Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

(Disclaimer:  Many of the following responses include the speculations of Bruce E. Walkup based on historical fact.  As such, these responses are subject to frequent revision as the author uncovers the ancient records, which sometimes contradict his previous notions.  In other words, if it is discovered that the Baa family of Normandy definitely could not have been the progenitors of the Wauchopes of Scotland, much of the following would have to be revised.)

Normandy, France

The Normans (North Men) were primarily of Viking origin, descended from Duke Rollo and his Viking pirates.  Rollo was a one time Jarl or Earl of Orkney who had been ejected from northern Norway by the King.  He landed in northern France in 911 AD and claimed a large section (modern Normandy France).  Once established, they quickly adopted French culture and language, and intermarried with the local population.  From the mid tenth century, this new and ambitious race ravaged all of Europe down to the tip of Sicily, quickly, thoroughly and effectively, despite (or because of) having been converted to Christianity.  The powerful land hungry Normans spread themselves thinly but with great determination and ruthlessness.  The usual retinue of the Norman knight consisted of one or two men-at-arms, clad in full armor, and several archers.

Edward III, the Confessor, King of England (1042-1066), brought over a contingent of Norman knights upon his return from exile to Normandy (his mother, Emma, was daughter of Duke Richard, 1st Duke of Normandy).  Some became responsible for reorganizing English defenses along the Welsh borders in about 1055.  Soon after, Malcolm III, Canmore, King of Scotland (1058-1093), invited some of these knights (and other Normans living in France and Hungary) up to live in Scotland to defend against his enemies.  Those enemies being Harold, Earl of East Anglia and Wessex (soon to be King Harold II of England), and his brother, Tostig, Earl of Northumbria.  This was upon Canmore’s return from exile to England.  These knights had befriended him and Prince Edgar Athling (brother of his future wife, Margaret).  Upon their arrival, these knights were granted titles and much land.  This may explain how several of the Scots-Norman families came into being, including the Wauchopes.  Canmore first successfully invaded Northern England in 1061, and in a string of subsequent invasions took much land and many English captives.  This France > England > Scotland scenario is further bolstered by the belief that many families that have Wheat Garbs in their shields (such as the Wauchopes) originated as vassals of the Earl of Chester, who at this time controlled the northern Welsh/English border region.  Another thought is that the Wauchope shield is simply derived from that of their powerful and close associates, the Cummin’s, that being “Azure, three garbs Or.”

One plausible theory is that the Wauchopes originated from the Baa or Baugh family of the village of Bahais just north of the present-day city of St.-Lô, Normandy, France, in the diocese of Coutances.  Most of the Vikings that settled this region arrived from Denmark.  The Baa family may have been a feudal tenant of the very powerful Brus/Bruce family of the nearby Castle of Brix.  The castleward of Brix was only about 30 miles away from Bahais.  The Bruces of Normandy were the progenitors of Scottish King Robert the Bruce.  Adam de Brus was known to hold lands in Scotland about 1062, and was also a companion of William the Conqueror at Hastings in 1066.  Also in support of this possible relationship between the two families, the Castleward of Brix shield consists of three mullets, as does all major lines of the Baugh family found in the United Kingdom.  However, there is also a striking resemblance between one of the Lindsay shields and the Baugh shields, so these similarities may only be a coincidence.  As stated above, English King Edward III, the Confessor, may have invited the family (likely a younger son who was not apt to inherent the family estate in Normandy) to England to help stiffen the Welsh border defenses in about 1055.  In possible collaboration, DNA studies show there is a small concentration of people of the E3b subgroup in Wales yet today.  The Baugh name saw its first appearance in Denbighshire of northern Wales.  (The Baughs of Gloucestershire apparently owe their existence to the Earls of Gloucester, who were also the proprietors of much of the area surrounding Bahais after the conquest.)  Other known spellings include Bach, Bagh, Baha, Baughe, Bawgh, Bawghe, DelaBaugh, De Le Baugh, Dillabaugh, Dillabow, Dillibaugh, and Dillibow (in French, “from the inland bay”).  King Malcolm III, Canmore, may have then invited a branch of the family to Scotland to what would soon be known as Wauchopedale of Dumfriesshire.  There it became Waugh (a common naming alteration) or Waughope by adding “hope” for a territorial style (literally, “Waugh’s Valley” which aligns with one view that the place-name originated from the family’s name).  With this in mind, an early pronunciation of the name would likely have been “Wah-op.”  The name Waugh and Wauchope were known to first appear in Dumfriesshire of the Scottish Borders.  In further potential support, the major branches of both the Baa/Baugh and Waugh/Wauchope families have two mullets in chief in their arms.  Warcop could then be a further corruption of the name as the family spread southward back into England, possibly during the reign of Scottish King David I, circa 1124.  In support of this, a little northward of Kirkby Stephen is the town of Warcop and Warcop Fell (Fell, as in a barren or rocky hill).  A little southward of the ruins of the Warcop’s purported Lammerside Castle are West Baugh Fell, Baugh Fell, and East Baugh Fell.

