporation and wield considerable power in the marketplace....

The Melrose monks were urbane and experienced negotiators with access to information

on prices and conditions of trade in other wool-producing areas of Europe.... No one crossed

the North Sea in an empty ship.... Cargoes from Europe included sugar, pepper, cumin,

onions, garlic, currants, ginger, almonds, rice, basil, alum, dyestuffs, metal pans, cauldrons,

locks, timber and iron.

 

Across the North Sea, back in Flanders and Northern Italy, merchants fed the wool into

their cloth production network.... Production went on in hundreds of workshops in the

towns and cities. Numbers employed could be very large and, for example, at Douai in the

13th century there were 150 merchant drapers each employing 100 people....

 

Fifteen religious houses, all of them producers of wool and hides, held properties in

Berwick, and there the foreign merchants maintained places of business. These resembled

the “factories” of English traders in colonial India, where a sort of diplomatic immunity was

allowed, and where outsiders could live in communal safety. “The Red Hall” was the name of

the Flemish trading center at Berwick and as many as 30 merchants operated out of it at one

time. German merchants were to be found at “The White Hall, ” and in Roxburgh a place

called “The Black Hall” is listed but no particular nationality attached. Perhaps all foreigners

used it [pp. 169-71].

 

By 1212 c.E., Berwick’s lucrative trade had moved into private hands. Provosts and

registered guild burgesses regulated the commercial operations of the town, the guild hall

being built on land purchased from one Simon Maunsel (p. 17). That same decade a man

we have already mentioned, Michael the Scot, likely from Melrose, was at the University

of Toledo in northern Spain translating Aristotelian manuscripts written in Arabic into

Latin. Michael served as a multilingual translator in Sicily and Palermo, as well. In 1378,

a master mason, John Lewyn, was hired to refurbish the walls of Roxburgh Castle. Around

1400, a Parisian master mason, Jean Moreau (“Moor”), was commissioned to enlarge

Melrose Abbey (p. 224).

 

These trade patterns, capabilities, and names were most common to two ethnic

groups at the time: Spanish Moors and Sephardic Jews. Not only did Islamic mercantil-

ism far surpass that of western Europe and Christendom, but Jews were well represented

in all branches of European business and industry, with the possible exception of agri-

culture and foodstuffs preparation. Jews and Muslims came to dominate such fields as

banking, shipping, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, glass, silk and paper manufacture, the

book trade, and jewelry and precious stones during this time period.

 

 

History of the Scottish People: 1560-1830,

T.C. Smout (1969/1985)

 

 

Smout’s encyclopedic account of Scotland focuses primarily on the post-Reforma-

tion period. Of interest to us, however, is his discussion of the reasons leading to the

overthrow of Catholicism by Protestantism. Foremost among these was the remarkable

corruption of the Roman Church in Scotland:

 

From the middle of the fourteenth century onwards it [the Catholic Church] suffered from

the increasing decay of its corporate spiritual life, as it did everywhere else in Europe. This

was greatly accelerated in Scotland by the erosion of its own freedom: kings gained the right

to nominate bishops and abbots and abused it by appointing their own bastards to high cler-

ical office when they were still only children; nobles came to control monasteries and cathe-

drals, and took over church lands as though they were their own. By 1560... the church was

very largely at the mercy of unspiritual laymen, its foundations corrupt and worldly, its

parish churches empty and ruined, its bishops a byword for immorality, and its congrega-

tions often contemptuous of its services.

 

But to this black generalization there were several bright exceptions. Throughout the

fifteenth century there had been great clerics, like Bishop Wardlaw, who founded Scotland’s

first university at St. Andrews in 1410, Bishop Turnbull, who founded Glasgow University in

1451, and Bishop Elphinstone, who founded King’s College, Aberdeen, in 1496 and was the

first patron of printing in Scotland.

 

As will be described shortly, these three churchmen were likely of Jewish ancestry

and governed parishes with largely crypto-Jewish populations. None of Scotland’s “Big

Three” universities ever required students to take a religious oath, a factor that rendered

them attractive to Jews from as far away as South Carolina. Non-Christians were excluded

from studying at Oxford or Cambridge, and most English and American universities of

the period mandated an oath on the New Testament naming Jesus Christ (Collins 1990,

p. 15). Smout continues his description:

 

[T]he Scottish monasteries had by 1559 long since ceased to be vehicles for spirituality. They

had become nothing more than property-owning corporations. Control over the property

was frequently in the hands of laymen, or sometimes of secular clerics who by hook or by

crook had secured the title of abbot or “commendator” (literally “protector”) in order to

divert the income of the monastic lands into their own pockets. The crown itself had been

the worst offender in this respect. James V, for example... had wrung permission from the

Pope... to appoint three baby sons, all illegitimate, to be titular abbots of Kelso and Melrose,

priors of St. Andrews and Pittenweem, and abbot of Holyrood respectively; a fourth was

later made prior of Coldingham and a fifth abbot of the Charterhouse....

 

The nuns, though few in number, were more scandalous than the monks. They were nor-

mally too illiterate even to write their own names.... They were frequently so undisciplined

that they no longer even bothered to live within the nunnery precincts.... If this was the state

of monks, friars and nuns, what was to be expected of the secular clergy in the parishes?

 

They took their tone from a hierarchy where appointments had for many years been made

on purely political grounds.... James IV had set the pace by making his illegitimate son

Archbishop of St. Andrews at the age of eleven [p. 50].

 

Smout then notes that the Protestant Reformation was embraced readily by the mer-

chants, burgesses and educated members of Scottish society; he attributes this to the

emphasis the new doctrine placed on a direct relationship to God. He alludes also to the

presence of a “secret church” among this segment of the population:

 

Protestant numbers snowballed.... By 1559 there was already an alternative church existing

in many parts of Scotland, awaiting some revolutionary stroke to bring it to power. [Protes-

tantism] succeeded by taking the right strategic bastions in society. It succeeded in the

burghs, where... the traditions of secrecy and co-operation among members of craft guilds

and merchant guilds, and of co-operation between the burgesses of different towns acting in

their common interest, made towns the ideal environment to sustain a secret and cellular

church organisation [p. 55].

 

Contrary to Smout’s arguments, however, it would not have been in the financial or

political interests of this very same group to support the overthrow of the prevailing, cor-

rupt Catholic Church as a social institution. Indeed, it was these very people who were

benefiting already from the Roman church as it was currently operating. What Smout

overlooks, as do virtually all other observers, is that the crypto-Jewish society we pro-

pose was present in Scotland since 1100 had been strengthened enormously during the

previous five decades by the arrival of thousands of converso Jews fleeing the Spanish

Inquisition. 13 As we will argue in chapter 10, crypto-Jewish practice was now poised to

transform itself into Protestantism.

 

Smout describes the robustness of the burgh-based Scots economy in the post-Refor-

mation period. With each burgh acting as a self-governing unit, electing its own burgesses

and monitoring apprenticeships for both merchants and craftsmen, Scotland became an

active international trade center. And in each burgh, a small set of families governed the

town both politically and financially. From Aberdeen, Scotland traded as far eastward as

Russia, Poland and the Baltic, while from Glasgow and Edinburgh, she traded south and

west to England, France, Spain, the Americas, and the Caribbean. Primary export prod-

ucts were wool, hides, fish, paper, coal, salt, and linen. And in each of these industries,

specific families came to dominate the trade, often forming oligopolistic partnerships with

family members residing in ports such as Bordeaux, Rouen, Cadiz, Lisbon, Warsaw, Rot-

terdam, London, Barbados, Danzig, Stockholm, Bergen, the Canary Islands, and Riga.

 

Judaic scholars have often pointed to the phenomenon of “Court Jews, figures pri-

marily located in central Europe, serving kings and princes as bankers, tax collectors,

and army provisioners, but it was not until the 1980s and 90s that historians began to

revisit this subject and focus attention on the Jews who settled on the Atlantic seaboard

(Cesarini 2004, pp. 1-11). The designation of “Port Jews” was born. In cities ranging from

Trieste to Glasgow, from Salonika to Hamburg, the social type of the previously over-

looked Sephardim of Spain and Portugal was thrown into high relief. Of them, we learn,

for instance, that “they eschewed the traditional autonomous Jewish community and

enjoyed improved legal status which permitted voluntary affiliation to the Jewish collec-

tivity.... They questioned Jewish religious tradition, having been estranged from it for so

long, and displayed a form of ethnic Jewish identity” (pp. 2-3). And: The distinctive

role of Sephardim as precursors [of the Enlightenment], who experienced emancipation

as a gradual development, has been [relatively speaking] ignored” (p. 4).

 

The Scottish burgess system in many ways combined the roles of court Jews and

port Jews. Smout describes it in the following terms:

 

In each burgh there was one basic division into burgesses and non-burgesses, and another

within the burgess groups between merchants and craftsmen, organised into a merchant

guild and craft guild respectively. To the burgesses alone belonged the privileges of being

members of a burgh: the rest of the inhabitants were mere indwellers with no more right to

elect the magistrates, to trade or to belong to a craft than a country bumpkin from the land-

ward parts.

 

A man could become a burgess in several ways: normally he had to pay some money to

the corporation and to prove that his name was upon the apprenticeship books of the town.

 

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries most new burgesses were either the sons or the

sons-in-law of existing burgesses. Sons could follow their fathers paying a smaller entry fine

and serving a shorter apprenticeship than strangers. Those who married the daughter of a

burgess... gained the same concession: it was a way of making certain that the daughters of

merchants and craftsmen were at a premium in the marriage market.

 

Others, not so lucky in birth or love, had to pay a slightly higher entry-fee and wait for a

period after they had finished their apprenticeship.... Strangers and “outland men, ” however,

no matter how well qualified they might already be as merchants or craftsmen in other

burghs, had to pay quite heavily for admission....

 

The first purpose of the merchant guild was to maintain a monopoly within a monopoly,

to preserve from ambitious craftsmen and unfreemen both within and without the burgh

the community’s right of foreign trade that only a free merchant burgess could enjoy....

 

The second purpose of the guild was to provide the organization by which the merchants

could dominate the town council: ... When... the old council gained the right of electing the

new one, an even smaller elite was able to emerge from within the merchant guild and con-

solidate themselves in positions of power. Thus Dundee in the early seventeenth century was

dominated by the Wedderburnes, the Goodmans, the Haliburtons, the Clayhills and half

a dozen other families united by bonds of marriage and mutual interest [pp. 148-149].

 

We have included this passage from Smout to show in detail exactly how the burgh

system operated and to draw attention to the potential it offered for collaborative efforts

among the patrician families in any given Scottish city. By a pattern of endogamous mar-

riage across several generations, an economically and socially cohesive infrastructure was

established in each burgh. Religion, political office, financial capital, credit, and trade

outlets could all be controlled securely and perpetuated in this fashion, with virtually no

supervision from outside. These conditions were ideal for the presence of crypto-Judaism.

 

As Smout further reports, Scotland’s young men from these leading families were

not schooled in a parochial Protestant enclave, but rather sent abroad for their educa-

tion — usually to centers where converso Jews were present and prominent on university

faculties. Many affluent Scots were educated in Rouen, Marseilles, Bordeaux, Amster-

dam, Lyon, and London, and in Venice, Padua, Rome, and Livorno (Leghorn) in Italy.

Brilliant Scots minds, such as that of John Napier (1550-1617), the inventor of logarithms,

and James Gregory (1638-1675), an astronomer and mathematician who developed the

first reflecting telescope, sprang from these sources. Gold and silver smithing, two Jew-

ish skills of long standing, were practiced brilliantly “in the second half of the sixteenth

century” by Edinburgh artisans— exactly the time period one would anticipate for con-

verso immigrants incoming from France, Holland, Italy and England.

