And it was never seen again ...

**Lime** · 27th March 13, 01:14 PM

The way he has worded the restrictions means that he can't even wear it himself!

Ha ha! Brilliant - have you considered a career in law? I wonder if he realises?

**TheOfficialBren** · 27th March 13, 01:50 PM

Quite right, Tobus. I can understand what you are saying about legitimacy.

Kyle, I agree. It is, in a word, hideous. I NORMALLY make it a policy to be open-minded about other people's tartans, especially those with a tradition behind them...but this one is a bit "garish," I agree.

**Mike_Oettle** · 27th March 13, 01:59 PM

Aside from the fact that this sett is asymmetrical, I have no comment to make on it. A man can wear what he chooses.
But going through the latest registrations from the Scottish Register of Tartans, I see that Rocky Roeger has brought out four for people with Irish ancestry.
Not sure why he felt it necessary to add to the already confusing number of Irish district tartans. I feel Ulster Red (or any other of the Ulster colour combinations) perfectly adequate for people of Ulster descent, and there are existing tartans for Leinster, Munster and Connaught (several there!).
Perhaps Rocky would like to respond and give his reasons, not only for producing the “Ancestry” series, but also for the colour choices he has made.
Regards,
Mike

**Sir Didymous** · 1st June 13, 11:16 PM

Legitimacy is why my troop wants to register a tartan, though we haven't decided on what restrictions to place on it. Some say members of our troop only, others say members and supporters, and still the list of possibilities goes on.

**mookien** · 2nd June 13, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Chas

... Leaving aside the limited pallet (4 colours) and the fact that it is asymmetrical, Mr James Klymson has almost insured that no one will ever wear this tartan. Firstly, you have to have the same surname, but also have to be one of his descendants. So his brother's children, or any other branch of his grandfather's family are not allowed to wear it. The way he has worded the restrictions means that he can't even wear it himself!

Will we ever see it again? I somehow doubt it.

Regards

Chas

Perhaps James doesn't ever want to wear the tartan, ... and hates his descendants.

**figheadair** · 3rd June 13, 10:06 PM

Originally Posted by Sir Didymous

Legitimacy is why my troop wants to register a tartan, though we haven't decided on what restrictions to place on it. Some say members of our troop only, others say members and supporters, and still the list of possibilities goes on.

I sit on the Advisory board of the STR and we recently discussed the way they note restrictions and other comments from applicants. I made the point that accepting a restriction on who can wear something is meaningless as it's unenforceable. I suggested that wording should be amended to something like Intended for the use of......

**Mike_Oettle** · 4th June 13, 06:21 AM

A most sensible proposal, Peter. Except in instances where it is physically possible to restrain weavers from producing the cloth without authority and disposing of it likewise, the restrictions are meaningless.
Regards,
Mike

**davidlpope** · 4th June 13, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by Sir Didymous

Legitimacy is why my troop wants to register a tartan, though we haven't decided on what restrictions to place on it.

Can you explain your thinking here a bit more? I'm not sure that public registration of a tartan creates legitimacy. There have been a horde of poorly designed and poorly conceived tartans that have propogated after the establishment of the Public Register of Tartans.

Perhaps, instead of legitimate, aim for authentic. Adopt one of the "orphaned" Wilsons of Bannockburn setts, much like the Scottish Tartans Authority or Mark Harden of Cowdenknowes did!