It is well known that the Bruce family was early on seated in Annandale.  The Wauchopes likely had at times held land in the area as well.  Evidence advocates that a large branch of the Wauchopes sided with the Comyns against the Bruces during the unrest of the War of Succession and Independence (1290-1328).  Recall that the Lindsays, who supported the Bruces, came into possession of the majority of Wauchopedale of Dumfriesshire in 1285.  It is not certain who held the land prior to that, perhaps the Wauchopes.  Also recall that a branch of the Wauchopes, who also held lands somewhere in southern Scotland (possibly these very lands), were said to have been driven from Leys in Aberdeenshire at about this same time.  Much of this land ended up in the hands of the Burnetts, supporters of the Bruces.  Thus, years later when the Wauchope family’s history was recorded, this onetime close relationship between the Wauchope and Bruce families possibly dating back to Normandy may have been forgotten.  This may also be the same period during which many of the ancient Wauchope charters were lost or destroyed.  It should be noted that it was not at all uncommon for different branches of the same family to support opposing sides in a conflict.  In this manner, the family would be covered no matter which side ultimately prevailed.  At this time the Wauchopes of Niddrie-Merschell were under the Keiths and the Wauchopes of Roxburghshire were under the Douglases, both of which supported the Bruces.  This is undoubtedly how both lines survived.

Just as the origins of the Wauchope family are uncertain, owing to the absence of the family’s ancient charters, so too the derivation of the name itself is uncertain.  The name does not appear to fit typical place-naming conventions of its time.  It is unclear as to whether the family name preceded the place-name, or the place-name preceded the family name.  One theory states the Wauchopes came from the independent kingdom of Strathclyde (circa 450 AD to 1058), which then became part of Scotland.  It was a land of Britons who spoke a Celtic language similar to Welsh.  If so,  the prefix and suffix would be expected to be of Celtic origin.  Rather, if arising from the period of the Danelaw in the late 9th century, the prefix would typically be the landowner’s name and the suffix a short description of the place.  The common Scandinavian suffixes would be -by, -thorpe, -toft, -holme (e.g., Langholm near Wauchopedale of Dumfriesshire), -kirk, -thwaite, -wick, -borough, and -ness.  Hybrid names with English suffixes were common as well, such as -ham, -ton, -ley.  In Scotland, the birth of the English type surname as distinct from the old Gaelic form of patronymic began in 1061 from the General Council at Fofar held by King Malcolm III, Canmore.  In either case scholars argue, whether Briton or Scandanavian, the Gaelic suffix of hope would be inconsistent.  Hereditary surnames were in use by all classes in Normandy in the middle of the eleventh century.  However, the aristocracy tended to exchange their Norman name for those of their new manors.  The Baa family retained the same name upon arriving to England from Normandy.

A few miles to the southeast of Langholm on the English side of the border are several similarly named physical features which may hold a clue as to the Wauchope’s true name origin.  These being Kershope Burn, Kershopefoot, and Kershope Forest.  Evidently a branch of the Norman family Espec, taking on the name Kerr (i.e., marsh dweller) from their lands in northern England, settled in the Scottish Borders region prior to 1249.  Also given that a village of Waughslee (although the village may be of a more recent origin) was located just south of Langholm, one could easily believe that the name Wauchope is likewise derived.  That is Wauchope is made up of the family’s name as the prefix plus a descriptive suffix.  It is still plausible that the original Wauchope’s name was Baa.  Seemingly upon arrival to Scotland a local word (i.e., ùig or wau) was substituted for the word bay.  In any event, the name would still refer to a small landlocked bay, also known as a nook or cove.  If true, the family and place-name of Wauchope arrived to Scotland together.

