I have been asked to give a brief outline on the correct use of territorial designations as a certain amount of confusion has arisen over this subject. First of all, what is a territorial designation? A designation is that part which follows an individual's surname. This is normally derived from ownership of a named piece of land or historic property (outwith a Burgh), e.g. a castle, in Scotland. Any one owning such property can call themselves "of" that property but this is not a title in itself, and should not be treated as such. A tenant would have been termed as "in" that property.

Once a designation has been recorded at the Court of the Lord Lyon King of Arms, it becomes inseparable from the surname. Only then, the designation becomes a title as an inseparable part of the nomen dignitatis , when the individual is recorded in the "Name and Arms of" e.g. MacTavish of Auchenshoogle.

These styles are protected by Scots law under the Statute 1672. Cap. 47. The Lord Lyon will not automatically accept any designation, for instance a designation will not be accepted if there is non-familial joint ownership of a property. There may also be a conflict with a chiefly  title. If a David Ross bought Ross Castle, he would not be able to style himself "David Ross of Ross", as this would indicate that he was chief of Clan Ross. He would be given the option of being accepted as "David Ross of Castle Ross" or "David Ross, Baron of Ross". When the Glengarry estates were sold, McDonell of Glengarry had a proviso put into the deeds that no succeeding owner was to use the "Glengarry" designation.

Once a designation is established, it becomes a heritable property of the head of that family (together with the Arms). If the land or castle is sold, the designation can still be used, but a distinction is made in official documents. The individual becomes "representer of' e.g. Sir Alexander Macdonald, Baronet, is "Representer of the Family of Macdonald of Sleat".

Territorial designations have come down to us from the beginning of the feudal system, and also influenced by our Celtic ancestors who bore a genealogical second name, the bun sloinn. The system was widespread in the middle ages. Adam de Balfour would come from Balfour in Fife ( Balfour:= settlement at the mouth of the Ore, where the river Ore flows in to the river Leven), William de Couper would come from the Royal Burgh of Cupar. These territorial names became permanent surnames. To differentiate between several people of the same name, a territorial designation was appended to the surname, thus David Balfour of Dovan was easily distinguishable from James Balfour of Denmiln.

Once a territorial designation has been recognised by the Lord Lyon (who, in all matters to do with titles and heraldry in Scotland, uses the Royal prerogative), it must be used and not played with. James MacTavish of Auchenshoogle cannot be James MacTavish through the week and MacTavish of Auchenshoogle at the weekend or at Highland Balls. The whole name should be used as the daily signature, on notepaper, visiting cards, cheques, credit cards etc. Similarly, anyone writing to him should give his full style, to style him as "Mr. MacTavish" or "James MacTavish, Esq." is not only incorrect, it is rude and disrespectful.

There are those who claim that designations make the name too long, and yet the same individual accepts hyphenated names. The most widely used mouthful (in text books) is "Temple-Nugent-Brydges-Chandos-Morgan-Grenville". After this example, territorial designations are extremely simple. Lord Justice General, Lord Clyde, clarified the matter on the 4th of May 1961, in the Scottish Justiciary Appeal Court. He stated "To state that your name is "A" when it is in fact "B" is obviously a false statement: indeed it seems to be that nothing could be plainer in common sense, apart altogether from legal principle. It is quite true that except for persons holding public office, people in Scotland are free to change their names without obtaining judicial authority for doing so, but they cannot have two names at the same time". It should be stated that to change a territorial designation as a nomen dignitatis does require approval from the Lord Lyon, either by Matriculation or a Certificate of Change of Name.

The styles for Laird, Baron, Chieftain and Chief are the same. There are Chiefs who bear designations that do not stem from a named piece of land e.g. Macdonald of Clanranald. In the middle ages, Chiefs reigned over their people as if they were Kings or Princes, thus the Chief was the feudal superior over the clan. The word "reign" is recorded in Privy Council records in connection with Chiefs. Some Clan Chiefs are accepted in Europe as being equal in status to Princes. Sir Thomas Innes of Learney, sometime Lord Lyon King of Arms, in his 'Scots Heraldry', says "Chiefs and Lairds reigned in their ancestral estates like Princes, their castle forming a little court, of which the ceremonial reflected in miniature that of Falkland and Holyroodhouse".