Tartan complaint

[ardchoille]

As I recall, one of the oldest tartans is one of the MacGregor's, the simple red and black Rob Roy tartan.

The tartan you are referring to is the MacGregor red and black (aka Rob Roy) tartan. Here's a bit of history about this tartan from Sir Malcolm MacGregor, Chief of Clan Gregor:

The Red and Black MacGregor Tartan

This tartan existed long before individual tartans became associated to particular clans Perhaps because it is one of the easiest setts to weave. There are those who question MacGregors' claim to this tartan as there are portraits of monarchs and other Highlanders wearing this sett. It is also claimed that it is not known what MacGregors would have worn during proscriptions and that they would not have worn their clan tartan so proudly. Two points here. First, I would argue strongly that due to proscription, the clan adopted it in 1603 because at that time it was not regarded as a MacGregor Tartan. It is my belief that by the end of the 18th century, nearly 200 years later, it came to be regarded as such. It is a fact that my family have worn this particular tartan since the late 18th century and regarded it as MacGregor tartan. My great. great. great, great grandfather would have worn it for good traditional reasons (see below), not on a whim. The tartan is included in the Highland Society of London's collection of 1816, which lends credence to this belief.

Secondly, if the MacGregors themselves survived the proscriptions - is it so surprising that the tartan survived? Laws passed in Edinburgh and London were difficult to enforce in the Highlands and it is quite possible that in the Highlands people would have worn the tartan of their choice. The wearing of a particular tartan demonstrates a blood connection with a particular clan. Even my kinswoman, Miss Jean Rollo, who lived in Edinburgh in 1746, made it a point to wear a tartan gown in the Canongate in defiance of the law!

[Archangel]

As a McGregor, you got my attention. I hadn't really concerned myself with this issue. Anyway, I read the Lord Lyon as saying the chief has the authority to do something about it. I'm not sure what that would be in terms of court and there's no indication that the Chief is going to do anything.
I guess mine is the last one on his list. I've outgrown it but I'm proud to have worn it.
My next McGregor will be the "film" tartan. I like it and I think it has done more for McGregors than anything else in recent history (Ewan aside). I read the movie designers reasons for that kilt and I believe it has as much authenticity as any other presented. (If somebody kept a copy of that, it would be great to see it reposted.)

All respect to the Chief, but when he sees fit to challenge the other tartans in court, I'll reconsider my position.

McGregor: despite them.

[ardchoille]

As a McGregor, you got my attention. I hadn't really concerned myself with this issue. Anyway, I read the Lord Lyon as saying the chief has the authority to do something about it. I'm not sure what that would be in terms of court and there's no indication that the Chief is going to do anything.
I guess mine is the last one on his list. I've outgrown it but I'm proud to have worn it.
My next McGregor will be the "film" tartan. I like it and I think it has done more for McGregors than anything else in recent history (Ewan aside). I read the movie designers reasons for that kilt and I believe it has as much authenticity as any other presented. (If somebody kept a copy of that, it would be great to see it reposted.)

All respect to the Chief, but when he sees fit to challenge the other tartans in court, I'll reconsider my position.

McGregor: despite them.

After thinking about this for a bit, I'm not sure "taking it to court" would be a good thing.

On the one hand it would go a long way to letting the world know that the authority for tartans is indeed vested in the clan Chief and you must obtain permission before slapping a clan name on any tartan.

One the other hand, it might be seen as "throwing a temper tantrum" and not be good for the image of a clan. Neither would it be taken very well by the mills who weave tartan and the vendors who sell it.

Perhaps Sir Malcolm is wise enough to simply "let it slide".

[macwilkin]

Here are two articles from Matt's blog you might want to read concerning this subject, especially the second one:

http://blog.albanach.org/2006/07/macneil-tartans.html

http://blog.albanach.org/2006/05/macgregor-tartans.html

I'm sure Matt can shed some light on the subject for you.

Cheers,

Todd

[gilmore]

Huh?

There are a couple of things off with Sir Malcolm's letter.

<<<...Two points here. First, I would argue strongly that due to proscription, the clan adopted it in 1603 because at that time it was not regarded as a MacGregor Tartan. It is my belief that by the end of the 18th century, nearly 200 years later, it came to be regarded as such. It is a fact that my family have worn this particular tartan since the late 18th century and regarded it as MacGregor tartan. My great. great. great, great grandfather would have worn it for good traditional reasons (see below), not on a whim. The tartan is included in the Highland Society of London's collection of 1816, which lends credence to this belief.

Secondly, if the MacGregors themselves survived the proscriptions - is it so surprising that the tartan survived? Laws passed in Edinburgh and London were difficult to enforce in the Highlands and it is quite possible that in the Highlands people would have worn the tartan of their choice. The wearing of a particular tartan demonstrates a blood connection with a particular clan. Even my kinswoman, Miss Jean Rollo, who lived in Edinburgh in 1746, made it a point to wear a tartan gown in the Canongate in defiance of the law! >>>

The Act of Proscription went into effect August 12, 1747 and the repeal was effective July 1, 1782. Maybe these are typos. Maybe Sir Malcom got it wrong. Maybe the clan adopted it in anticipation of the proscription. Maybe Miss Jean Rollo was ahead of the times.

[ardchoille]

Huh?

There are a couple of things off with Sir Malcolm's letter.

