Questions on wearing Stewart tartans

[CDNSushi]

Wikipedia is an interesting source -- very helpful but often not very authoritative. According to an article stub on the Royal Stewart tartan, it says that the Royal Stewart is the personal tartan of Queen Elizabeth II. Further, it claims:

It is said to be appropriate for all subjects of Elizabeth to wear the Royal Stewart tartan[citation needed], much in the same way that clansmen may wear the tartan of their clan chief.

Is this true? What is the source of this idea? When wikipedia says "It is said" and there is no citation, it may as well be my favourite Japanese bartender who said it... Question is, is it true?

Next question. IF we were to assume the above to be true, could the same thing be said about variations on the Stewart tartan? I.e. would it be appropriate for all of Elizabeth's subjects to wear, say, a Black Stewart? Dress Stewart? Hunting Stewart? (I know that these are considered universal tartans so anyone can wear them regardless but I'm asking about appropriateness as a function of the claim in quoatations)...

Final question -- a little farther from the above. I've read numerous times in this forum that some people feel that it's appropriate to write a request to a clan chief before going ahead and wearing that clan's tartan. For those who feel this way, what would be the appropriate course of action in the case of an armigerous clan (a clan with no chief) such as the Stewart clan?

Thanks, guys. Apologies if any of this has been asked/answered before. I did use the search button.

[JakobT]

Wikipedia is an interesting source -- very helpful but often not very authoritative. According to an article stub on the Royal Stewart tartan, it says that the Royal Stewart is the personal tartan of Queen Elizabeth II. Further, it claims:


Is this true? What is the source of this idea? When wikipedia says "It is said" and there is no citation, it may as well be my favourite Japanese bartender who said it... Question is, is it true?

Next question. IF we were to assume the above to be true, could the same thing be said about variations on the Stewart tartan? I.e. would it be appropriate for all of Elizabeth's subjects to wear, say, a Black Stewart? Dress Stewart? Hunting Stewart? (I know that these are considered universal tartans so anyone can wear them regardless but I'm asking about appropriateness as a function of the claim in quoatations)...

The red Royal Stewart tartan is classed by the Scottish Tartans authority as a universal tartan, meaning that anyone can wear it. The other Stewart tartans you mention are mostly clan tartans, and so are not universal. There is also a Stewart fashion tartan. I'd say if you want to be on the safe side, stick to Royal Stewart or the Stewart fashion tartan.

[macneighill]

I am definitely no "authority" on tartans. So, if I get this wrong . . please don't throw me outside with the hogs :mrgreen:

For your first question:

The Balmoral Tartan is restricted and, is to be worn only by members of the Royal Family. But I believe a few of the Stewart tartans are OK. You may want to peruse through Tartan Authority's "FAQ's" section. There is quite a bit of helpful info.

Also, here are a few links that might be of help:
http://www.scotclans.com/what_tartan/
http://www.clansstewart.org/faq.html
http://www.tartans.scotland.net/tart.../royal.cfm.htm
http://www.tartansauthority.com/web/...yalTartans.asp

Final question -- a little farther from the above. I've read numerous times in this forum that some people feel that it's appropriate to write a request to a clan chief before going ahead and wearing that clan's tartan. For those who feel this way, what would be the appropriate course of action in the case of an armigerous clan (a clan with no chief) such as the Stewart clan?

If its Stewart you seek, there are Associations that exist today. As for "having" permission to wear the "Royal Stewart" tartan, none is needed (as it's a universal tartan). But, if you feel you really need to write, I commend you. The website for the "Clan Stewart Society of America" is: http://www.clansstewart.org/index.htm; the website for the "Stewart Society" in Edinburgh, Scotland is: http://www.stewartsociety.org/home.htm; and the "Stewart/Stuart Association of Nova Scotia" website is: http://www.clanstewartassociation.piczo.com/.

[CDNSushi]

The Tartan Authority link was a good one -- and I should have known to check that first. It provides a pretty good answer. Bold emphasis=mine.