The Poteria family of La Poterie-Mathieu, Normandy, were the first recorded Norman proprietors of the ancient lands of Wallop, Hampshire, under Domesday tenant-in-chief Hugh de Montfort after William’s conquest of England in 1066.  The family apparently never did take on the estate’s name in England, as did a branch of the Peverels later in the thirteenth century.  The Poterias lost their English lands in 1204 for adhering to Philip Augustus (i..e., King Philip II of France, 1180-1223).  Philip II annexed much land for France (including:  Normandy, Maine, Bretagne, Anjou, Touraine, and Poitou), and warred against the English.  It is possible that a branch of the family was invited to Scotland at the time of King David I, circa 1124, taking along their English estate name of Wallop, much as the Espec family may have done later with the name Kerr.  Conceivably, this confiscation of English property may have contributed to the Scottish branch “forgetting” their origins.  In support, Wallop and Wauchope are thought to have nearly identical meanings.

Another interesting, yet unproven theory, has been put forth by some of the Australian Wauchopes as decribed in Ona Butler’s Wauchope Family History (circa 1990) that the Wauchopes first lived in Alsace-Lorraine prior to residing in Scotland.  The region has been intermittently part of Germany and France prior to remaining French territory after World War II.  This theory does fit in with the tradition of the Wauchopes having come from France.  However, it is known that several Wauchopes from Scotland were in the service of French King Louis XI during the mid fifteenth century, and were granted letters of naturalization.

During the many years that the Scots and English fought over control of the Borders region, the king of Scotland would often assemble the nobility of his realm up north at Aberdeen, as Edinburgh was prone to attack by the English.  (In general, the Borders is that portion of land stretching along the border of Scotland and England.)  So it was natural that the king’s loyal backers, including the Wauchopes, would hold property near Aberdeen along the Dee River Valley.  King Malcolm III, Canmore, held court at Deeside circa 1060.  King David I, who had been a Prince and Earl in northern England before becoming king of Scotland, first began to invite Norman knights to the Dee in earnest, circa 1124.  (This may well coincide with the rise of the Warcops in Cumbria as well).  Aberdeen was made a royal burgh in 1179.  Edinburgh was not made the official national capital until 1437.  Canmore built the first castle there (i.e., on Castle Rock, site of later Edinburgh Castle) in the 11th century.

On David I’s return to Scotland from England as king in 1124 he proceeded to distribute large estates there amongst his Anglo-Norman friends, such as the Bruces, Walter Fitz-Alan (a Breton who became his high Steward, and the ancestor of the Stewarts), the Balliols, the Comyns, and many others who thus became landholders on both sides of the border.

David I also introduced into the Lowlands a feudal system of ownership, founded on a new, French speaking Anglo-Norman aristocracy.  Although they intermarried and eventually merged with the old and rapidly disappearing, Celtic aristocracy, these new Scots remained for a time partially Gaelic, save for the south and east of Scotland which now spoke a primitive form of English (Lothian English).

When David I came to the throne in 1124, Scotland had been a rather primitive country, with only small towns and little industry.  Also, depending on where you were in the Lowlands, you could have to speak Latin, French, English or a number of Gaelic dialects just in the south of Scotland.  The Scottish church with only three Bishops, had little influence.  When David I died in 1153 much had changed.  In many areas of the Lowlands, what remained of the old Celtic way of life had been swept away and a new Anglo-Norman order of things were established in its place.

The Poor Knights of Christ, also known as the Knights Templar, was established by French nobleman Hugh de Payens and eight companions in 1119 to protect Christian pilgrims to the city of Jerusalem after the First Crusade (1095-1099).  They later became a powerful political and military force in both Palestine and Europe.  Templars of only the highest rank, knight, traditionally wore a white tunic with a red Latin cross.  The grand master was responsible only to the Pope.  Templar installations were free from control of kings or bishops.  At their zenith the Templars numbered over 20,000 strong.  Pope Clement V dissolved the order in 1312, mainly due to long-standing resentment of their great power and wealth.  Most of their remaining property was transferred to their rivals, the Hospitalers, including in 1319 the 8,500 acres of Maryculter of Kincardineshire just across the Dee from the Wauchopes.  The Templars were known supporters of the Bruces in Scotland.