 

On the southern Scottish border at Falkirk, the Carron iron works were established

in 1759, Carron being a French converso surname. By 1801 immense deposits of black-

band iron ore had been identified by David Mushet (Moshe), which would provide the

resource for Scotland’s great steelmaking industry of the nineteenth century. And as we

shall see in chapter 3, Glasgow merchants became rich from a triangular tobacco trade

with the American colonies and the Caribbean. By the late 1700s Scotland ran a lucra-

tive import-export trading network that reached from Virginia and South Carolina to

Jamaica and Barbados, to France, Germany, and Holland, onward to Sweden, Poland,

and Russia — all locales where converso Jews had settled and opened up banks, shipping

firms and manufactories. As Smout wonderingly writes about these Scottish entrepre-

neurs, “It would be interesting to know as much about thqir religious affiliations and their

childhood upbringing as we do about their parentage” (p. 364). It would indeed, and so

we turn now to a review of the last historical monograph examined in this introductory

chapter.

 

 

The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland,

 

Prince Michael Stewart (2000)

 

The author of this Scottish history is HRH Prince Michael Stewart of Albany, head

of the Scottish Royal House of Stewart, a descendant of the Stuart Pretenders. The word

“pretender” did not originally have a pejorative meaning. These royals are dejure (legal)

successors of the last Stuart monarch Queen Anne, with whose death in 1714 the throne

passed to the Hanoverians. 14 An immediate giveaway to Prince Michael’s storyline is his

listing as “Honorary President of the Association of Jewish Students of Glasgow Univer-

sity” (other titles of his include, for example, Titular Prince of France and Poland, and

Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine). Why is the current heir of the Stewart dynasty of

Scotland also head of the Glasgow University Jewish student association? Because he is

of Jewish ancestry.

 

HRH Michael Stewart puts the circumstances in a rather straightforward manner

in his narrative: The Stewart family maternal line in France was descended “from the

Tribe of Judah”; he believes his family is of Davidic ancestry (that is, from the Jewish

King David); and he is therefore a Jew by descent. The Stewarts were among that set of

French families that came to England with William the Conqueror and his Norman army

in 1066. Originally named FitzAlan, the family took the name of Stewart after serving as

royal stewards to the Bruce dynasty of Scotland. By marrying the female heir of King

Robert Bruce in 1315, Walter Stewart (who by this time served also as regent) ensured

that his son Robert II eventually advanced to the throne of Scotland. 15

 

HRH Michael Stewart, it should also be noted, does give credence to the Stone of

Destiny origin story, believing that an Egyptian princess named Scota did come to Ire-

land and that the Piets and Gaels both originated near the Black Sea (Scythia) in south-

eastern Europe. As he states, “From Tamar and Eochaid (Echad) were descended most

of the royal lines of Ireland... through which all Kings of Scots traced their succession

from the Biblical Kings of Judah” (p. 70). While HRH Michael Stewart may believe this

explanation for the ancient Jewish lineage of the Scottish kings, we do not. We could be

wrong; he could be correct; but the story is too far-fetched to support serious historical

argument. Further, we do not require these remote origins, for France in 1050 is a more

proximate — and provable — source for Judaic ancestry.

 

What HRH Michael Stewart’s narrative does offer us, however, is a more detailed

and nuanced version of Scottish history than we have seen previously; one with several

significant clues about a Jewish presence there. First, he notes (p. 19) that the Celtic

Church retained several Jewish practices, while deliberately resisting conformation to

Roman Catholicism. From 906 C.E. onward, the Last Supper ritual was celebrated only

at Passover/Pesach; infant baptisms were not practiced, and no crucifixion imagery or

icons were used.

 

 

22

 

 

When Scotland Was Jewish

 

Stewart also writes that the Old and New Testaments were weighted equally within

the Celtic Church, and further:

 

Unlike their Catholic counterparts, the priests of the Celtic Church were allowed to be mar-

ried, and their hereditary offices were passed from father to son.... 16 Given that Jesus own

teachings formed the basis of the faith, the Mosaic structure from the Old Testament was

duly incorporated. Judaic marriage laws were observed, together with the celebrations of the

Sabbath and Passover, while Easter was correctly held as the traditional feast-day of the

Spring goddess, Eostre... [p. 30],

 

He also describes accurately, if a bit patronizingly, the merging of Constantine’s

brand of Christianity with preexisting pagan cults in the Middle East:

 

Contrary to traditional belief, Emperor Constantine the Great (a.d. 274-337) did not

embrace Christianity as the religion of Rome; [rather, ] he adapted Christianity into a

new form that was... actually related to the Syrian Sol Invictus cult of sun worship. [Con-

stantine] redefined Jesus’ birthday to comply with the Sun Festival on 25 December, and

substituted the sacred Sabbath (Saturday) with the Sun-day... the high-points of Judaic

Christianity were conveniently merged with the pagan tradition, and the Persian cult of

Mithras, which stressed the concept of final judgment... [p. 31].

 

Stewart provides us with a different perspective on the arrival of the “outsiders” into

Scotland during the UOOs, noting that many of these immigrants were Flemish, rather

than French per se: “Although some Normans ventured into Scotland at the time of Mal-

colm III... there was no effective penetration until the reign of King David I (1124—53) —

The resultant settlement was far more Flemish than Norman, even though some of the

noble families of Flanders...” (p. 32).

 

Stewart argues that these Flemish newcomers were attractive to King David because

of their skill in administration, international trade and business. They were also good

farmers and weavers. Once the Flemish and Normans arrived, King David established

them in a series of Sheriffdoms 17 and incorporated them into the Scottish judicial system.

 

The wife of Scottish Kind David was Maud de Lens of Boulogne, Flanders, the widow

of Simon de Senlis (St. Liz) (bearing a Jewish given name) and the wealthiest woman in

Britain. Stewart states, “Maud was not only a cousin of the Count of Flanders, she was

also a cousin of Godefroi de Bouillon, Guardian of the newly created kingdom of

Jerusalem. David’s policy had been to implement a mercantile strategy that would link

Scotland to a trading empire centred upon Bruges and managed by Flemish families

throughout Eastern and Western Christendom” (p. 43).

 

Accompanying Maud to Scotland was a host of Boulogne kinsmen: Walter Fleming

(now Seton), Gilbert de Ghent (now Lindsay), Robert de Commines (now Comyn and

Buchan), Arnulf de Hesdin (now Graham), the Advocate of Bethune (now Beaton).

Stewart also states that Flemish ancestry characterized the Scottish families of Aber-

nethy, Anstruther, Baird, Balliol, Boswell, Brodie, Cameron, Campbell, Crawford, Doug-

las, Erskine, Fleming, Fraser, Hamilton, Hay, Innes, Leith, Leslie, Murray and Oliphant

(p. 34).

 

Thus, many of the surnames we think of as typically Scottish are in fact Flemish and

French — as were the people carrying them. In chapters 3 and 4, we will document the

intermarriage and consanguinity among the Norman nobles, both in Scotland and in fam-

ilies related to them in France and Flanders. The cohesiyeness of these bonds of kinship

provided a unified political and economic network that spanned Western Europe and the

Holy Land.

 

The royal house of Bruce came to an end in 1371, when Robert’s son David (age 47)

died after a sudden illness in Edinburgh Castle without a male heir. Robert the Bruce’s

daughter, Marjorie, however, had married Walter, the 6th High Stewart of Scotland (ca.

1292-1326). She died giving birth to a son, Robert II, who served as regent during David’s

frequent absences and was crowned in Scone Abbey on March 26, 1371, initiating the Royal

Stewart dynasty. Stewart describes his installation procedure, which was that of a priest-

king, modeled after those of Israel. 18

 

Firstly, the King-to-be was passed through a ritual of purification to become an ordained

people’s priest. He would then appear at the Church Abbey of Scone, dressed in white as a

symbol of integrity.... With his hand upon the Stone [of Destiny], the King would swear his

Oath of Fealty as the people’s champion. He was duly anointed, and then sat upon the sepa-

rate and much larger Coronation Stone.... In the early days the crown was no more than a

circlet of gold, and its symbolic concept was to catch the eye of God... [A]t that stage would

the religious ceremony begin, led by the Bishop and the seven priests. There were readings

from Old Testament scriptures, along with prayers... [pp. 75-76].

 

Also according to Stewart, if is frequently presumed that Robert de Brus was a Nor-

man, but this is not true. The de Brus had held lands in Normandy, but Robert carried

the azure Flemish lion of Louvain when he came to Britain.

 

Conclusions

 

So where does this discussion and review of Scottish history leave us? First, we have

found one Scot of aristocratic descent who claims Jewish ancestry. Admittedly, this is not

an overwhelming showing in a country of five million persons, but at least it is a start. 19

 

Second, we hope we have convinced the reader that Scotland after 1100 C.E. was no

longer peopled exclusively or even predominately by Celts. With Vikings to the north

and French, Flemings, and Hungarians to the south and center, there were few Celts left

in possession of land or titles at the turn of the millennium-plus-one-century mark. A

dialect of Anglo-Norman Middle English replaced the older Gaelic language at the court

and other local seats of government as early as 1100. Indeed, the view of most historians

today is that the clans were not so much a holdover from Scotland’s dim tribal past as a

creation of her feudal period of development. As we are reminded repeatedly, “the bonds

that held the clan together were land and landholding, ” while the origins of Scotland had

as much to do with French-speaking Normans as with ancient Celts” (Herman 2001, pp.

121 - 22 ).

 

 

Chapter 2

 

 

DNA and Population Studies:

“But Why Do You Think

They Were Jewish? ”

 

It is very hard to prove someone is Jewish. To begin with, even living, present-day

Jews may disagree about who and what a Jew is. The broadest definition, that adopted

by most Reform Jews today, describes Judaism as an international community of persons

who share the same monotheistic faith and are guided by the same commandments and

Torah. In this view, Jews may come from many ethnic backgrounds, some of them con-

verts, others Jews by birth, all of them equal: there is no possibility of one person being

“more Jewish” than another.

 

Many Orthodox Jews, however, disagree with this view and consider only other Ortho-

dox Jews to be “really” Jewish; they can even quibble among themselves about which Ortho-

dox group is the most Jewish. Further, persons whose mother or father was born Jewish

may be considered Jewish by some Jews, but not by others. Persons whose mother or father

converted to Judaism or who themselves converted may not be accepted as Jewish by all

Jews. Even persons whose parents were both born Jews and are now practicing Jews, but

who do not belong to a temple, may not be pronounced Jewish by all Jews. Thus, Jewish

identity is a complex and controversial issue, which we will not attempt to resolve here. 1

 

To complicate matters further, Jews who were born of two practicing Jewish par-

ents, and who themselves belong to an Orthodox synagogue, may not necessarily be of

Semitic ancestry. That is, they may not carry the genes of the ancient Hebrews. Instead,

some time between 3, 000 years ago and the present, their ancestors decided to become

Jews, and the family has continued to practice that faith ever since. Most Jews now liv-

ing do not have predominantly Semitic ancestry in their genetic makeup. This is partic-

ularly the case for the maternal line. As geneticist Steve Olson puts it in Mapping Human

History (2002, pp. 109-110), “The mitochondrial DNA sequences of Jewish females are

even more diverse than the Y chromosomes of males, suggesting that non-Jewish women

converted or married into the faith even more often than men.” Importantly for our pur-

poses, descendants of medieval Spanish, French and Italian Jews — that is, the Western or

Mediterranean Jews of Sefarad — are not primarily of Semitic ancestry. Rather, most

belong to what is called the Rib Y chromosomal DNA haplogroup, the most common

paternal lineage in Europe and in countries of the New World founded by Europeans. 2

 

What about simply regarding as Jewish any person who now publicly “self-identifies”

as such? While seemingly reasonable, this solution will not work in the case of Crypto-

Jews (secret Jews). Though a term normally reserved for Jewish Iberian exiles after the

pogroms of 1391 and especially after the Edict of Expulsion in 1492, it can also be applied

to ancestrally Jewish Scots, ancestrally Jewish Germans, ancestrally Jewish Melungeons,

and in fact to any ancestrally Jewish persons whose forebears feared identification or detec-

tion, chose to hide their true identity, and practiced that religion in secret. For up to 600

years, Crypto-Jews had to survive without rabbis, yeshivas, torahs, or synagogues, iso-

lated from openly Jewish communities in Eastern Europe, Islam and the Mediterranean,

and subject to a kind of “double hostility” from their surrounding societies (Santos 2000).

