Of the lairds of Macfarlane there have been no fewer than twenty-three. The last of them went to North America in the early part of the 18th century. A branch of the family settled in Ireland in the reign of James VII., and the headship of the clan is claimed by its representative, Macfarlane of Hunstown House, in the county of Dublin. The descendants of the ancient chiefs cannot now be traced, and the lands once possessed by them have passed into other hands.
Under the head of Garmoran, Mr Skene, following the genealogists, includes two western clans, viz., those of Campbell and Macleod. We shall, however, depart from Mr Skene’s order, and notice these two important clans here, while treating of the clans of the western coasts and isles. Mr Skene,[173] on very shadowy grounds, endeavours to make out that there must have been an ancient earldom of Garmoran, situated between north and south Argyle, and including, besides the districts of Knoydart, Morar, Arisaig, and Moydart (forming a late lordship of Garmoran), the districts of Glenelg, Ardnamurchan, and Morvern. He allows, however, that “at no period embraced by the records do we discover Garmoran as an efficient earldom.” As to this, Mr E. W. Robertson[174] remarks that “the same objection may be raised against the earldom of Garmoran which is urged against the earldom of the Merns, the total silence of history respecting it.”
ARGYLL CAMPBELL.
Badge—Myrtle.
The name Campbell is undoubtedly one of considerable antiquity, and the clan has for long been one of the most numerous and powerful in the Highlands, although many families have adopted the name who have no connection with the Campbells proper by blood or descent. The Argyll family became latterly so powerful, that many smaller clans were absorbed in it voluntarily or compulsorily, and assumed in course of time its peculiar designation. The origin of the name, as well as of the founder of the family, remains still a matter of the greatest doubt. The attempt to deduce the family from the half-mythical King Arthur, of course, is mere trifling.
The name is by some stated to have been derived from a Norman knight, named de Campo Bello, who came to England with William the Conqueror. As respects the latter part of the statement, it is to be observed that in the list of all the knights who composed the army of the Conqueror on the occasion of his invasion of England, and which is known by the name of the Roll of Battle-Abbey, the name of Campo Bello is not to be found. But it does not follow, as recent writers have assumed, that a knight of that name may not have come over to England at a later period, either of his reign or that of his successors.