And from the Science of Etymology (Webster’s Dictionary):

Waugh is probably a Northumbrian or Lowland Scots name.  In these parts the gh is still sounded, either as ff, k or ch (as in Scottish loch).  Each district has its own local sound.  The au sound can be said as a short o or long aw.  The W is sometimes aspirated.  The Northumbrian pronunciation of Waugh sounds rather like “Whoauff” where the vowel is very long.  Other local names like Woof (Yorkshire) and Wark sound similar to Waugh.  There seems to be an instance of Waugh being spelt phonetically as “Waff” in one of the Whitby (N. Yorkshire coast) parish registers, c. 1800.  I have heard it pronounced “Woff” further south in Yorkshire.  In Ireland the gh in Waugh is sometimes pronounced as a soft growl in the throat, rather like an aspirated French r.  (Anonymous contribution)

In the United States, the gh is predominately silent so that Waugh rhymes with law or saw, and then also with Baugh.

It has been speculated that the name of the Wauchope’s ancient property of Wolfelee of Roxburghshire is actually a  corruption of Waughlee (Waugh pronounced like “Whoauff” above), which in turn is similar to Waughslee of Dumfriesshire mentioned earlier.  In support, Wolfelee was once known as Wolhopelee.

The Baughs were likely already in Wales/England in about 1055, and the Waughs/Wauchopes already in Scotland in about 1062.  The family did not need to take what it had already been freely given.

The Welsh/English border region was spottily canvassed, while Scotland was not included at all.

Prior to the time that we had surnames as we do now, only the eldest son of the nobility was entitled to use the family “name” (i.e., de Wauchope).  The other sons had to come up with their own.  That is one reason why you could get several variations of the same name which over time became separate surnames (e.g., Wauchope or Waugh).  For another twist on this, see the question immediately following this one.  You also get new surnames from the same family based on the location where they settled (e.g., Lindsay from the Toeni family of Normandy).  Another way in which new surnames come about is due to how the name was recorded on official documents.  In years past, spelling was not as important as today for record keeping (e.g., Wachob or Walkup).

Wauchope was named by Capt. Robert Andrew Wauch (1786-1866) who called his property “Wauchope.”  He simply used the original form of the family name.  His Father was Captain Robert Wauch (1761-1817), who was born on the family estate, “Niddrie Marischal,” in the immediate vicinity of Edinburgh quite close to Craigmillar Castle, famous for its association with Mary Queen of Scots.  Actually this Captain Robert Wauch’s name was originally Wauchope - the true family name - but after the death of his father, a quarrel ensued over shares of the estates, and the matter finally ended up in the Court of Scotland.  Losing the legal battle, the embittered Captain retired to his portion, Foxhall, and thenceforth dropped the “ope,” retaining the abbreviated form which he passed on to his descendants, including his son, Robert Andrew, the founder of Wauchope NSW Australia.  There it is pronounced “War-hope.”  The station of Wauchope in the Northern Territory of Australia is pronounced “Walk-up,” which is the Gaelic pronunciation.  (Contributed by Peter Coulon of Wauchope, NSW, Australia)

In a word, no.  It is evident that several aristocratic lines are related or possibly related.  However, many people simply took their surname from the area in which they lived (e.g., Wauchopedale of the Lindsay family), or from the “clan” they identified with (e.g., Clan Johnstone), or had the name ascribed to them by their neighbors.  For example, Waugh referring to a native Strathclyde Briton or a “foreigner” from Wales.  Not as likely though, as the name Wallace is thought to be so derived.  Bach in Welsh referring to someone “little” or “small” in stature.  Once again not as likely, as the name Vaughan is thought to be so derived.  In addition, it is known there are Baughs with German roots (Bach meaning “stream” or “brook” and Bau meaning “den”).  However, some have suggested that modern people with the surname Wauchope and its various spellings (e.g., Walkup, Waughop, and Wachob) are related to the Wauchopes of Niddrie-Merschell, as it was the only major aristocratic branch of the family left beyond about the fourteenth century.  Also in support, the name of Wauchope is not found today in the area of Wauchopedale of the Lindsays.

