“Younger of” and “Master of”: the record set straight

The heir to a Scottish title is “Younger”, unless the title is a peerage, when the heir is “Master of”. The two styles have stood side by side in the records since the 1500s. Where a baron, baronet, chief or laird has a territorial designation, the heir adds “younger” to it, after it or before it. The heir of a baron with none is “Younger of” the barony. Some say he may not be. This paper sets out the record.

The short answer

• The style is old and official. From 1584 to 2005, Parliament, the Great Seal, the Gazette and the Lyon Court’s own rolls write the heir “younger of”.
• It is the counterpart of “Master”. A survey of Scots law of 1936 puts the two in one sentence: the heir of a peer is “Master”, the heir of a baron is “younger of”.
• Barons share it with baronets, chiefs and lairds. Each adds “younger” to the family’s territorial designation. Only the heir to a peerage is “Master”.
• It follows the father’s rank. One man was “younger” of Stair in 1689 and “master of Stair” in 1690, when his father had become a peer.
• No rule requires a territorial designation. It is part of a surname and needs the Lord Lyon’s recognition, and many barons have none. No statute, court ruling or Lyon Court text has been found that says a baron’s heir needs one.
• A baron with no territorial designation uses the barony. His heir is “Younger of [Barony]”, as a peer’s heir is “Master of [Peerage]”. The “of” is the barony’s own, as in “Baron of X”. “The” may go before either.

In the record

“Robert Dowglas, younger of Lochlevin, Laurence, maister of Oliephant, Johne, maister of Forbes”

Summons of treason, Parliament of Scotland, 1584

In 1584 Parliament summoned a list of men for treason. The clerk put the heirs of lairds and the heirs of peers in one line. “Robert Dowglas, younger of Lochlevin” is followed at once by “Laurence, maister of Oliephant” and “Johne, maister of Forbes”, and, one name later, by “Johne Levingsstoun, younger of Dynnypace, Johne Carmichaell, younger of that Ilk”. “Maister” is Master. Lord Oliphant and Lord Forbes were lords of Parliament, so their heirs are Masters. The other fathers were not, so their heirs are “younger”.¹

The Crown’s Latin says the same. In a Great Seal charter of 1600 the heir is “juniori de Bathgait”, younger of Bathgate, “filio et heredi apparenti”, son and heir apparent, of his father the elder.² And the heir acted under the style: in 1693 “The laird of Calder, younger” was admitted to Parliament for Nairnshire “in place of Sir Hugh Campbell of Calder, his father”.³

The form lasted. In 1986 the London Gazette printed a commission to “Donald Cameron, Younger of Lochiel”.⁴ The Lyon Court’s rolls in the Edinburgh Gazette, down to 2005, carried a note signed by the Lyon Clerk: a family’s name and territorial designation are used by “The eldest son and his wife, with the adjective “younger””.⁵

Beside the Master

“Whilst the heir-apparent of a feudal baron is invariably styled ‘younger of,’ the heir, whether apparent or presumptive, of an earl or peerage-lord is ‘Master’.”

The Stair Society’s survey of Scots law, 1936, as quoted in the Scottish National Dictionary

The national dictionary quotes that sentence twice, once to explain “Master” and once to explain “younger”. Of “Master of” it says: “The designation is that of the title to be inherited.”⁶

The Lord Lyon’s own certificate does the same for a baron’s heir. In 1930 he certified the birth of “Thomas Innes of Learney, younger”, son of the “Baron of the Baronies of Learney and Kinnairdy”. The pedigree on the certificate names the child “younger, apparent heir to the Barony of Learney”.⁷

Sir John Dalrymple shows both on one man. In June 1689 Parliament recorded “Sir John Dalrymple, younger, of Stairs”. By 1690 his father was “the viscount of Stair”, and the next name on the roll is “the master of Stair”.⁸ The father’s rank changed, and the son’s style changed with it.

A Master is named from his father’s dignity, not from the surname or an estate. Debrett’s of 1921 lists the heir of Lord Saltoun, whose surname is Fraser, as “Master of Saltoun”.⁹

Who is “Younger”

The style is not the barons’ alone. The national dictionary gives it to “the eldest son and heir of a landed proprietor below peerage rank”.⁶ A guide to forms of address of 1955 gives the heirs of chiefs and lairds as “John Mackvicular, younger of Mackvicular”, and says of a baronet’s eldest son: “In Scotland he is styled “younger” of the family description.”¹⁰

So the heir of a chief, a laird, a baronet or a baron with a territorial designation is “younger” of it. Only the heir to a peerage is Master.

The word goes after the territorial designation or before it. The Lyon Court’s rolls print “FORBES OF ROTHIEMAY, younger”;⁵ the Gazette prints “Donald Cameron, Younger of Lochiel”.⁴

A baron with no territorial designation has no “of X” in his surname to add the word to. His heir takes the style from the barony itself: “Younger of [Barony]”. Whether he may is the question that follows.

Does it need a territorial designation?