Tradition has it that those who have no tartan of their own can wear the Black Watch (The Universal or Government Tartan) or the Hunting Stewart, but not the Royal Stewart without the express authority of the Queen. However, commercialisation in recent times has rather blurred this. The one tartan which cannot be worn by anyone unless the Queen's permission has been granted is the Balmoral.

But being the inquisitive sort of person I am, I'm led to question how this "tradition" came about. I do know that the Hunting Stewart is considered the official tartan of Scotland (according to the Stewart Clan website). It's very interesting, however because so far I have four somewhat conflicting opinions on the wearing of the Royal Stewart.

1. It is appropriate for any subject of EII to wear it. (Wikipedia)

2. Only the royal family is entitled to wear it. (Clan Stewart website)

3. It is a universal tartan and no permission is needed. (macneighill - but backed up by various sources such as Scotclans)

4. Express permission of the queen is required to wear it. (Scottish Tartans Authority)

[Galb]

I was in this same boat a while ago. I liked the Royal Stewart for the very vibrant and eye catching colors, but it had a name associated with it. I was torn with this as I really wish to stick with my clan's tartan and universals. After much research I came up with various conclusions. One I ran into many times was that "it is a universal tartan". That being said I took the leap and got it and couldn't be happier. The simple fact that it can be debated as to whether or not it is or isn't a universal can actually lead one to believe that it truly is a universal tartan. Think about it. Ever hear a debate asking if a Wallace tartan is a universal? Nope. ;)

[CDNSushi]

I suppose, then that the real, key question might be who or what determines whether any given tartan is universal or not... Really, what makes a tartan universal?

[Morris at Heathfield]

I believe the Royal Stewart tartan was the one worn by George IV on his visit to Scotland, and it is for that reason that it is associated with the Royal Family. George IV was, of course, a Hanover. He could claim descent from the Stuarts, but not on the male line.

I seem to recall running into statements online that some monarch, either Victoria or George V, stated that all British subjects were entitled to wear the Royal Stewart tartan, but I have also found statements where George V (a Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, later a Windsor) referred to the Royal Stewart tartan as his personal tartan and granted permission to the pipers of several regiments to wear it. That does not sound like he regarded it as a universal tartan. Perhaps the current monarch has said something upon the subject. If so, I have been unable to find anything about it so far, except for this statement. Depending on how you parse it, either both the Royal Stewart and Balmoral tartans are restricted to the Royal Family, or only the Balmoral tartan is. I think the latter interpretation is more likely.

However, I think I may have found the source for the Wikipedia quote here. The Scottish Tartans World Register probably inherited that information from the defunct Scottish Tartans Society.

[Phil]

Wikipedia is an interesting source -- very helpful but often not very authoritative. According to an article stub on the Royal Stewart tartan, it says that the Royal Stewart is the personal tartan of Queen Elizabeth II.

The red Stuart tartan has always been regarded as the one that can be worn if you have no affiliation to any other tartan. In recent years, however, there has been an explosion of district,corporate, association, Irish, Welsh, Uncle Tom Cobley and all tartans so the choice is now much wider (and more confusing). Take it from me there is no reason whatsoever why anyone cannot wear this tartan and, if you are Scottish, there is no such person as Queen Elizabeth II. The English had a Queen Elizabeth I a few hundred years ago when our Queen was Mary, Queen of Scots.

[McClef]

Take it from me there is no reason whatsoever why anyone cannot wear this tartan and, if you are Scottish, there is no such person as Queen Elizabeth II. The English had a Queen Elizabeth I a few hundred years ago when our Queen was Mary, Queen of Scots.

Whilst recognising that the Queen is the first Elizabeth to reign in Scotland there has been a policy since the Act of Union regarding regnal numbering that the highest number takes precedence where a name has been used in both Scotland or England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...itish_monarchs

So, for example, another James would be James VIII as the Scottish usage is higher than the English.

[Phil]

I see they don't reckon Charley boy wants to call himself Charles III. Maybe he's afraid of going the way of his namesake!