The religious status of these Marranos, 3 conversos, Anusim (“the Forced Ones”) and New

Christians challenged some of the best rabbinical minds of the day (Netanyahu 1999).

 

And so, to determine if the Scottish families in question were of Jewish descent, we

used a process of inductive reasoning. We relied on clues from several different types of

evidence — historical, genealogical, linguistic, archeological, geographic and genetic. By

considering these different sources, we can argue that a given family had a very high prob-

ability of being Jewish upon their arrival in Scotland. In some cases this is no problem:

certain of these families still are Jewish and can document lineal descent from Scots fore-

bears. But in most cases we are going to have to finesse this conclusion by looking at the

overall pattern of evidence for that family, including their associated lines and marriage

preferences. The formal term for this branch of science is the statistical inference of

demography from DNA sequence data.

 

In this chapter, we focus on DNA samples collected from descendants bearing the sur-

names of prominent Scots in the “early/first wave” and “later/second wave” migrations from

the Continent. The first set of families included Alexander, Bruce, Campbell, Douglas, Forbes,

Fraser, Gordon, Leslie and Stewart. The second set of surnames included Caldwell, Christie,

Cowan and Kennedy. We selected these families because we believed, a priori, they had a

high likelihood of being Jewish. Why did we believe this? Because these are all Scots sur-

names found in high numbers among the Melungeon population of Appalachia. As noted

at the outset, we are of Melungeon descent; we have learned that some of our ancestors (per-

haps all) were practicing Jews at some time in their past and in some instances still are. We

have corresponded with many cousins in our various lines who have come to the same con-

clusion, namely, that their Scots (and French, German, Dutch, Portuguese, German, Swiss,

Italian, Welsh, Irish and English) ancestors practiced the Jewish faith. This fact was hidden

from most of us until just recently. But it need not remain hidden from you.

 

 

DNA and Surnames

 

Before describing the DNA results, let us review the emergence of this new tool in

genealogical and anthropological studies. The investigation of surnames in genetics can

be said to go back to George Darwin, son of the founder of evolutionary science. In 1875,

Darwin fils used surnames to estimate the frequency of first-cousin marriages and cal-

culated the expected incidence of marriage between people of the same surname. He

arrived at a figure between 2.25 percent and 4.5 percent for cousin-marriage in the pop-

ulation of Great Britain (Jobling, June 2001, p. 353), with the upper classes being on the

high end and the general rural population on the low end. (Admittedly, this was a pretty

crude effort by modern scientific standards, but quite innovative for its era.) The next

stimulus toward using genetics to study family history had to wait until the 1990s, when

certain locations on the Y chromosome were identified as being useful for tracing male-

to-male inheritance.

 

It all began when a Canadian nephrologist of Ashkenazi parentage attended syna-

gogue one morning and noticed that a Sephardi congregant with the same surname as

his— Cohen — seemed to have completely different physical features (Kleiman 2001;

Thomas et al. 1998; Skorecki et al. 1997). According to Jewish tradition, Cohens are

descended from the same male ancestor, the priest Aaron, brother of Moses, and as such

are regarded as the hereditary Jewish priestly caste, called upon first to come forth and

read Torah in temple services. The nephrologist reasoned that if Kohanim (plural of

Cohen) were indeed the descendants of only one man, they should have a common set

of genetic markers and should perhaps preserve some family resemblance to each other.

 

To test that hypothesis, he made contact with Professor Michael Hammer of the

University of Arizona, a leading researcher in molecular genetics and pioneer in Y chro-

mosome research. The publication of their study in the prestigious British science jour-

nal Nature in 1997 sent shock waves through the worlds of science and religion. A

particular marker (now known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype, or CMH) did indeed

appear in 98.5 percent of men bearing the surname Cohen (or a variation thereof such

as Cone). It was apparently true that knowledge of their priestly calling and descent from

the Biblical Aaron had been strictly preserved for thousands of years (Skorecki et al. 1997;

Thomas et al. 1998). Moreover, the data showed that there were very few “non-paternity

events, ” testimony, as one Jewish scholar put it, to the faithfulness of thousands of Mrs.

Cohens down through the ages (Kleiman 2001). 4

 

The first to test the new methodology in general surname research was Bryan Sykes,

a molecular biologist at Oxford University (Sykes and Irven 2000). His study of the Sykes

surname obtained valid results by looking at only four markers on the male chromosome.

It pointed the way to genetics becoming a valuable assistant in the service of genealogy

and history. Sykes went on to found the first home DNA testing firm, Oxford Ancestors,

and write the popular book The Seven Daughters of Eve (2002).

 

To conduct our research we identified two persons for each surname who could doc-

ument, genealogically, their exclusive male-line descent from a Scots-born male forebear

carrying that surname. Our first lab results arrived in September 2000. The laboratory

looked at twelve markers on the Y chromosome prone to genetic mutation (polymor-

phism). Taken together, the resulting scores, called short tandem repeats (STRs), or alle-

les, make up a haplotype, a unique genetic profile shared by males of the same paternal

descent. Each test result was then compared with the Y-STR Haplotype Reference Data-

base (YHRD), a collection of over 28, 000 samples taken from 249 world populations

 

(Willuweit et al. 2005). Nearly 23, 000 distinct haplotypes are identified within the Euro-

pean section of YHRD; there are also Asian, African and North American sections. This

extremely informative gene bank, though it has a few underrepresented areas such as

France, serves as the final word for forensic scientists and courts of law the world over,

as well as for professional genealogical casework. Matches in the FTDNA database, Ybase,

and other available concordances were also used. 5 The raw scores for these analyses are

shown in appendix A.

 

 

Alexander: Surname from the Ancient World

 

Let us begin our discussion of haplotypes with Alexander, a surname commonly

found in both Melungeon and Scots genealogies. An Alexander donor with ancestry in

the Southern Appalachians took our test. 6 There were two exact (12/12) matches found

at FTDNA, both of unknown ancestral origin. An extended comparison produced 22 one-

step (11/12) mutational matches (in other words, the same scores on all markers but one).

 

On the basis of a predictive model, the Alexander haplotype was assigned to hap-

logroup (common lineage, gene type) Rib. Interestingly, in addition to four Scottish

matches and twelve English matches, its one-step mutation had a match also with a Jew-

ish donor in Poland, a French male and four Belgian males. Could the Continental dis-

tribution of the haplotype be an indication of its “deep history”? In the much larger

YHRD (22, 970 haplotypes), on a nine-marker basis, it elicited a single full match in Lim-

burg, Netherlands (1/50), while haplotype neighbors (one-step mutations, related far-

ther back in time) included the following:

 

 

Antioquia, Colombia (European)

 

2 / 407

 

Latin America

 

Argentina (European)

 

1 / 301

 

Latin America

 

Asturias, Spain

 

1/90

 

Europe

 

Barcelona, Spain

 

1 / 224

 

Europe

 

Bern, Switzerland

 

1 / 91

 

Europe

 

Birmingham, UK

 

1 / 97

 

Europe

 

Budapest, Hungary

 

1 / 194

 

Europe

 

Cantabria, Spain

 

2 / 101

 

Europe

 

Connecticut, USA (Hispanic American)

 

1 / 52

 

North America

 

Damascus, Syria

 

1 / 100

 

Asia

 

England-Wales, UK (Afro-Caribbean)

 

1 / 107

 

Europe

 

Greifswald, Germany

 

1 / 208

 

Europe

 

Madrid, Spain

 

1 / 152

 

Europe

 

Marche, Italy

 

1 / 1 08

 

Europe

 

Missouri, USA (European American)

 

1 / 59

 

North America

 

New York City, USA (European American)

 

1 / 155

 

North America

 

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (European)

 

1 / 126

 

Latin America

 

Rostock, Germany

 

1 / 203

 

Europe

 

Sao Paulo, Brazil (European)

 

1/447

 

Latin America

 

 

28

 

 

When Scotland Was Jewish

 

 

Texas, USA (European American)

 

2 / 78

 

North America

 

Virginia, USA (African American)

 

1 / 47

 

North America

 

Sicily, Italy

 

1 / 199

 

Europe

 

Southern Portugal

 

1 / 112

 

Europe

 

Stuttgart, Germany

 

2 / 453

 

Europe

 

Switzerland

 

1 / 149

 

Europe

 

Tyrol, Austria

 

2 / 230

 

Europe

 

Zaragoza, Spain

 

2 / 120

 

Europe

 

 

The astounding news was that of 72 near-matches in the YHRD, 22 (nearly one-third) were

in Spain, Portugal or countries once ruled by these colonial powers, including Antioquia

(Colombia) and Madeira (Spain), both places known to have large populations of Sephardim.

There was even a Scottish Alexander genetic cousin in Damascus, Syria. The modal score

(most frequent response) was central eastern Spain, the original homeland of innumerable

Crypto-Jews now living in Mexico and the American Southwest (Santos 2000). 7

 

 

Forbes

 

Let us examine Forbes next. In the Forbes DNA surname project of Kenneth Forbes,

Forbes I matched a David Forbes circa 1785, of Montrose, Scotland, and Forbes II a

William Forbes of South Carolina. 8 Forbes I had 40 exact matches in the Recent Ethnic

Origins section of the FTDNA database. Comparison of the scores with the extended data-

base of Dr. Hammer at FTDNA showed only one exact match (Ireland — probably our

donor), but 34 one-step and two-step mutations, including England, France, the Shet-

land Islands, Polynesia (European admixture), Ukraine (Ashkenazi), Portugal, Italy,

Philippines (European admixture), Poland and Spain (Basque), illustrating the wide dis-

semination of this genetic pattern. The presence of Polynesian and Filipino matches

underscores the fact that the bearers of this haplotype sometimes traveled by ship to dis-

tant countries. Admixture was also suspected in matches with an Inuit from Greenland,

an Indonesian, a Japanese, a Micronesian, an Arab from Israel, some native Siberians and

a Chinese Muslim of Central Asian descent on the historic trading route known as the

Silk Road.

 

In the YHRD, Forbes I elicited 167 matches throughout the world, weighted toward

southern Europe and the Mediterranean. The modal center was in northern Spain (Basques),

with noteworthy peaks in Colombia, the Pyrennes, Brazil, northern Portugal, Paris (France),

Valencia, Madrid and Barcelona (Spain), Poland, London, Argentina, Texas and New York

City (European and Hispanic descent). More than 50 percent of the matches were in Iberia

or Hispanic populations in the New World. If we were to project the sample size onto the

country of Colombia, 2 percent of the population, or 400, 000 Colombians, could be said

to be carrying the “Forbes” haplotype (even though they would likely have different sur-

names). Further, it can be inferred with a high degree of confidence that these Colombian

males would all have a common ancestor who lived, according to estimates of average muta-

tion rates, about a thousand years ago, when the first surnames were being established. Eight

out of 224 Barcelonans also matched: in other words 3.6 percent of that population. By

these measures, then, this Forbes haplotype appears to be Iberian. 9

 

Forbes II differed from Forbes I on five markers, suggesting different original ances-

tors for these two donors, despite their having the same surname. Both were assigned to

haplogroup Rib. The pattern of matches for Forbes II yielded a worldwide distribution. 10

Results included multiple matches with three other surnames (Arnold, Toole, and

McQuiston). 11 We believe that both branches of Forbes came to Scotland from France or

the Spanish Peninsula sometime in the not-so-distant past. Significantly, there are Jews

by the name of Forbes buried in the Sephardic communities of Brazil (Whiznitzer 1960),

and several generations of Forbeses (along with Alexanders) were partners in the impor-

tant Pensacola-based trading house of Panton, Leslie and Co., later called John Forbes

and Co. (Sutton 1991).