<<<...Two points here. First, I would argue strongly that due to proscription, the clan adopted it in 1603 because at that time it was not regarded as a MacGregor Tartan. It is my belief that by the end of the 18th century, nearly 200 years later, it came to be regarded as such. It is a fact that my family have worn this particular tartan since the late 18th century and regarded it as MacGregor tartan. My great. great. great, great grandfather would have worn it for good traditional reasons (see below), not on a whim. The tartan is included in the Highland Society of London's collection of 1816, which lends credence to this belief.

Secondly, if the MacGregors themselves survived the proscriptions - is it so surprising that the tartan survived? Laws passed in Edinburgh and London were difficult to enforce in the Highlands and it is quite possible that in the Highlands people would have worn the tartan of their choice. The wearing of a particular tartan demonstrates a blood connection with a particular clan. Even my kinswoman, Miss Jean Rollo, who lived in Edinburgh in 1746, made it a point to wear a tartan gown in the Canongate in defiance of the law! >>>

The Act of Proscription went into effect August 12, 1747 and the repeal was effective July 1, 1782. Maybe these are typos. Maybe Sir Malcom got it wrong. Maybe the clan adopted it in anticipation of the proscription. Maybe Miss Jean Rollo was ahead of the times.

You're referring to the proscription act against the clans. Sir Malcolm's letter is referring to the proscriptions against clan Gregor (a whole different story) which went into effect in the early 1600's and wasn't repealed until the late 1700's. This act stated:

1. Any man caught claiming the MacGregor name was beheaded
2. Any woman caught claiming the MacGregor name was stripped, branded and sold into slavery in the new colonies in what is now the US
3. MacGregor scalps were legal tender
4. Killing a MacGregor brought amnesty for capitol crimes

All because the MacGregors refused to give up their rightly owned lands. The English crown was harassing individual clans long before the proscription acts against the clans as a whole.

Oh.. and.. MacGregor Despite Them!

[ardchoille]

Here are two articles from Matt's blog you might want to read concerning this subject, especially the second one:

http://blog.albanach.org/2006/07/macneil-tartans.html

http://blog.albanach.org/2006/05/macgregor-tartans.html

I'm sure Matt can shed some light on the subject for you.

Cheers,

Todd

Ah, yes, that second link is excellent! Thank you for posting it

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Todd beat me to the punch with my blog posting commention on Sir Malcolm's letter.

While it is very true that the only one who has authority to say what is and is not an actual clan tartan is the clan chief, we must remember that this authority is one of tradition. It is not a legal authority. There is really nothing that Sir Malcolm can do, in a court of law, to prevent people from non-approved tartans by the MacGregor name. All he can do is inform his clan that these and only these are recognized MacGregor tartans.

One wearing his tartan for the purposes of clan identity will no doubt be very interested in finding out what their chief has to say on the matter and will want to follow his opinions. Other people will be less interested.

One thing that was mentioned in Malcolm's letter were the number of "MacGregor" dance or dress tartans. These were not sanctioned as official MacGregor tartans. Now, there is a long tradition of Highland dancer's tartans being based on traditional clan tartans, but based in white (or cream) and rendered in much brighter colors (like teal, purple, gold, etc). Now, if you have a tartan that is based in the MacGregor pattern, just rendered in colors more appropriate to Highland Dancing, what else are you going to call it other than "MacGregor"?

(As a side note, I beleive that Sir Malcolm later amended his statement to include the dance versions of the MacGregor tartan as official clan tartans, but only to be worn by MacGregor dancers).

I have a friend who is a MacGregor (who also works at the museum), who simply doesn't like red tartans. He much prefers darker tartans, especially black. So he and I worked together to make a black tartan for him. Since he's a MacGregor, we based it in the MacGregor design, but reversed the red and black. We called the result the "Black MacGregor" tartan. He's standing to the right in the below photo:


Now, this is not a clan tartan, nor does it pretend to be. We had it recorded with the Scottish Tartans Authority as a "personal" tartan. That's what it is. However, were we wrong in using the MacGregor name? The pattern of the tartan is the MacGregor pattern. As a personal tartan, we could name it after the person it was designed for... whose surname is MacGregor! There is no mistaking it. This is "a" MacGregor tartan, even though it is not a MacGregor clan tartan.

It can be confusing, admittedly. Which is why research is always important.

This is also one of the reasons why the forthcoming National Register of Tartans will be important. One of the things that this Register will supposedly do is earmark in some way which tartans are officially recognized by those with the authority to do so, and which ones are not. This will not keep personal tartans, or dancers tartans, or fashion tartans from being recorded, mind you. But it will separate them from tartans that have the official sanction of the clan chief (or another appropriate authority). The details of the National Register are still being worked out, but whatever the end result is, the hope of many is that this National Register will have the backing of the Scottish government behind it, so that if there are cases of copyright infringment or false claims being made, there will be a legal authority to rectify the situation.

Aye,
Matt

[RockyR]

Now, if you have a tartan that is based in the MacGregor pattern, just rendered in colors more appropriate to Highland Dancing, what else are you going to call it other than "MacGregor"?

MacGregor-ish?
MacGregor-esque?
MacGregggor?
Almost MacGregor?
Fake MacGregor?
My favorite... MacRoeger?

All listed with tongue firmly in cheek.

[ardchoille]

Todd beat me to the punch with my blog posting commention on Sir Malcolm's letter...

As always I highly enjoy your posts. As I commented earlier, I'm going to have to change the way I think about this. The tartan that your MacGregor friend created is beautiful.. and he is, after all, a MacGregor so I feel there is something to be said about personal tartans.