I was just reading the Clan Boyd sept list. It states that Boyd is a sept of Clan Stewart, but names that are listed as septs of Boyd are not members of Clan Stewart.
Walter Stewart 6th High Steward of Scotland Married Marjorie Bruce, Their son Robert II, Married Elizabeth Muir Daughter of Sir Adam Muir of Rowallen.... Some Muirs went with Her as retainers. others went to receive protection when The last Clann Chief Died with out a designated or acknowledged Heir and the Clann Fragmented......some went to other Clanns Who were "related' and such.........NOW WE ARE BACK.
The simple answer to your question is that the only way to know for certain if a person with the surname of Muir, Moore, More, etc., is a part of Clan Stewart is by direct genealogical descent. If your family tree or other historical records connect you to people named Stewart who are known to be part of Clan Stewart, then you would also have a link to the Stewarts.
The Stewarts owned property widely throughout Scotland. Muir and other variations of the surname were concentrated in the Ayrshire-Dumbartonshire-Lanarkshire region, but over time, like many other Scottish surnames, became dispersed throughout the country. Thus, the only way to determine the connection between one Muir and the Stewarts is by genealogical record.
While it is true that the Muirs helped create the bloodline of the Stewart kings through the marriage of Elizabeth Mure to Robert II, their offspring were Stewarts. We can be proud that our bloodline is present in the royal genealogy down to the present day. If you are interested in Elizabeth Mure's children and grandchildren, the first Stewart royalty, I recommend the following book: Scottish Kings, Gordon Donaldson, Barnes & Noble, 1967.
Were not a sept of any other clan, wikipedia is not accurate We have a head of house, and therfore are recognized as our own Clan, Read the Clan laws. As for the the stewart, and boyd Question I have no idea but someone else may have the answer.
While the Muirs, in a general sense, are not a sept of any other clan at the present time, there is ample historical/genealogical record of times in the past when branches of the Muir family were definitely septs of other clans. Most frequently this happened through marriage, and there was little shame or sense of loss in this. Families frequently intermarried to create alliances or greater wealth. This is the ancient Celtic way, going back to pre-Roman times.
In the present day we have situations like that raised by Cindy Moore, who may have discovered family tradition that links her family to the Stewarts or the Boyds. If her genealogical research establishes that her family was intermarried with the Stewarts at the time when there was no Muir chief, then her family at that time may be said to have a sept relationship with the Stewarts. Because her Muir blood would then be intermingled with Stewart blood she would have the right to choose her alliance with clan or tartan.
It is not uncommon for many of us with Scottish ancestry to have several different Scottish family "threads" woven into the fabric of our heritage. One usually goes with the house/clan/family of paternal descent in choosing clan alliance and tartan. To play devil's advocate, with the ancient culture of the Celts being matrilineal, maybe we should be following the mother's line?
I am very proud of my Muir ancestors, and I wear the ancient Muir tartan. But it does not diminish one whit my pride in the Wilsons, Russells, Weirs, Brices, and Huffmans who also make up my Scottish heritage.
So here's tae us, in our Scottish mutt glory - there's still damned few like us!
The Boyds who lived close-by Rowallan were recipients of considerable estates from Robert I when the lands of the Balliols were distributed. They were slightly up the pecking order from the Mores and by the late 1300s had expanded their estates and standing such that they were in the first rank of baronies (Rowallan was in the second rank of baronies). When James 2 was readying to challenge the Black Douglases, he went to Ayrshire and conferred lordships on certain barons in exchange for military assistance and fealty. One of these was the Boyds. The Boyd was now Lord of (estate name). I have not specifically researched this, but when they received lands from Robert 1, they would have become vassals of the crown, directly. The new-born (1316) Robert Stewart, who was made successor to the crown of Scots, was provided with the lands of Cunninghame, amongst others, and this will have included the lands held by Boyds. This would have made Boyds vassals of the Stewart, who later became Earl of Strathearn and later King of Scots.
This is my guess at how the Stewarts had a "superior" role to the Boyds, and how the Boyds would in modern times be considered a sept of Stewarts. (None of this considers the issue in intermarriage between Boyds and Stewarts). Nevertheless, Boyds, after the 1450s did have an independent clan position or perhaps status. But be careful, because although families recognised their chief, as far as I know they were not known as clans. I think this came later about the 1500s or 1600s, but that is another discussion.
I suggest that you lead a discussion to consider the idea of families, head of house, of that ilk, chief of (Mores), and so on, and when or how the concept of the term 'clan' arose and came into use. You could also lead a discussion on cadency in heraldry in Scotland.
Regards Dave Moir
I have made available a few books in pdf format of the Scottish Canadian regiments which are available towards the foot of our Scottish Regiments page.
Chapter VII. - Ford the Bow River—Blackfoot method of catching eagles—"Dry Rat" shoots ducks on the Sabbath— Reach Fort Kipp—Country without government— Cross the 49th Parallel.