 

 

Bruce

 

Next, let us consider the surname Bruce. Our Bruce donor 12 proved also to be Rib

and matched with the surnames Fookes (German Fuchs, English Fox, both common Jew-

ish surnames), Kent, Ferguson and Harris (2). Harris was the name of 1 in 84 patrons of

Anglo-Jewish charities in an 1884 study compiled by Jacobs, making it 13th in rank among

British Jewish surnames. Bruce had exact matches in the FTDNA Recent Ethnic Origins

database in Bohemia (1 out of 15) and England, with an additional 14 of “unknown”

origin. One-step (11/12) matches included Scotland (8 out of 500, or 1.6 percent), U.K.

(26 out of 2406, or about 1 percent), Germany (10 out of 576, or 1.7 percent), and France

(3 out of 165, or 1.8 percent, with Keskastel, a town in Alsace that had a noted medieval

Jewry, being 2 of those, plus an additional 1 classified as of unknown country origin).

There were also matches with a Russian Ashkenazi donor, Mexico, Denmark and the

Netherlands (2 out of 13).

 

A search of the YHRD database produced 38 matches. These were fairly well con-

centrated along the Rhine River between France and Germany, with Freiburg (Germany)

being the modal response (5 out of 433, or 1.2 percent), followed by London (3 out of

247, or 1.2 percent). There were also scattered matches in Brussels (Belgium), Finland,

Sicily, Norway, Sweden, Gotland, northern Poland and southern Portugal, as well as

Brazil. The sole French hit (Paris) was striking in view of the small sample set in the data-

base, only 109 total, all from Paris and Strasbourg. The Scots Bruce line, of course, claims

to come from France, and the etymology of the name (de Brousse, Lat. bruscia “brush,

brushwood”) leads to Normandy and Flanders.

 

Campbell

 

The DNA of our Campbell donors emerged as a relatively uncommon haplotype and

though fairly pan-European, was, again, concentrated in Iberia. Our participants matched

two donors in the later-forming Campbell Surname DNA Project. Campbell matches in

the FTDNA database were in Ireland and of unknown origin, with one-step matches in

Sweden (1 out of 69), England (18 out of 2039), Germany (4 out 576), Ireland (3 out of

617), Scotland (11 out of 500) and “unknown” (23). Two-step matches were found in

Belarus (Russia, 1 out of 86), Denmark (1 o.ut of 49), France (2 out of 165), Holland (1

Ashkenazi-Levite and 1 Dutch-Mennonite out of 40), Sicily (1 out of 103), Germany (7

out 576), Iceland (3 out of 119), Shetland Islands (5 out of 45, or 11 percent), Poland (1

out 102), Wales (3 out of 76) and Iberian locations (including Andalusia and Mexico: 4

out of 254 total for these countries, or 1.6 percent).

 

Notable two-step Campbell matches from Hammer’s database at FTDNA included

several Ashkenazi Jews (Belarus, Holland, and Russia), plus matches in Spain, Italy, Greece

and Syria. The Ashkenazi match from the Netherlands was noted as Levite. Matches in

the YHRD database (25) yielded Colombia, Birmingham (England), London and New

York City (Latino) in a tie as modal scores and included Cantabria (in northern Spain),

central eastern Spain, central Portugal, Moscow, Paris, Southern Ireland, Belgium, Hol-

land, Sweden, Russia, and Hungary.

 

The bulk of the participants (12 out of 17) in the Campbell Surname Project fell into

the Rib haplogroup and had genealogies traced back to a large Campbell colony in Rock-

bridge/Augusta County, Virginia, coming from Northern Ireland via Pennsylvania. There

were numerous marriages between Campbells and Davidsons (a common Jewish surname),

McKees (Mackey, Mackie, etc., Jewish surname), Hays (Jewish surname), and Alexanders.

 

In American history, Campbell County, Tennessee/Kentucky, is a rocky and

inaccessible area of the southern Appalachians near the Melungeon heartland. It was

named after one of Daniel Boone’s right-hand men and long harbored an important

Crypto-Jewish community that was evidently gathered around Richard Muse (born 1752,

died after 1840), 13 a land agent. Also settling there were two branches of the Cooper fam-

ily, relatives of the scout for Boone, William Cooper (about 1725-1782).

 

The Campbellite denomination, loosely Primitive Baptist, was a network of circuit

meetings strong in the early years of the nineteenth century in Tennessee. It was charac-

terized by absence of belief in the Christian trinity, worship without icons, avoidance of

all writing, adherence to orally transmitted law, the wearing of kippot (Jewish skull caps),

reading of the Old Testament only, use of Jewish wedding ceremonies, and Saturday reli-

gious meetings, with designation of the primary house of worship as a temple and tem-

porary meeting places as “tabernacles.” 14 One Dinana Campbell is buried with a death date

of 1821 and the familiar Jewish symbol of a hand pointing to a star in Purrysburgh Ceme-

tery in South Carolina, an early Crypto-Jewish religious colony on the Savannah River.

 

Campbells were among the leading Jewish families in Jamaica, 15 and there are 14 per-

sons surnamed Campbell listed in Rabbi Malcolm Stern s American Jewish genealogies

(1991). It is also a leading name researched by the Jewish Genealogical Society of Great

Britain. Campbells, including Isaac and Israel, were among the first settlers of the Repub-

lic of Texas, and they were among founders of the Watauga Country experiment in repub-

licanism in Tennessee. 16 We hypothesize that Campbell as a surname may be related to

Campanal, a Marrano surname (see chapter 3).

 

Our two Douglas samples did not match each other exactly, but were very close. It

would appear we are likely dealing with branches of the same family, a Scottish clan of

royal descent first attested as lords of the South Isles as early as the 9th century C.E. In the

FTDNA database, on a two-step basis, Douglas I produced an Ashkenazi match in Belarus

(White Russia), 3 matches in the Shetland Islands (out of 45, or 6.7 percent of the popu-

lation), 45 matches total from the U.K. (one-third of all matches), and notable matches

in Switzerland (2/69) and Spain (3/103), besides a scattering of Scandinavian matches. In

the YHRD database there were two matches for Douglas I: Albania and Cologne.

 

Douglas II had 6 matches in the YHRD database: Colombia, Freiburg, Liguria

(northern Italy), Limburg (Netherlands), Lombardy (the region around Milan), and Lon-

don. With Colombia, we are seeing more of the Iberian pattern witnessed with Forbes

and our previous Scots surnames. Douglas I with its 12, 14 values on DYS 385 may be

the parent haplotype. A simulation in the YHRD, inputting these scores for DYS 385 and

allowing the other two sites to vary between the values for Douglas I and II, produced a

“generic Douglas” of 80 hits, widely distributed, over one-third (28) of them in Iberian-

settled places, including Argentina, Brazil, Madeira, Colombia and all Portuguese pop-

ulations. Significantly, Douglas II exactly matched three Jewish males with Ashkenazi

surnames at FTDNA.

 

 

Gordon

 

We obtained three Govdon DNA donors from two different sources. The first, labeled

Gordon III, came from a Clan Gordon descendant from Scotland. The second two were

Jewish Gordons from Russia, labeled Gordon I and II. We wanted to learn if these two

Gordon populations were related genetically.

 

The Gordon III donor from Scotland carried haplotype Rib and matched individ-

uals with the following surnames: Cowell, Kendrick, Nichols, Wingo, French, Day, Beck-

endorf, Brown, Sisson (11), George (2), Picklo, Hill, Mock, Shelton, Radcliffe, and Clark.

The several matches with Sisson, a version of Sasson, Sosa, Sassoon, Shushan and Ibn

Shoshan, are notable as this is the post-exilic Hebrew name for “happiness, ” associated

with th efleur de lis or lily that served as a symbol of the House of David during the Mid-

dle Ages (Jacobs 1901-1906). Gordon III is one step away from the extremely widespread

Lavender haplotype, which has been traced to French Jewry (Lavender 2003).

 

Gordon Ill’s exact matches in the REO database were either in the British Isles or

of unknown origin: Ireland (2), Scotland (2), United Kingdom (1), unknown origin (3),

and Wales (2). One-step mutations showed a thin, but consistent, distribution through-

out Europe, including Austria (2/42), Switzerland (6/69), Germany, Holland (6/40),

France (3/165), Italy, Slovakia, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Jamaica, and Ashkenazi

matches in Poland and Russia. There were also matches by admixture with native Siberi-

ans, Inuits, Polynesians, Filipinos, Micronesians, Indonesians, Japanese, Africans, Arabs,

Chinese Muslims and Uyghurs (a Turkic people in Central Asia). In the YHRD database,

there were 73 matches. Every population in present-day Germany was covered, with the

capital, Berlin, being the modal response (6/548 or 1.1 percent). The Iberian picture was

uneven, however, with high numbers for Colombia/ Antioquia (5), and 2 hits in central

Portugal, but none in the northern or southern parts of that country.

 

The donors we have labeled Gordon I and II (and which are Russian Jewish Gor-

dons) fit the Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH) and are haplotype J2. In the words of

FTDNA, “Haplogroup J is found at highest frequencies in Middle Eastern and North

African populations where it most likely evolved. This marker has been carried by Mid-

dle Eastern traders into Europe, Central Asia, India, and Pakistan.” Moreover, the J2

sub-haplogroup “originated in the northern portion of the Fertile Crescent where it later

spread throughout central Asia, the Mediterranean, and south into India. As with other

populations with Mediterranean ancestry, this lineage is found within Jewish popula-

tions.”

 

Gordon I had two exact surname matches at FTDNA: Norwalk and Horn (a rela-

tively common Jewish surname, derived from Hebrew shofar ). An exact match was found

in the Hammer worldwide Jewry database with an Ashkenazi Jew from the land of Radzivil

(Radziwill, Belarussia). One-step matches included Ashkenazim from Austria-Hungary,

Hungary, Romania and Uzbekistan. Of the two-step matches, there were Ashkenazis from

Lithuania, Russia (3, one of whom self-identified as a Cohen), Austria-Hungary, Belarus,

Czechoslovakia, and Poland (Makov). In addition, there was one each of the following:

India (tribal), Iran (Mazandarani) and Arab. Thus, the CMH is not restricted to Jews,

but is also found among Arabs, Persians and other Middle Eastern peoples. Three-step

matches included a Greek from Australia and a Samaritan from Israel. (Extended near-

matches such as these are pertinent because we are dealing with an ancient genetic pat-

tern, said to go back three to four thousand years.) In the YHRD database, Gordon I

elicited three matches: Argentina, Netherlands and Latium (the area around Rome).

 

 

2. DNA and Population Studies

 

Gordon II matches and near-matches at FTDNA echoed the Gordon I results, and

a one-step match from Czechoslovakia listed as a self-identifying “Sephardi.” Gordon II

exactly matched persons with the last names of Kaplan (a Hebrew name formed from

KPLN — uSdd— meaning “descendant of Cohen”) 17 and Jordan (2). These Jordans com-

prise Group JG5 in the Jordan Surname DNA Project. 18 (The surnames Jordan and Gor-

don are likely permutations of one another.)

