wearing other family tartan rather than your own

[Mike_Oettle]

Thank you Todd. Things were getting a little anarchistic there.
Regards,
Mike

[Moski]

You fail to understand the concept of the Clan Chief, my friend. If the Chief recognizes the tartan, then it is a legitimate clan tartan. A quote from a member of the Court of Session, Lord Aitchinson, seems appropriate:

Historically the idea of a chief or chieftain submitting his dignity to the arbitrament of it Court of law is really grotesque. The chief was the law, and his authority was derived from his own people.

-- http://www.heraldica.org/topics/brit...cs.htm#Maclean of Ardgour

If you want to be pedantic, there are tartans that were designed by clan members and chiefs, as well as those that were named by mills and others for clans. But in Highland tradition, the Chief decides which tartan is a "bona fide" tartan.

T.

But that was not my question. My question was of ownership. Not if the Chief could state "this tartan respresents my Clan or that tartan I do not recognise". And no I won't aknowledge haughty praise of the personage and priveiledge of a Chief as authoritative in-re the question of ownership it the particular rights thereof.

Yes the Chief decides what is a "bona fide" tartan of his clan. Where does the right to restrict it's use come from? And I was not referring to tartans that were designed by chiefs of clan members. I'm pretty much talking about pre-existing tartans.

Hey who has the right of control of the sutherland district tartan? How does it apply to a tie or trews.

[Teufel Hunden]

Great thread everyone!

I'm of the camp that doesn't usually stray from associated tartans. It never really crossed my mind to wear a different one than my chosen MacDonald of the Isles Hunting, just as displaying a different family coat of arms in my home hasn't. But, I see nothing wrong with wearing a different tartan, as many others in the thread have agreed.

I also agree with McClef, as if it were a big issue, it would come up in some official channels and not just amongst the kilted rabble. At the very least it might appear in the FAQ section of some Clan websites. I think intent and respect win the day in all cases of wearing a tartan not your own.

[Jock Scot]

Aha "Official channels" sometimes don't necessarily exist in writing in matters such as these and it is a very British thing and causes confusion and misunderstandings to the unwary and particularly to the unwary foreigner! There are many unwritten conventions in UK society, even these days, that go under the headings of "its just not done", or conversely, "that is the way it is done" and confusing though it is, even though it is unwritten----anywhere----there is still the "propper way of doing things"! Do not rely on the fact that something is written down with British conventions and if it is not written down then it must be OK to do it,or not, as the case may be.That would be probably be a big mistake!

[tripleblessed]

With UTMOST respect to those knowledge and opinions I honestly value, we have revealed the vast abyss between the Norman view and the Celtic view.
cajunscot quotes Lord Aitchinson as saying the authority of the chief is derived from the people. People are not, in my humble opinion, heritable objects. I would submit for your consideration that it is a man of haughty disposition indeed who would attempt to make the case that they are. And yes, I address that remark to many of my very own ancestors. The Norman view
that the king has a God-given right to own and rule lands and people is anathema to those who hold the Celtic view of free men standing together
by blood and choice. I am no man's man. I will happily support the man who
stands FOR his clan, but will have no truck with the craven slime that would sell
their clan to be called earl or duke, or steal clan lands for sheep and money.

'Nuff said. Don't want to step over the line, and no desire to call mods out in the
middle of the night.

[Irish Jack O'Brian]

I am no man's man. I will happily support the man who stands FOR his clan, but will have no truck with the craven slime that would sell their clan to be called earl or duke, or steal clan lands for sheep and money.

Thank you sir, for speaking up. I have mentioned already once in this thread that as an American I owe no allegiance to a foreign aristocracy. So if this clan of my ancestors is "heritable," and in order for me to honor my ancestors by wearing the tartan of their long-ago clan, I am required to take a knee and kiss the ring of the scion of the filth that ran my people out, then I will not be able to do so. We colonials have always been a bit haughty.

As an old man, I am done with little secret societies that have secret handshakes and wear funny little secret hats and have the power to blackball others from their company. My motto these days is "Radical Inclusivity." Yes, it is anarchic, but I find it feels closer to the truth than the gated community of the elect.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

People are not, in my humble opinion, heritable objects.

With all due respect I believe that some on this thread are, perhaps, woefully uninformed as to what is, exactly, the nature of a clan, and how it relates to its chief and chieftains.

From what has been posted in the past it often appears that individuals sometime launch into vituperative attacks on long deceased generations of chiefs based on sources drawn from popular fiction, rebel songs, or a personal sense of "justice and fair play". While I can accept one's emotional responses (and, indeed, the way in which they were brought up in their own homes) as a valid reaction to what they perceive to have been said, I feel that it would be a good thing if people were to approach the subject of chiefs, clans, and clanship, from a position of greater knowledge and understanding.

As a starting point, I would suggest that anyone who questions that a clan is "heritable" read chapters I and V of Adam's The Clans, Septs & Regiments of the Scottish Highlands. Likewise, they should read Sir Thomas Innes of Learney's book, The Tartans of the Clans and Families of Scotland. Both authors clearly explain the heritable relationship between the chief and his clan.

[Jock Scot]

I say this with the greatest of respect to all, but I have some Americans in mind here.

If you live outwith the UK in general and Scotland in particular then you have every right to think the way that you do when it is to do with your own country's affairs. You have the Declaration of Independence and your ancestors may well have fought to have the Aristocracy removed and the "all men are created equal" train of thought was created and there is much to commend that way of thinking. In passing I note that they do have military ranks and Presidents etc and of course in a democracy those positions are given on some sort of ability and merit. Nevertheless there is a "pecking order".

All of the above is fine as far as I am concerned as long as those from other nations with that point of view don't try to impose their views on others from other countries.That they have no right so to do. Rubbishing traditions, conventions, and courtesies of other nations can cause at the very least, a sharp intake of breath! In truth most of us from anywhere in the world, on the whole, are too busy getting on with day to day life to bump into this situation.

However in this case we are talking about two cultures, the UK one and in this case mainly the USA because we are involved in discussing a mutual interest------the kilt, part of the Scots culture to be precise. For my part whilst I think I understand ( I try to at least) other points of view from outwith the UK's borders I do feel that on occasion this is not reciprocated by some. I always find that a shame and sometimes I find that insulting and arrogant.

Some people really ought to try to be a little more thoughtful, courteous and respectful when discussing other nation's cultures. That goes for me and that goes for everyone else in this world.

[BoldHighlander]

Some people really ought to try to be a little more thoughtful, courteous and respectful when discussing other nation's cultures. That goes for me and that goes for everyone else in this world.

Hear! Hear!

[Downunder Kilt]

Hear hear Jock. As a person that has travelled to a lot of countries and experienced a lot of cultures and traditions, I wholeheartedly agree that if you want to join in those cultures/traditions, you play by their rules and accept their terms. If you don't agree and find it offensive with the way things are done, why in the hell do you want to join in.