The family ways of the backcountry, like its speech and building
ways, were also brought from the borderlands of North Britain and
adapted to a new American environment with comparatively little
change. "The conquest of the back parts," writes Carl Bridenbaugh,
"was achieved by families.... The fundamental social unit, the
family, was preserved intact . . . in a transplanting and
reshuffling of European folkways."55
From the perspective of an individual within this culture, the
structure of the family tended to be a set of concentric rings, in
which the outermost circles were thicker and stronger than among
other English-speaking people. Beyond the nuclear core, beyond even
the extended circle, there were two rings which were unique to this
culture. One was called the derbfine. It encompassed all kin within
the span of four generations. For many centuries, the laws of North
Britain and Ireland had recognized the derbfine as a unit which
defined the descent of property and power. It not only connected
one nuclear family to another, but also joined one generation to
the next.
Beyond the derbfine lay a larger ring of kinship which was, called
the clan in North Britain. We think of clans today mainly in
connection with the Scottish Highlands. But they also existed in
the lowlands, northern Ireland and England's border counties where
they were a highly effective adaptation to a world of violence and
chronic insecurity.
The clans of the border were not precisely the same as those of the
Scottish Highlands, and very different from the Victorian
contrivances of our own time. They had no formal councils, tartans,
sporrans, bonnets or septs. But they were clannish in the most
fundamental sense: a group of related families who lived near to
one another, were conscious of a common identity, carried the same
surname, claimed descent from common ancestors and banded together
when danger threatened.
Some of these border clans were very formidable. The Armstrongs,
one of the largest clans on the Cumbrian border in the sixteenth
century, were reputed to be able to field 3,000 mounted men, and
were much feared by their neighbors. The Grahams held thirteen
towers on the western border in 1552, and bid defiance to their
foes. The Rutherfords and Halls were so violent that royal
officials in 1598 ordered no quarter to be given to anyone of those
names. The Johnston-Johnson clan adorned their houses with the
flayed skins of their enemies the Maxwells in a blood feud that
continued for many generations.56
The migration from North Britain to the backcountry tended to
become a movement of clans. A case in point was the family of
Robert Witherspoon, a South Carolinian of Border-Scots descent.
Witherspoon recalled:
My grandfather and grandmother were born in Scotland about the
[year] 1670. They were cousins and both of one name. His name was
John and hers was Janet. They lived in their younger years in or
near Glasgow and in 1695 they left Scotland and settled in Ireland
in the county of Down . . . where he lived in good circumstances
and in good credit until the year 1734, [when] he removed with his
family to South Carolina.
When Witherspoon used the word "family" he meant not merely a
nuclear or extended family but a clan. His grandparents, their
seven children, at least seventeen grandchildren and many uncles
and cousins all sailed from Belfast Lough to America and settled
together in the same part of the southern backcountry. Witherspoon
described their exodus in detail:
We did not all come in one ship nor at one time. My uncles William
James and David Wilson, and their families with Uncle Gavin left
Belfast in the beginning of the year 1732 and Uncle Robert
followed us in 36.57
Here was a classic example of serial migration or stream migration
which was common in the peopling of the backcountry. A few clan
members opened a path for others, and were followed by a steady
stream of kin.
These North British border clans tended to settle together in the
American backcountry. An example was the Alexander clan. In North
Carolina's Catawba County, the first United States Census of 1790
listed 300 nuclear families named Alexander. Most were blood
relations. Similar concentrations appeared throughout the
backcountry the Polks of Mecklenberg, the Calhouns of Long Cane,
the Grahams of Yadkin, and the Crawfords of upper Georgia, to name
but four examples.
These concentrations of kinsmen, all bearing the same surname,
created endless onomastic confusion. We are told that in Catawba
County, "so numerous were the tribe of the Alexanders that they had
to be designated by their office, their trade or their middle
name." The most eminent Alexander was called "Governor Nat" to
distinguish him from "Red Head Nat" and "Fuller Nat." This became
a common custom throughout the southern highlands.58
The clan system spread rapidly throughout the southern highlands,
and gradually came to include English and German settlers as well
as North Britons, because it worked so well in the new environment.
When George Gilmer compiled his classic history of upper Georgia,
he organized his book by clans, beginning with the Gilmers and
moving to others in order of their kinship with the author. He
specifically described these groups as clans, and wrote that their
members "called each other cousin, and the old people uncle and
aunt. They lived in the most intimate social way meeting together
very often."59
The internal structure of the clan was not what some modern
observers have imagined. Historian Ned Landsman writes, ". . .
among the distinctive features of clan organization was the
emphasis on collateral rather than lineal descent. In the theory of
clan relationships, all branches of the family younger as well as
older, female as well as male were deemed to be of equal
importance. This fit in well with the mobility of the countryside,
which prevented the formation of 'lineal families' in which sons
succeeded to their fathers' lands."60
Admission by marriage was a process of high complexity. "When a
Scottish man or woman took a spouse who was not of Scottish
descent," Landsman writes, "the whole family could be absorbed into
the 'Scottish' community."61 But when the bride had belonged to
a
rival clan, then the question of loyalty became more difficult.
Generally a new bride left her own kin, and joined those of her
husband. Elaborate customs regulated the relationship between the
wife and the family she had joined by marriage. These customs were
highly complex, but by and large they established the principle
that marriage ties were weaker than blood ties. One marriage
contract in Westmorland explicitly stated that a newly married wife
could never sit in her mother-in- law's seat.62
In many cases the husband and wife both came from the same clan. In
the Cumbrian parish of Hawkshead, for example, both the bride and
groom bore the same last names in 25 percent of all marriages from
1568 to 1704. Marriages in the backcountry like those on the
borders, also occurred very frequently between kin.63
Within these family networks, nuclear households were highly
cohesive, drawing strength from the support of other kin groups
round about them. Landsman writes: "The patterned dispersal of the
Scots, rather than isolating individual settlers from their homes
and families, served instead to bind together the scattered
settlements through a system of interlocking family networks.
Rather than a deterrent, mobility was an essential component of
community life." The effect was reinforced by exchanges of land,
by rotations of children, and by chain migrations.64 The clan was
not an alternative to the nuclear family, but its nursery and
strong support. The pattern of cohesion was different from the
nuclear families of Puritans and Quakers which had exceptionally
strong internal bonds, powerfully reinforced by ethical and
religious teachings. Among the North Britons the clan system
provided an external source of cohesion supporting each nuclear
family from the outside like a system of external buttresses.
Backcountry Family
Ways:Border Ideas of Clan and Kin
High Fertility Rates