 

The corresponding matches in the YHRD with Gordon II also are revealing. They

include Barcelona, Bulgaria, Bogota (Colombia), Lausanne, Ostergoetland/Joenkoeping

(Sweden), and Sicily, in addition to matches in Egypt, Syria and Turkey. It is known that

people descended from the ancient Biblical Hebrews settled in all these places— in Spain

from Roman times (and thence to South America after 1492), in Bulgaria and Sicily dur-

ing Hellenic and Byzantine times, in Switzerland during the High Middle Ages and early

modern period, and in Gothland, joining, respectively, the Iberian, Bulgarian, Greek,

Swiss and Gothic indigenous populations. Lausanne, for instance, in addition to being a

haven for Protestant reformers, was a favorite refuge for French, Italian and Iberian Jews.

 

The history of the early settlement of Jews among the Scandinavian peoples is little

investigated, but a substantial early Jewish population is suggested by the fact that in 1751

a group of Norwegians arrived in London and petitioned the Spanish and Portuguese Jews

Synagogue of Bevis-Marks to admit a large number of their countrymen who wanted to

return to the open practice of Judaism (Endelman 1979, p. 283). As we shall discuss in a

later chapter, Scottish Gordons established trading stations and manufactories through-

out the Baltic, traveled to Russia in the service of the Tsar ( and in the Appalachians with

the Melungeons), and even married into the English nobility, where the poet Byron, Lord

George Gordon (1788-1824), became their greatest ironic hero. 19

 

 

Stewart and Caldwell

 

The Stewart donor scores match those of the Caldwell donors in the second wave of

immigration, so we now move to a discussion those Jews or Crypto-Jews who joined their

coreligionists in Scotland after 1300. What we term the Caldwell-Stewart haplotype is

the most frequent male haplotype on record. It is widely distributed throughout Europe.

In America, it occurs in most ethnic populations, including African-American and His-

panic (due to admixture). Stewart and Caldwell surname matches at FTDNA included:

Agin, Arnold (one of the most common Colonial American Jewish surnames), 20 Bell

(“good looking” in French), Brown, 21 Canterbury, Carter, Cordova (Sephardic), Castano

(Sephardic), Chamberlain and Chambers (from Latin Camerae and cognate with

Cameron, “of the chamber”), Cooper, Cullen, Davenport (Welsh “David’s port’ ), Ellis-

ton, Etheridge/Everidge (likely formed from Osterreicher “from Austria”), Franklin (from

France), French (from France), Hooper (cognate with Cooper), Jacobs (a leading English

Jewish surname whose meaning in Hebrew is “merchant”), 22 Lovett/Lovitt (= Levite),

German/Jarman (from Germany), Gibbs (often Jewish, a shortened form of Gabriel), 23

Goheen (Yiddish for “impure, ” goyim), Harry (French Harre, related to Harrison), -4

Hutchinson, Kuchinsky (Polish form of the preceding), Mallett (French Sephardic sur-

name), Maxwell (Scottish clan name), May (often German Jewish), Mordecai (Hebrew),

Noe (a common Portuguese Jewish surname), Ramey (French Jewish), Rodriguez (a com-

mon converso surname), Rose (an example of a Jewish “purchased” name, formed from

Hebrew Rosh, “head”), Rosenboom (German Jewish “rose tree”), Saylor (German),

Schmidt (German), Schoch (meaning “chess, ” “exchequer, ” or “accounts” in German),

Shelton (English landed gentry), 25 Smothers, South, Stewart, Wall (compare Wahl,

Walling), Walter (Norman), Warner (Norman Guarnier), Waters, West, White, and

Woods (Sylvan).

 

In the YHRD there were 594 matches representing about three percent of all sam-

ples in the database. This haplotype has been labeled — falsely, in our opinion — the (West-

ern) Atlantic Modal Haplotype (AMH), a description going back to Wilson et al. (2001).

We believe it is much more accurately labeled a Mediterranean or Iberian modal haplo-

type. AMH, along with its close mutational neighbors, is the genetic type of one-third

of the population of Portugal (Gusmao et al. 2003). Nearly 40 percent of the AMH

matches come from Iberian populations (Spain, Portugal, Madeira, Canary Islands, Latin

America). Further, the AMH/Caldwell-Stewart progenitor appears to have been respon-

sible for siring 8 percent of the population of the city of Barcelona, 8.3 percent of Zaragoza,

6 percent of Cantabria, and 12 percent of the Pyrenees; altogether about 6 percent of the

modern population of Spain and Portugal! Matches also occur in Turkey, Egypt, Syria

and the Philippines, as well as Polynesia and Indonesia.

 

Of the 5 or 6 haplotypes identified by the Stewart/Stuart DNA Project, 26 the Caldwell-

Stewart haplotype corresponds to the most common, S4235. One Stewart matched Cald-

well exactly, and the other was only a slight variation, perhaps an Irish branch to judge

from the 14 matches found in Ireland. Clearly, the Caldwell-Stewart pattern represents

a prolific lineage, one favored by historical circumstances.

 

 

Caldwell

 

As the distribution map shows, the Caldwell haplotype left descendants in areas

ranging from Scandinavia through central Europe and Germany, down to Italy, across to

France and Spain, and over to the British Isles. One match was also found in Turkey. As

we will see in chapter 4, according to their origin story the family actually claims to have

lived in most of these places. Their motive for migration is remembered as having been

a desire to escape religious persecution.

 

A glance at the distribution of the AMH Caldwell-Stewart haplotype, combined with

a knowledge of European history, suggests that the major population segment in today’s

Spain and Germany — leaving aside France for the moment — likely did not come from

Roman or Celtic DNA, two obvious candidates. Neither hypothesis would be a sufficient

causal argument for the Scandinavian matches. Both these origins would be hard pressed

to account for the Polish matches, as well as for the population density geared toward the

North and Baltic seas. The history of Europe is the history of its biggest conquerors. The

chronicling of the most frequently-occurring Y chromosomes should correspond to the

fortunes of ancient fathers who begat large numbers of sons over the generations.

 

Caldwell DNA distribution. Map by Donald N. Yates.

 

 

Let us attempt to solve the origins of this haplotype by gauging the era in which this

prolific Rib father lived. Male haplotypes are believed to mutate at a constant rate. This

“genetic clock” was chosen for kinship determinations because it “ticks” about once every

thousand years and can thus be compared with written records, genealogy and histori-

cal sources of information. Usually, heteronymic matches (those between persons of

different surnames) reveal a common ancestor who lived between 1, 000 and 2, 000 years

ago, prior to the use of surnames. The Caldwell-Stewart allele configuration, then, likely

arose during in the Middle Ages (500-1500 C.E.) or the late Roman period (1-500 C.E.).

Since 500 C.E., some of the descendants would have moved from their ancestral home,

while some remained behind.

 

We believe the only people who had contact with all these relevant populations within

the appropriate time period were the Germanic tribes that originated in the far north of

Western Europe and overran the Roman Empire from the fourth to sixth centuries of the

Common Era. They came from the Baltic and harried the borders of the empire in Thrace,

Hungary and Pannonia; they are called the Goths. We pick up the Caldwell-Stewart hap-

lotype trail in Wolhynia (Ukraine), the ancestral home of the Goths before their division

into Visigoths and Ostrogoths. Gothic legends tell of a migration from the mouth of the

Vistula to the Sea of Azov that took them through a vast swamp. In crossing a river,

probably the Dnieper, some of their people became separated from the main group and

were left behind. In the words of one historian:

 

Old songs tell the story of the trek of the Goths from Gothiscandza to Scythia.... Modern

archeology assumes a slow shift of the East Pomeranian-Masovian Wielbark culture into the

archaeological region that has been named, since the turn of the century, after the village of

Cherniakhov near Kiev. The advance of the Polish culture into the Ukrainian area thus pres-

ents itself as a process that lasted from the end of the second until far into the third cen-

tury.... To this stage belongs also the early phase of the Cherniakhov culture in Wolhynia

[Wolfram 1988, p. 42],

 

The left-behinds stayed in an area that eventually became the medieval state of the

Ukraine. The largest group of Goths continued to travel over a thousand miles to the

“Greutungian heartland in southern Russia, ” where “the peoples of the Cherniakhov

[Wolhynian] culture certainly had the military and logistical capability to enforce their

authority in the vast expanses of Russia” (p. 87). There, the Gothic king “ruled over all

peoples of Scythia and Germannia as if they were his own” (p. 88). From this farthest

eastward point, they turned west (now being termed Visigoths) and began to prey on the

Roman provinces of Greece, Turkey and the Balkans. Eventually, they joined the Ostro-

goths, their ancestral cousins, and descended on Italy. Still later, they established the

kingdom of Toulouse in southern France around 418 C.E. and the Visigothic kingdom of

Toledo in Spain in 568-711 (Wolfram 1988, appendix 2). There they virtually replaced

the resident Romano-Celtic-Punic population, already decimated by wars with their kin-

dred tribes, the Suevi, Vandals, Alani and Silingi.

 

We read from another authority (Hodgkin 2000, pp. 15-17):

 

It was reserved for the Goths... to deal the first mortal blow at the Roman state [the sack of

Rome by Alaric in 410].... The Gothic nation, or rather cluster of nations, belonged to the

great Aryan family of peoples, and to the Low German branch of that family.... The informa-

tion which fordanes [flourished about 550 C.E.] gives us as to the earliest home and first

migration of the Goths is as follows: “The island of Scanzia [peninsula of Norway and Swe-

den] lies in the Northern Ocean, opposite the mouth of the Vistula, in the shape like a

cedar-leaf. In this island [peninsula], this manufactory of nations, dwelt the Goths with

other tribes....”

 

The migration from Sweden to east Prussia [is supported by] Pytheas of Marseilles... who

lived about the time of Alexander the Great [and who] speaks of a people called Guttones,

who lived by an estuary of the Ocean named Mentonomon, and who apparently traded in

amber (Pliny, Natural History, xxxvii.2)... and who must therefore have been settled on the

south-east coast of the Baltic at least as early as 330 before Christ.

 

Why do we identify the Visigoths, though, as the source of the AMH Caldwell-

Stewart haplotype and not one of the numerous other Germanic tribes— for example,

the Franks, Burgundians, Saxons, Siling or Asding Vandals, Suebi, Alamanni, Juthungi,

Iazyges, Carp, Taifali, Gepids, Heruli, Alans, or even the Visigoths’ cousins, the

Ostrogoths? Suspicion might fall instead on the Suebi, who crossed the frozen Rhine

in the winter of 406-7 C.E. with the Vandal and Alan hordes and two years later were

said to number 80, 000 as they crossed the Pyrenees into Iberia (Cunliffe 2001, pp. 428,

449).

 

With the Visigoths’ second conquest of the peninsula beginning in 455 under

Theoderic I and the end of the kingdom of Toulouse in France (507), however, the Suebi

“merged imperceptibly with the indigenous population” in the northwest, “making the

last significant contribution to the gene pool of the region” (p. 449). This left the Visig-

oths as masters of Iberia until the arrival of the Arabs two centuries later. A map of Ger-

manic settlement in the fifth and sixth centuries shows their densest concentration is a

fan-shaped crescent between Toledo and Barcelona, the exact center of the modal scores

for the AMH Caldwell-Stewart haplotype and homeland of the Sephardic Jewish popula-

tion in the cities on the Ebro and in “northeast central Spain” targeted by the Spanish

Inquisition in later centuries (p. 449). The map gives the broad picture and shows the

origin and travels of the Visigoths superimposed on the distribution map of one of our

Scottish clans, Forbes.