A Wauchope Surname DNA Study is now underway to ascertain if there is indeed a relationship between the male lines of various spellings.  Test results so far indicate that there are at least three unrelated male lines.

The word clan originally meant, in Gaelic, offspring or descendants, family or tribe.  Originally a family unit, the clan became the basic political, economic, and social unit of the Scottish Highlands until the political oppression of 1745.  (The Highlands is that portion of Scotland that lies north of a line roughly between Glasgow and Edinburgh.)  Each clan has its own tartan that was worn in a kilt or scarf.  They were fiercely loyal to the family group and are quick to avenge any wrongs done to their fellows, as well as defending the area they considered home territory.  Most Scots-Norman families were not considered proper clans.  The Wauchopes are not currently found listed as a true clan.  Similarly, the Wauchopes are not found listed as a sept of any other more powerful clan either.  A sept is a family not having the name of the clan, but associated with the clan and entitled to wear its tartan.

The surname Wauchope is found on Page 438 of Volume 2 of Hanna’s The Scotch-Irish in the list of Border Clans and Chiefs in 1590 in Annandale, principally Dumfriesshire (It is listed as such on commercially available family scrolls as well).  It has been suggested that this is actually referring to the Lindsays of Wauchope.  The name Lindsay does appear directly after that of Wauchope in the list.  However, Page 150 of Volume 7 of Scott’s Miscellaneous Prose Works lists a Laird of Wauchop of the Middle March in an 1587 (Scottish Acts) “Roll of Names of the Landlords and Bailies of Lands dwelling on the Borders, where broken Men have dwelt and presently dwell.”  Scott’s list clearly denotes surnames when they are distinct from the location.  In this case, there is no mention of the surname Lindsay after the location of Wauchop, so Wauchop is both the location and surname.  Also, with DNA results received thus far showing multiple male lines, there may well have been a “clan” of Wauchopes from the Borders that dispersed shortly after 1590, some departing for Ulster.  

Being Lowlanders, the Wauchopes did not have a tartan of their own, and in fact probably rarely would have had reason to wear one.  However, if so desired, it would be proper to wear the tartan of the present-day district from which your Wauchope ancestor came from (e.g., Edinburgh, Galloway, or Roxburgh), or the Scottish National Tartan.

The commercially available family scrolls give an adequate general background of a surname from fairly widely available sources.  At least one inaccuracy may be found on the typical Walkup scroll.  On some older scrolls the shield found at the top of the scroll in not correct.  The shield presented is actually that of what is evidently the cadet line of Waugh of Larkhall, not the main line of Wauchope of Niddrie-Merschell.  The error is in that the wheat sheaf and the fleur-de-lis are transposed (i.e., the sheaf should be on the bottom).  Refer to Selected Shields for the proper layout.  

The younger sons of the laird might well marry tenants or become tenants of the father’s estates.  In later years younger children of such tenants could marry more humble members of the community.  The original headstone of James Walkup (d. 1798) of the Carolinas has a shield with a wheat garb on it, which would lead one to believe that the Samuel and Nancy Wauchope line of the USA is indeed of the Niddrie Wauchopes.  Recent DNA test results do not confirm this relationship.

The tragedy lies in the oral nature of the tradition.  Once the patriarchal society disappeared in Scotland, one’s lineage was of little use or interest.  It was of even less importance to the emigrant of the New World where culture and society had nothing to do with one’s forebears.  In ancient times genealogy was the cornerstone of Gaelic culture. “Who are you from?” was more important than “where.”  All Gaels were completely familiar with their own ancestry and the subject was one of the most frequent topics of conversation on cold winter evenings.  (Adapted from “Descendants of King Robert Bruce,” The Highlander, Vol. 40, No. 1, Jan./Feb. 2002, James Irvin Robertson.)

 

Return to Bruce's Wauchope/Walkup Home Page

 

This page last updated December 29, 2007