A territorial designation is the “of X” in a surname. It is not the barony. It comes from land, and it needs the Lord Lyon’s recognition: his guidance of 2010 says it “proclaims a relationship with a particular area of land”.¹¹

A baron may have none, and that is not new. The Lyon Court’s own rolls print “HOLMAN, BARON OF RICKARTON” in 1988 and “THACKER, BARON OF FETTERNEAR” in 2002, each with no territorial designation.¹² Since 2004 “the dignity of baron, though retained, shall not attach to the land”, and many barons have no territorial designation at all.¹³

One baronial society says on its website that the son of such a baron may not use the style: a baron must first have a territorial designation recognised by the Lord Lyon. It cites no authority.¹⁴ Another, in a paper of 2024, accepts “Younger” for him but not yet “Younger of”. It says “the use of ‘Younger’ without territorial reference is acceptable”, while “Younger of Exton” for the heir of a baron with no estate “has not yet gained wide acceptance”.¹⁵

That view treats the “of” as belonging to a surname territorial designation (TD). But a barony has an “of” of its own. “HOLMAN, BARON OF RICKARTON” has no TD, and the “of” is in his barony title.¹² And the heir’s “of” does not depend on an “of” in the father’s style at all. Lord Oliphant, Lord Forbes and Lord Saltoun have none, yet their heirs are “Master of Oliphant”, “Master of Forbes” and “Master of Saltoun”.¹⁹ That is the precedent for “Younger of [Barony]”: an heir named from the title itself, not from a territorial designation.

The Lyon Court has published no rule on the style of a baron’s heir. Its Gazette note speaks only of a family’s “names and designations”.⁵

What do the records show?

Named from the barony. In 1649 Parliament put two heirs on a commission “in place of their said fathers”. One is the “laird of Duncrub, younger”. The other is the “baron of Auchyle, younger”.¹⁶ In the Lyon Court’s own rolls, “McCUNE OF COLL-EARN, BARON OF ELPHINSTONE” in 1989 is followed by “McCUNE OF ELPHINSTONE, younger” in 1992: on its face, a younger named from the barony.¹⁷

Named from the territorial designation. A territorial designation and a barony can have different names. Where they did, the old registers name the heir from the surname’s “of X”, not from the barony. In a Great Seal charter of 1631 a father and son are “seniori de Bischoptoun” and “juniori de Bischoptoun”, elder and younger of Bishopton, though their barony is Gogoside. In 1681 “James Gordon, younger of Lesmore” was “infeft in the lands and barony of Newtongarry”.¹⁸

Each of those fathers had a territorial designation in his surname: he was “Surname of X”. None of these records shows the heir of a baron who had none.

The peerage does show an heir named from the title alone: a Master is named from the dignity, whatever the surname.

No court has ruled on the point for barons. But no statute, court ruling or Lyon Court text has been found that says a baron’s heir needs a territorial designation, and the society that says so cites none.

With or without “the”

The style is “Younger of X”, after the name or alone, as a peer’s heir is “Master of X”. For both, “the” is optional.

The Master shows it. The passport rules have both in a single entry. The surname field reads “MASTER OF [title]”. The observation reads “THE HOLDER IS [forenames and surname] THE MASTER OF [title]”.¹⁹ An account of a reception for chiefs’ heirs in 2014 has “John, Master of Lauderdale” and “Alexander, the Master of Cranstoun” in one list.²⁰

“The Younger” has long been written: “Donald Cameron the Younger, of Lochiel” in the London Gazette of 1746, and “Pirie Gordon the Younger of Buthlaw” in a book on titles of 1991. An Act of 1778 names “Alexander Thomson Keith Urquhart of Meldrum” and, next, “James Urquhart the younger thereof”. The forenames differ, so “the younger” is not there to tell two men of one name apart.²¹

It is written without “the” as well: the Crown’s “Donald Cameron, Younger of Lochiel” of 1986.⁴

There is a practical reason to add “the”. A standard work on the clans, revised by Innes of Learney as Lord Lyon, warns that officials “might otherwise suppose “younger” to be a surname”.²² “The” before the word removes the doubt, as it marks the Master.

A woman as heir

In some families a daughter who is heir is “the Maid of”. Sir Iain Moncreiffe of that Ilk, a herald of the Lyon Court, wrote in 1967: “It is the old Scots custom to call an heiress the Maid of her inheritance.”²³ No statute, court or Lyon Court rule sets the form.

A woman may also be “Younger”. In 2014 the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs gave a reception for heirs at the Palace of Holyroodhouse, with the Lord Lyon and the Lyon Clerk among the guests. Among the heirs its account names are “Catriona, the Maid of Bachuil” and “Claire Henderson younger of Fordell”, daughter of the chief of the Hendersons.²⁰ It is the earliest record found of a woman so styled: a recent precedent, from the chiefs’ own council. One baronial society’s paper of 2024 says the use “is not a style that is generally accepted”.¹⁵

The Roll and the Pledge

A Younger takes his style from a barony. The Roll shows, on evidence, who holds it.

The Baronage of Scotland Association keeps the Roll of Scottish Barons, which enters a holder only on evidence, and offers the Pledge: an undertaking, in honour and not in law, to preserve a barony within the family for future generations and to uphold the Baronial Code of Honour. The precedent is the baronets’ Roll of 1910.