Connection between Kilmodan Mcleas and Craignish Livingstons

[janetparkes]

Last month I was having a discussion about the Kilmodan Mcleas in our DNA Forum, but thought I would post my further finds here.

To recap, there were 3 Mcleas, in the second half of the 18th century, living in and around Kilmodan (by Glendaruel), which is a little inland from Otter Ferry, Kilfinan and Linsaig, who have been puzzling us.

The first was DUNCAN MCLEA (dates approx 1755-1830), who as Duncan Livingston married Sarah Lietch at Kilmodan 17 Jan 1776. He was a tailor in Camquhart (by Kilmodan) and was twice press-ganged for the army but made his escape. He had 6 and possibly as many as 8 children in 20 years. These were, to give them their birth names: Donald Livingston, George Livingston, Archibald Livingston, John Mclea, Charles Livingston, Anne Mclea, and possibly also a Mary and a Catherine. All were baptised at Kilmodan in that order, sometimes called Livingston, sometimes called Mclea, though the grandchildren were all called Livingston. Also in Kilmodan at the same time was MALCOLM MCLEA who was married to Hannah de Groot, the first four of whose children were christened Mclea, all in Kilmodan, (John, Nameless, Donald and Duncan) and the fifth - my discovery this last week - who was baptised in Greenock in 1784, was Malcolm Livingston. From that birth I was able to establish that Malcolm senior was a sailor, though while in Kilmodan he may have been a farmer since he was described as "of Maybeg". That he was a sailor may well explain how he met his (likely) Dutch wife and may be why I can't find their marriage.

Finding that Malcolm like Duncan switched between the names Mclea and Livingston, I went after the third Mclea, trawling through the Livingstons and Livistons. This man was HUGH MCLEA, whose wife is given as NicClartish with no Christian name, or NClartish or NClartich or McLartich, or finally, as I found, Katherine McLarty. I initially had for this couple a son called Alexander Mclea, baptised in Kilmodan in 1771. At that time Hugh was of a place that looks like Eolzalachan, which may be a version of Strathlachan, close by Kilmodan.

I should say that we have been puzzled that in the heart of Linsaig territory here were Mcleas living who alternated their name with Livingston, something it is thought the Mcleas of Linsaig did not do. However, I think I have the explanation, which was the one Donald guessed must be the case: These were in fact Bachuil Mcleas off territory.

I found that Hugh Mclea and Katherine Mclarty married in 27 April 1765 at Craignish when he was Hugh Liviston. They had their eldest son in Craignish in 1766: Nameless Livison, when Hugh was "of Barbrech", the next one was Alexander Mclea in Kilmodan, though there may have been others in between, followed by Betty Liviston also in Kilmodan, and then in 1775 and 1778 two John Livingstons in Greenock. At this time, Hugh Mclea/Livingston was a gardener, which, it is my understanding, is what small-holding farmers called themselves at that time, particularly if they did not keep cattle, but kept to vegetables and crops. (although at that time there would have been employed gardeners and they too obviously called themselves gardeners!)

It is looking now as though these 3 Kilmodan Mcleas, who had close contacts with Greenock (Duncan was delivering herring to Greenock when he was pressganged the second time) may have originated as Livingstons in the Craignish area, which allies them to the Lismore Mcleas rather than the Linsaig ones, though it is yet to be discovered what they were doing in Kilmodan or whether they were brothers or close cousins or in fact unrelated.

I have now moved on to try and unravel the Mcleas of Greenock, of whom there were quite a few early ones, Mclae and Mclea alternating as Lae and Lea. Donald Mclae, who married Jonet Love in 1703, was miller of Greenock.

I see there has been, coincidentally, correspondence about Craignish Livingstons this last week, so look forward to hearing people's thoughts.

Regards,
Janet

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Janet,

Welcome to the Maclea Livingstone Forum. Yes I think we are both right on this one. There is no reason why some highland Livingstons the odd time wouldnt use both names though we have not seen too much of that in the records. To be honest I was quite suprised when going through the Western Argyllshire records just how the name Maconlea/Maclea essentially disappeared in usesage by the highland Mcleas that lived in Western Mcleas beginning presumingly in the 1750's with the Baron McOnlea of Bachuil on the the Island of Lismore and the neighbouring parishes in Western Argyll.

regards,

Donald

[Bachuil]

In the McLea manuscript the following passage makes it clear that the McLeas of Lindsaig descend from the McLeas of Achnacree, opposite Lismore.

“There were also the McLeas of Achnacree of whom the family of Lindsaig is descended, who were possest of the Lands of Achnacree for a long time” Footnote According to tradition the McLeas certainly at one time possessed Achnacree in the Benderloch, and tradition is confirmed by the appearance on record of John M'Dunslaif of Achnacre in 1557 (O.P.S. , vol. ii. P.155). … Two other versions of how they were disponed are given by Lord Archibald Campbell in Records of Argyll, pp. 114-17

According to the article in The Celtic Review Volume VI July 1909 pp340-348 on Donald Livingstone

“Donald Livingstone, Bun-a-mhuilinn, Morvern, was of the Livingstones of Achnacree, Benderloch. These Livingstones of Achnacree had been the keepers of the Royal Forest of Dail-an-eas (Dalness) till this was wrested from them by the Macdonalds of Glencoe. The Livingstones of Achnacree were of the same line as the Livingstones of Bachuill, Lismore, keepers of the Staff of Saint Moluag.

So all are clearly of the same clan - and the surname was frequently interchanged at that time.

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi Janet,

Thank-you for sharing your research on the Mclea/Livingston family of Craignish. I find it interesting when we find records of a individual family that is using both names in the 18th or 19th century records. It is rare however so when we do locate a family using both and it is definitely worth investigating. Thank-you for that.

regards,

Donald