 

 

Kennedy

 

Our Kennedy donor is a one-step mutation from the AMH Caldwell-Stewart pat-

tern. He has an allele value of 15 instead of 14 at DYS 385b, the same as Gordon IV. Sur-

name matches included Broom, Cothron, Harris, Irving, Mitchell (2), Sanches, Moore,

Briley, Grant, Stewart, Slavin, Gordon, Mock (3), Mauk (3), Elliston, Alford, Rea, Gar-

vey, Bannon, Robinson, Edstrom, Kraywinkel, Beal (2), Devine, and Dyas (Dias, Diaz) —

a mixture of names emanating from Scotland, England, Germany, Portugal, Spain,

Hungary, Wales, France, Poland and Denmark. Exact haplotype matches in the FTDNA

and Hammer databases were England (2, one from the Isle of Man), France, Iceland,

Polynesia (European admixture), Portugal and one of unknown origin. One-step muta-

tions were found in Cuba, Denmark, England (2), Finland, France, Germany, Holland

(Ashkenzi-Levite), Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy (Apulia), Norway, Poland, Polynesia

(2, European admixture), Portugal, Russia (Native Siberian), Shetland Islands, Spain

(Andalusia and Basque), and one unknown. Matches in the YHRD database closely repli-

cated the AMH Caldwell-Stewart pattern, only on a smaller scale, with the significant

difference that Kennedy had fewer Scandinavian matches.

 

 

Leslie and Christie

 

The Leslie haplotype is a two-step mutation from the AMH Caldwell-Stewart pat-

tern. (It has a repeat of 14 instead of 12 at microsatellite 439.) Clan Leslie has a reliable

tradition that the name was brought to Scotland from Hungary by one Bartolomaeus Lad-

slau (Latin Ladislaus) around 1120. Supporting this traditional story, we found numerous

near-matches with persons tested from the Ukraine, Hungary and Russia, as well as some

from Scandinavia and a high number of matches in the Mediterranean.

 

The Christie haplotype had 18 matches in YHRD, the modal response being north-

ern Portugal. One-third of the Christie matches were Portuguese (6/18), with 2 from Bel-

gium, 1 from Caceres (in Spain on the Portuguese border), 1 from Cologne, 1 from Croatia,

1 from Dusseldorf, 1 from Freiburg, 1 from London, 1 from Magdeburg, 1 from Sao Paulo

(Brazil), 1 from Sicily and 1 from Zeeland (Netherlands).

 

The name Christie ostensibly refers to the bearer’s status as a follower of Christian-

ity, but such a designation would only make sense if acquired in a land where Christians

were the minority (such as Arab Palestine), or else bestowed on a convert. Sometimes

converso Jews purposely adopted explicitly Christian surnames such as Cruz (cross), Santa

Maria, or Santa Cruz (Saint Cross! ): in 1389 Solomon Halevi, the chief rabbi of Burgos

in Spain, took the name Pablo de Santa Maria when he converted, or pretended to con-

vert, to Christianity (Gitlitz 2002, pp. 5, 10-11, 201-2).

 

 

Fraser

 

 

Our Fraser results come from the Fraser DNA Project. 27 This appears to be a haplo-

type with a great deal of variability centering around what can perhaps be hypothesized

as the ancestral type. Let us explore the matches:

 

The Fraser donor from Kiltarlity in Inverness-shire (northern Scotland) produced

no French or Iberic matches, but yielded a strong Polish and Baltic resonance. Northern

Poland, with 8 matches out of 47, or 17 percent of the total, proved the modal score. If

we add up all matches for Polish cities, we arrive at a figure of 19, or 40 percent of all

matches. Lithuania had 4 matches, and in fact all the Baltic states were represented. This

Scottish Fraser also has numerous Swedish, Polish, Russian and Ukrainian cousins— not

the places one would expect to find Gaelic stock if Fraser were Celtic or Pictic.

 

With the second Fraser donor (Aberdeen) scores, the Polish genetic matches drop

away. We have 6 matches only: in Colombia (Antioquia), Freiburg, Liguria, Limburg,

Lombardy, and London. The closely related Richmond, Virginia, Fraser donor has a sin-

gle match, in the Pyrenees, the borderland between Spain and France.

 

With the Edinburgh Fraser donor we get a broader picture. Its 53 matches reveal a

wide distribution. French connections emerge, with 3 matches in Strasbourg and 1 in

Paris. Northern Poland, with 5 matches, is the modal score. At the same time, we have

heavy coverage of northern and east central Spain and all regions of Portugal, including

2 matches (out of 133) from the Pyrenees, a location that was the sole match for Rich-

mond, Virginia, Fraser donor. During the anti-Jewish riots in northern Spain in 1391,

and again after the 1492 Edict of Expulsion, Jews crossed and recrossed this mountain

chain many times, finding temporary refuge in southern French cities.

 

The Hastings Fraser donor is only one marker different from the Edinburgh Fraser

 

Swed/ah /

 

Brazil

 

Edinburgh

 

Poland

 

Strasbourg

 

DNA distribution of Fraser of Edinburgh. Map by Donald N. Yates.

 

and, in fact, is identical to the AMH Caldwell-Stewart haplotype. The Alexandria,

Virginia, Fraser donor is a two-step mutation away from it, evidently a unique haplo-

type, and thus not able to be investigated.

 

Based on this analysis, we propose that the Edinburgh donor represents the main

Fraser ancestral line, which was originally French and Iberian. By contrast, the Inverness

Fraser line, which differs on three markers, seems to be predominantly Polish in origin.

Thus there seem to be two ancestral clans of Frasers in Scotland, the Frasers who prob-

ably came from Anjou in southern France around the time of David I, and the Frasers of

Lovat, who arrived later, during the reign of Robert the Bruce. 28

 

 

Cowan

 

It remains to examine the Cowan data. Here we are confronted with a Scottish “clan, ”

some members of which carried knowledge of their Jewishness from Scotland and Ire-

land to the Appalachians, where they dwelled alongside the Melungeons. While strictly

not part of the Melungeon project, the Cowan Surname Project 29 participants were kind

enough to make available their results. To date, twenty-five Cowan surname bearers have

been tested. They may be divided into 5 haplotypes, of which Cowan IVa (Rib) is the

modal haplotype, representing 8 out of 25 of the donors (see fig. 2). 30

 

Cowan IVa had the following surname matches (aside from other Cowans): Allison,

Berry, Blakely, Blanchard, Bussanich, Csalpinski (Polish), Doherty (and variants

Dougherty, Dohty, Dowtertie, etc.), Dalton/Dolton, Dorsey, Harrison, Jones (2), Kennedy,

Kenny, Knowles, Leisner, MacKlin, McLaughlin, MacQueen, 31 MacTiernan (2)/McTer-

nan, Milligan, Parvin, Perryman (Sephardic, “pear man”), Reed, Rodgers, Shanahan,

Sinor (2, Spanish Senor, Seneor), 32 Soakell (Jewish), Stidham, Walker, Ward, and Wil-

son. It is one marker distant from four other Cowans. In the Hammer/FTDNA haplo-

type database, Cowan IVa had four exact matches: 2 in Iceland, 1 Anglo-Celt, and 1 of

unknown origin. In the YHRD database, the 9 matches were London-modal (4, nearly

half), with 3 from Southern Ireland, and 1 each from Berlin and Madeira.

 

With the exception of France (which is not well represented in the database), these

matches corresponded to the English, Scots, Irish, Spanish and German (Polish) sur-

names we noted above. Keeping in mind the Icelandic matches mentioned already, we

propose that this rather geographically restricted haplotype is a later formation from the

same Visigothic ancestor whose distribution we have seen in AMH Caldwell-Stewart.

Though it spread primarily in the British Isles, it is part and parcel with the same famil-

iar pattern.

 

Cowan III, a two-step match with Cohen IVa, matched 6 persons with the last name

Maxwell, another Scottish clan. It also matched a Stone, Koontz (Hebrew “righteous

priest”), 33 Aboy, Avery, Bell, Pope, McCarthy, and Chenault. Exact matches in the FTDNA

database included England (4), France, Ireland, Polynesia (European admixture), Scot-

land (15/520, or 2.8 percent), Spain, and unknown origin (9). From the English and Scot-

tish matches, it is again apparent that this is a family with numerous descendants in the

British Isles.

 

 “Cowan haplotype chart.” Figure by Donald N. Yates.

 

However, in the YHRD European database half of the 36 matches were in greater

Iberia, and there were 2 (out of 99) in Strasbourg, France, as well as matches in Poland,

Sweden and Italy. Projecting the Cowan III data on the total population of Scotland (esti-

mated at 8 million), we can infer that there are about 180, 000 males on its sod, moors or

sidewalks carrying the Cowan III haplotype. They all likely descend from a single com-

mon ancestor who lived about 1, 500 years ago, circa 500 C.E. 34 And if our hypothesis is

correct, he was a Visigoth who lived in southern France.

 

Cowan V is an Rla haplotype and shows an Eastern European ancestry common to

Ashkenazi Levites. There was an exact match at FTDNA with an Ashkenazic Jew from

the village of Komi in Russia. The YHRD European matches are in Finland (2), Leipzig,

Ljubljana, London, Stuttgart, Ukraine, Warsaw and Wroclaw. This branch’s DNA matches

that of a Polish Ashkenazi Jew named Bennett Greenspan (the founder of FTDNA), and

its one-step mutations consist of 16 matches, 13 of which are identified as Ashkenazi-

Levite, from Germany (2), Austria (2), Belarus (3), Hungary, Lithuania (2), Poland (2),

Russia (3), and France.

 

 

2. DNA and Population Studies

 

Conclusions

 

It is time to summarize our arguments. If Scottish clan surname research and genetic

haplotype history take us back to the early centuries of the Common Era and imply com-

mon ancestors in France and Spain that were primarily Rib, what makes us think that

the Scots who paternally inherited these genes were, by religion, Jewish? For one, certain

of these lines have continued to be Jewish down to the present, either in a cultural or

religious sense. Our presumption is that the Jews carrying Rib haplotypes converted to

Judaism sometime during the past 1, 000 to 1, 500 years. We will develop this thesis in depth

in chapter 5.

 

Further, the abundance of matches between these Scotsmen and Ashkenazi and

Sephardi Jews, in Diasporic locales as far flung as Colombia and Fithuania, suggests they

were cut from the same cloth. In the case of the AMH Caldwell-Stewart haplotype, we

have seen that it corresponds to a Visigothic prototype situated today in the exact pop-

ulation center of Europe (Freiburg-modal ). 35 The two Fraser clans, on the other hand,

exhibit a “butterfly” pattern of distribution, with possible Sephardic and Ashkenazic

wings. In the case of Clan Cowan, we will later suggest that Rib and Rla males adopted

the Cowan/Coen surname indicative of the Jewish priestly caste when they converted to

Judaism around 750-900 c.E. Even though these Scots were not Semitic descendants of

Aaron or the priest-kings of ancient Judea, they thought of themselves as such. As we

shall show in later chapters, the Stewarts began very early to style themselves as Davidic

in their ancestry. They became honorary Fevites, affiliates of the tribe that traditionally

provided the soldiers and craftsmen, defenders and sextons for the Jerusalem Temple.

 

 

Chapter 3

 

 

Genealogies of the First Wave of

Jewish Families, 1100-1350 c.E.

 

 

In this chapter we focus on a set of noble families entering Scotland from 1050 to

1350 which we propose were Jewish. They are Bruce, Campbell, Forbes, Leslie, Douglas,

Gordon and Stewart. We present genealogical and historical evidence to document the

Jewish ancestry of these families.

 

 

Bruce

 

The de Brusse family of Flanders and Normandy entered England in 1050 as part of

the entourage of Duke Richard I; the family remained in Britain subsequent to the con-

quest of England by Richard’s son, William the Conqueror, in 1066. Robert de Bruce (d.

1094) married a Norman woman, Agnes St. Clair, 1 and was the son of a Norman woman,

Emma of Brittany. Other members of the de Brusse/Brousse family in France emigrated

not only to England, but also to what are now Hungary, Germany, the Netherlands and

Poland. Some members of this family were and are practicing Jews (M. Stern 1991).

 

Our research question is whether the de Brusse family in England, and later Scot-

land, were practicing Jews, as well. As their genealogy shows, several Hebrew and Mediter-

ranean given names are found among the early Bruces; among these are Adam, Emma,

Isabel, Agnes, Agatha, Euphemia, David, Matilda, and Eleanor. By the early 1300s, the

Bruce family in Scotland had produced Robert I (the Bruce), King of Scotland, who

reigned from 1306 to 1329. Robert I, King of the Scots, married Isobel of Mar (1295), pro-

ducing a child, Marjory de Bruce. The de Mar family (i.e., “from the sea/ocean”) was also

French Mediterranean in origin. 2 Robert subsequently married Elizabeth de Burgh (also

of French origin), having a daughter with her as well, Matilda (Maud). Robert I also had

a son, David (b. 1325), by either Elizabeth or a mistress, and two additional children,

Elizabeth and Robert, by mistresses.

 

What should draw our attention at this point are the spouses of Robert I’s children.

 

Matilda/Maud married Thomas Isaac, a man with an undeniably Hebrew surname which

Jacobs (1902-1911) found to be the most common among British Jews during this time

period. From this union came Joanna, who married John de Ergardia (of French origin),

producing a daughter, Isabel, who married Sir John Stewart: from this union sprang the

Stewarts of Cardney. Further, Robert I’s daughter, Elizabeth, by an unknown mistress,

married Sir Walter Oliphant, a family surname also known to be Sephardic.

 

This lineage, together with the DNA evidence of a Southern French or Spanish Jew-

ish origin for the Bruces (chapter 2), strongly suggests that this family was aware of its

Judaic heritage and chose marital partners and given names designed to perpetuate this

heritage. When Bruces from Scotland arrived in the American colonies during the 1600s

and 1700s, the marital patterns of at least some members suggest that the Crypto-Judaic

practice had been carried forward to the New World (Stern 1991). We compiled the fol-

lowing genealogical chart from information available online at http: //www.scotlandroy-

alty.com.

 

 

Fig. 3: Genealogical Chart of the Bruce Family

 

 

Robert de Brusse

 

Robert de Brusse aka Brusi, birth date unknown, was the first to use the name Robert

the Brus” or some variation. He married Emma of Brittany (ca. 1020) in Normandy. They

had one son:

 

1. Robert de Bruce (d. ca. 1084)

 

 

Robert de Brus

 

Robert de Bruce, birth date unknown, came over to England with William the Con-

queror. He married Agnes St. Clair (d. 1080) and they had one son:

 

1. Adam de Bruce

 

Adam de Brus, „

 

Adam de Brus, birth unknown, went to England in 1050 as attendant to Queen Emma,

 

daughter of Richard I of Normandy. Adam de Brus married Emma Ramsay and had a child

 

1. Robert de Bruce

 

 

Robert de Bruce,.

 

Robert de Bruce (d. 1141), born ca. 1078, married Agnes Paynell (aka Agnes Bruce, a dis

 

tant cousin) and had three known children:

 

1. Adam I (d. 1164; m. Ivelta de Arches) had a son:

 

a. Adam II (d. 1196; m. 1 Joanna de Mescines; m. 2 Agnes of Aumale)

 

2. Robert de Bruce III

 

3. Agatha (m. Ralph Talybois)

 

 

Robert de Bruce. „ • j

 

Robert de Bruce (d. 1194), aka Robert le Meschin, was Lord of Annandale. He married

 

 

Euphemia and had a son:

 

1. William de Bruce

 

 

William de Bruce.,

 

William de Bruce (d. 1215), 4th Baron of Annandale, was born ca. 1178 and married

 

Christina or Christine. They had one known son:

 

1 Robert de Bruce

 

Robert de Bruce, 4th Baron of Annandale, was born ca. 1195. He married Isabella/Isobel

Huntington. They had two sons:

 

1. Robert Bruce

 

2. Edward le Bruce of Ireland

 

Robert Bruce

 

Robert Bruce, Lord of Annandale, was born in 1210. His first marriage was on (or possibly

before) 12 May 1240 to Isabel (Isabella de Clare, b. 2 Nov. 1226). Sometime prior to 10 May

1275 he married Christian d’lrby.

 

Child by Isabel

 

1. Robert de Brus

 

Sir Robert de Brus

 

Sir Robert de Brus, Lord of Annandale, was born in July of 1243. He first married in

Turnberry in 1271, to Marjorie of Carrick (Countess of Carrick, wife of Adam de Kolcon-

quhar). Through this marriage he also became Earl of Carrick. After her death in 1292, he

resigned the title of Earl of Carrick to his (unknown) son, and married Eleanor who, after

Robert’s death, married Richard de Waleys.

 

Children by Marjorie

 

1. Robert I, Bruce, of Scots

 

2. Unknown (Earl of Carrick)

 

3. Christian (d. 1357; m. Gratney of Mar

 

4. Mary (m. 1316 Sir Alexander Fraser [d. 1332])

 

5. Maud (m. Hugh Ross [ca. 1275-19 Jul 1333])

 

Child by Eleanor

 

1. Isabel (m. Thomas Randolph, Chamberlain of Scotland)

 

Robert I Bruce, of Scotland

 

Robert I, epic hero, was commonly known as “Robert the Bruce, ” King of Scotland.

 

Robert I was born 11 July 1274 in Turnbury (Turnberry), Essex. In ca. 1295 he married Isobel

of Mar (aka Matilda; ca. 1278-ca. 1320). They had one child prior to her death, after which

he married Elizabeth de Burgh (1280/1-26 Oct 1327). He also had children from (an)

unknown concubine(s).

 

Child by Isobel

 

1. Marjory de Bruce

 

Child by Elizabeth

 

2. Matilda or Maud (ca. 1310-20 July 1353; m. Thomas Isaac b. ca. 1300) had daughter:

 

a. Joanna (b. ca. 1377; m. John de Ergardia b. ca. 1317) who had daughter:

 

1. Isobel (ca. 1362-21 Dec 1439; m. Sir John Stewart)

 

Child by Elizabeth or concubine

 

3. David II (boy King of Scotland; b. ca. 1325; m. as infant to Princess Joan, young

sister of King Edward II of England)

 

Children by unknown concubine

 

4. Elizabeth (m. by 1329 Sir Walter Oliphant [d. after 20 Oct 1378])

 

5. Robert (d. 12 Aug 1332)

 

Robert the Bruce died (rumored from leprosy) in Cardross Castle, Firth of Clyde, Scot-

land, on 7 June 1329. He is buried at Dunfermline Abbey, Fife, Scotland.

 

Marjory de Bruce

 

Marjory de Bruce, Princess of Scotland, was born ca. 1297. She married 1314/15 Walter

Stewart, 6th High Steward of Scotland. Princess Marjory died 2 March 1315/6. She is buried

at Paisley Abbey, Renfrewshire, Scotland. They had one child:

 

1. Robert II Stewart of Scotland, later King of Scotland

 

 

3. Genealogies of the First Wave of Jewish Families, 1100-1350 C.E.

 

The bronze bust of Robert the Bruce’s skull on display at Dumfermline Abbey. The bones around

the right side of the mouth are deformed, likely as a result of leprosy. Photograph by Elizabeth Cald-

well Hirschman.

 

We visited several of the sites in Scotland associated with Robert I. At Bannockburn,

the Scottish Cultural Center shows a reconstructed model of Bruce’s head. Apparently

Bruce did suffer from leprosy and the disease had disfigured his mouth and nose. Bruce

lies buried at Dunfermline Abbey. Reportedly his skeleton, uncovered in 1819, shows a

split sternum, where his heart was removed at death to be transported to Jerusalem by a

Douglas. Unfortunately, Douglas was slain by the Moors in Spain on his way to Jerusalem;

Bruce’s heart was recovered from the battle and is interred either at Dunfermline Cathe-

dral or at Rosslin Chapel. 3

 

As will be discussed in chapter 5, Bruce was very likely a Templar, through his

marriage to a St. Clair. Freemason symbols are present on some stones at Dunfermline

Abbey churchyard. The Templars were largely transmuted into the Freemason order after

1306.

 

The Royal Bruce coat of arms depicts a central lion rampant (lion of Judah), a widely

recognized symbol of the Judaic royal line of David. The arms of Robert I’s brother,

Edward, not only shows a lion rampant, but also places an Islamic crescent over the lion’s

heart, suggesting perhaps Muslim or Arab ancestry in addition to Jewish. Notably, the

arms of the de Mowbray, Plantagenet, Bohun and Beaumont families also prominently

carry the Lion of Judah symbol. All these families originated in France and (we propose)

believed themselves to be of Davidic descent. Notably, arms of the Beaton/Bethune fam-

ily discussed in chapter 1 also bear the Islamic crescent.

 

The Scottish Saltire flag hangs in Dumfermline Abbey; we propose that the symbol is derived from

the Cabalistic Tau/Tough image. Photograph by Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

 

3. Genealogies of the First Wave of Jewish Families, 1100-1350 C.E.

 

Dunfermline Abbey Churchyard photographs show a Tau/Tough symbol marking a Freemason or

Templar grave and a skull and crossbones marking a Templar or Freemason grave. Photographs by

Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

Campbell

 

The Campbell surname seems to have originated in the mid-to late 1300s (Smout

1969). We believe that the first members of this family arrived in Scotland as a result of

anti-Jewish pogroms in France and Spain in the middle of the fourteenth century (Ben-

bassa 1999). Below we have excerpted material taken from the Clan Campbell Web site

at http: //www.tartans.com/clans/Campbell/Campbell.html to demonstrate how a process

of “Gaelicization” naturalized this family, which originated outside Scotland (Smout

1969), disguised its French and Semitic roots. As noted in chapter 2, some Scottish Camp-

bell families in Latin America considered themselves to have “always been Jewish.”

 

The surname Campbell, most probably derived from the Gaelic cambeul (twisted mouth), is

one of the oldest in the Highlands, and a crown charter of 1368 acknowledges Duncan Mac-

Duihbne as founder of the Campbells who were established as Lords of Loch Awe. The

founder of the Argyll line was Cailean Mor (d. 1294), whose descendent, Colin Campbell (d.

1493), 1st Earl of Argyll, married Isabel Stewart of Lome....

 

Sir John Campbell (1635-1716), 11th Laird of Glenorchy, was created Earl of Breadalbane

in 1681. Described as being “cunning as a fox, wise as a serpent, and supple as an eel... [he]

knew neither honor nor religion, but where they are mixed with interest....” His line was

founded by the colourful crusader “black” Colin Campbell (d. 1498), who received

Glenorchy in 1432 from his father, Sir Duncan Campbell. The Campbells of Loudoun are

descended from Sir Duncan Campbell, second son of the first MacCailean Mor, who married

a Crauford of Loudoun.

 

The Campbell septs include several with an apparent Hebrew connection ( itali-

cized ) 4:

 

Septs: Arthur, Bannatyne, Burnes, Burness, Burnett, Burns, Connochie, Conochie, Denoon,

Denune, Gibbon, Gibson, Harres, Harris, Hawes, Haws, Hawson, Isaac, Isaacs, Iverson,

 

Keilar, Keller, Kissack, Kissock, Lome, MacArtair, MacArthur, MacColm, MacColmbe, Mac-

Conachie, MacConchie, MacEller, MacElvie, MacGibbon, MacEver, MacGlasrich, MacGub-

bin, MacGure, Maclsaac, Maclver, Maclvor, MacKellar, MacKelvie, MacKerlie, MacKerlich,

MacKessack, MacKessock, MacKissoch, MacLaws, MacLehose, MacNochol, MacNocaird,

MacOran, MacOwen, MacPhedran, MacPhun, MacTause, MacTavish, MacThomas, MacUre,

Moore, Muir, Ochiltree, Orr, Pinkerton, Taweson, Tawesson, Thomas, Thomason, Thompson,

Thomson, Ure.

 

The Gaelic word duibne means “black” or “dark.” Such a designation probably

referred to a dark skin or complexion, as early portraits of the Campbells show them to

have olive or tawny skin and dark hair and eyes. Material gathered from Melungeon

genealogies illustrates that several Campbell lines in the American colonies had Hebrew

naming patterns, for example, using Israel, Orra, and Tabitha as given names.

 

An ancestor of the Marquise of Argyll Archibald Campbell (chapter 1) was closely

allied to the Royal Stewart house, even marrying a Stewart. Yet in the late 1500s he dra-

matically broke with the Stewarts, who had become ardent Catholics (despite believing

themselves Jewish by descent), and supported the Protestant Reformation. The Protes-

tants’ principal spokesman in Scotland, John Knox (chapter 10), came to Castle Camp-

bell and preached to the Campbells and other supporters. The Campbellite denomination

mentioned in chapter 2 seems to have been the fruit of the Campbells’ abhorrence of

Catholicism and partial embrace of Knox’s Presbyterianism. We believe their early and

strong support for Knox was founded on a Crypto-Judaic orientation, which found

Protestantism more congenial than Catholicism.

 

The Campbell coat of arms does not bear a lion rampant. Thus they do not see them-

selves as having Davidic ancestry. It does carry an oared sailing ship with furled sails, not

a Viking or Celtic type of vessel, but a Mediterranean-style merchantman. The iconog-

raphy suggests they arrived in Scotland from the Mediterranean and chose to settle there.

 

 

Forbes

 

The surnames Forbush, Fawbush and Fawbus all appear to be alternate spellings of

Forbes. 5 We believe that the family name originally was derived from the Moroccan

Sephardic surname Farrabas, which is related to Phoebus. Several colonial members of

the Forbes family living in Charleston, S.C., and Savannah, Ga., were openly Jewish,

belonging to the Spanish-Portuguese synagogues there and being buried in Sephardic

cemeteries (M. Stern 1991). Given below is an informative GenForum posting from a

Forbes/Forbush/Farrabas descendent.

 

Daniel Forbes/Forbush

By Michael Forbush

 

(From “Forbes and Forbush Genealogy: The Descendents

of Daniel Forbush” by Frederick Clifton Pierce)

 

The first record of Daniel Forbes, or Forbush, or Farrabas, that I can find in this country is in

Cambridge, Mass. He married, March 26, 1660, Rebecca Perriman, who is supposed to be

the sister of Thomas Perriman, Weymouth, 1652.... Their son, Isaac b. 1656, m. Jane Rutter

and resided in Marlborough.... February 27, 1664 and March 27, 1665 Daniel Farrabas was

granted by the town of Cambridge these several lots....

 

Daniel’s wife, Rebecca, died May 3, 1677 and he married second May 23, 1679 Deborah

Rediat 6 of Concord, who was the daughter of John Rediat of Sudbury, who was a freeman in

1645. By his wife Ann... he had John b. April 19, 1644; Samuel b. October 22, 1653; Eliza b. 12

Aug. 1657; Deborah, b. 1652; Mehitable, who m. Nathaniel Oaks and d.s.p. Nov. 25, 1702.

 

John Rediat was probably born in England in 1612 and came to America in the good ship

“Confidence” of London, of which John Jobson was master; Daniel Farrabas was a resident

of Cambridge, Concord, and Marlborough, Mass. He had the following children with

Rebecca (Perriman):

 

i. Daniel, born Cambridge, March 20, 1664; married Dorothy Pray

 

ii. Thomas, born Cambridge, March 6, 1667; married Dorcas Rice

 

iii. Elizabeth, born Cambridge, March 16, 1669

 

iv. Rebecca, born Concord, Feb. 15, 1672; married Joseph Byles

 

v. Samuel, born about 1674; married Abigail Rice

 

Daniel had the following children with Deborah (Rediat):

 

vi. Jon born 1681; married Martha Bowker

 

vii. Isaac born Oct. 30, 1682;

 

viii. Jonathan born March 12, 1684; married Hanna Farrar Holloway

 

Note in the description above the intertwining of several Mediterranean-Sephardic

surnames: Rediat, Jobson, Perriman, Rice (Reiss), Farrar; as well as a preponderance of

 

Hebrew and Mediterranean given names, e.g., Hannah, Jonathan, Dorcas, Daniel, and

Deborah.

 

Septs allied with Clan Forbes are listed below. Notice the several permutations of

the surname and also its linkage with the Berry (Sephardic), Walters and Watts names.

 

Bannerman

 

Fordice

 

Meldrum

 

Berrie/Berry

 

Fordyce

 

Michie

 

Boyce

 

Furbush

 

Middleton

 

Boyes

 

Lumsden

 

Walter

 

Faubus

 

Macouat

 

Walters

 

Fobes

 

Macowatt

 

Watson

 

Forbess

 

MacQuattie

 

Watt

 

Forbis

 

Mac Watt

 

Watters

 

Forbus

 

Mechie

 

Wattie 7

 

Forbush

 

Mekie

 

Watts

 

 

Fraser

 

The Frasers of Scotland acknowledge their medieval ancestral origins in France, the

Lady Saltoun recently clarifying that the name “probably came from Anjou” (Fraser 1997,

p. 1). Their associated septs, as listed below, include several Sephardic Jewish surnames.

Among these are Bissett, Frizell, Frew, Olivier, Sim, Simon, Simpson and variations

thereof.

 

 

Bissett

 

Mackim

 

Simon

 

Brewster

 

Mackimmie

 

Simpson

 

Cowie

 

Macsimon

 

Sims

 

Frizell

 

Mactavish

 

Syme

 

Frew

 

Oliver

 

Twaddle

 

Macgruer

 

Sim

 

Tweedie

 

The Clan Fraser Web site (http: //www.fraserchief.co.uk ) states:

 

It is generally believed that the name Fraser traces its origins to the French provinces of

Anjou and Normandy. The French word for strawberry is /raise and growers are called

fraisiers. The Fraser arms are silver strawberry flowers on a field of blue. The Frasers first

appear in Scotland around 1160 when Simon Fraser made a gift of a church at Keith in East

Lothian to the monks at Kelso Abbey. The Frasers moved into Tweeddale in the 12th and

13th centuries and from there into the counties of Stirling, Angus, Inverness and Aberdeen.

About five generations later, Sir Simon Fraser was captured fighting for Robert the Bruce and

executed with great cruelty by Edward I in 1306....

 

Frasers of Philorth [ Lord Saltoun], The senior line is descended from Sir Alexander Fraser,

 

 

3. Genealogies of the First Wave of Jewish Families, 1100-1350 c.E.

 

 

who married Robert the Bruce’s widowed sister, Lady Mary. His grandson, Sir Alexander

Fraser of Cowie, acquired the castle and lands of Philorth by marriage with Lady Joanna,

younger daughter and co-heiress of the Earl of Ross in 1375. Eight generations later, Sir

Alexander Fraser, 8th laird of Philorth, founded Fraser’s Burgh by royal charters obtained in

1592 and also built Fraserburgh Castle. His son, the 9th laird, married the heiress of the

Abernethies, becoming Lord Saltoun, 8 and in 1669 their son, Alexander Fraser, became the

10th Lord Saltoun. The present Chief of the Name of Fraser is Flora Marjory Fraser, 20th

Lady Saltoun, who is an active member of the House of Lords. The family seat is Fraser-

burgh, Aberdeenshire.

 

Frasers ofLovat [Lords Lovat]. The Frasers of Lovat 9 descend from Sir Simon Fraser who

married Lady Margaret Sinclair. Documents dated 12th September 1367, connect a Fraser

with the lands ofLovat and the Aird.... Beauly was founded in about 1320 by John Bisset,

who also built Lovat Castle. About 1460 Hugh Fraser, 6th Laird of Lovat, became the 1st

Lord Lovat.

 

The seal of William Fraser, bishop of St. Andrews (1279), shows a man in a central

Tau position flanked by an Islamic crescent and six-pointed star. The line of bishops of

St. Andrews included some persons we believe are likely of Judaic descent, including,

besides Fraser, William Malvoesin (1202-1230), David de Bernham (1239-1253), Abel de

Golin (1254), Gamelin (1255-1253), James Ben (1328-1332), and William Scheves

(1478-1497). The St. Andrews cemetery has several graves with Freemason symbolism.

Additionally, on display at the cathedral museum are several very early sarcophagi marked

with Templar images. Perhaps most remarkable of the artifacts at St. Andrews, however,

is a large carved stone sarcophagus dating from the late 700s depicting the Jewish king

David battling lions. We will argue in chapter 5 that it was during this time period that

a Jewish holy man, Machir of Narbonne (France), either in person or through represen-

tatives, visited Scotland and proselytized its inhabitants for the Jewish faith.

 

 

Leslie

 

The Leslies are one of the very few Scottish landed families to acknowledge an ances-

try other than Celtic or French. According to both clan history records and our DNA

results, their ancestor was a man named Bartholomew Ladslau from Hungary who ven-

tured to Scotland with Queen Margaret’s entourage (Klieforth 1993). Bartholomew later

became chamberlain to Queen Margaret (Smout 1969). The role of chamberlain or stew-

ard was one performed often by Sephardic Jews in England, France, Portugal and Spain,

as they were well educated, multi-lingual and traveled internationally (Benbassa 1999;

Benbassa and Rodrique 1995; Stern 1950). Historically, the origins of “chamberlain, ” like

many courtly titles of European royalty, lie in Persian, or “Oriental, ” ideas of high rank

and luxurious palace life, notably continued by the caliphs and other rulers of Islam. The

Leslies became the Earls of Leven and Rothes, both of which are Jewish/Hebrew appel-

lations.

 

As is the case with our other families, Scottish-originating Leslies exhibited Judaic

naming practices in the American colonies, and members of the Scottish-based family

group openly practiced Judaism in Charleston, S.C. and Savannah, Ga., where males were

also leading figures in the Freemasons’ temples (Stern 1991). Charleston was the port of

 

 

Above and opposite: Tombs with Templar symbols in St. Andrews churchyard cemetery. Photographs

by Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

Top: Grave marker with Cabalist symbols, St. Andrews churchyard. Bottom: Freemason tomb, St.

Andrews churchyard. Both photographs by Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

 

Top: Judaic “Book of Life” motif gravemarker, St. Andrews cemetery. Bottom: David sarcophagus

at St. Andrews Cathedral Museum, ca. 900 c.e. Note the presence of leopards, gazelles and lions —

all symbols of Israel. Both photographs by Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

Templar sarcophagus, St. Andrews Cathedral Museum. Photograph by Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman.

 

 

3. Genealogies of the First Wave of Jewish Families, 1100-1350 c.e.

 

entry for what was called Scottish Rite Masonry, and Savannah’s chapter was established

as Solomon’s Lodge #1 (Roberts 1985).

 

Panton, Leslie and Company in Pensacola, Fla. , was at one time the largest trading

firm in the Western Hemisphere. It was founded by Sephardic Scotsmen who had all been

active as traders in Charleston and Savannah and whose families were multiply entwined,

both by marriage and by business ties. Through contacts with Basil Cowper and John

Gordon of Charleston, William Panton, John Forbes and several junior Leslie partners

took over the Scots-run Spalding and Kelsall establishment based at Frederica on St.

Simon’s Island, Georgia (Braund 1993, p. 56). There was also a shifting alliance with the

various subsidiaries and affiliates of Clark and company, centered in Augusta, Georgia.

The new partners developed Pensacola in Spanish West Florida as their entrepot. From

here, Panton, Leslie and Co. traded with the world. It had energetic “factors” in every


Поделиться:



Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2019-05-04; Просмотров: 284; Нарушение авторского права страницы


lektsia.com 2007 - 2024 год. Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав! (3.294 с.)
Главная | Случайная страница | Обратная связь