Tartan-wearing conventions among Scots

[macwilkin]

Agreed...fun thread. I read a very enlightening piece from a well-known Tartan Scholar (I think it was Matt Newsome) on the origins of tartans and the "falsity" (my word, not his) of the notion that all of these tartans are deeply rooted in family and clan connections...in fact they were imposed by the Monarchy in the 1800s and then commercialized by the tartan weavers...post Culloden. I wish I could remember what site it was on now. Anyways...agreed on the interest in conducting more geneaological research on the family roots...but in the meantime, I'm not going to feel guilty about wearing a tartan that I like either.

I don't know if I would use the word "imposed"...the State visit of George IV to Edinburgh certainly helped fuel the tartan mania, but there were other factors, such as the weaving firms like Wilson's of Bannockburn, that helped create it as well, and before 1822 when George wore his pink tights under the kilt. :mrgreen:

Regards,

Todd

[beowulf67]

There may be wishful American Davidsons sporting the tartan whose forebears came from Coventry, England.

There may also be wishful American Davidsons whose Davis ancestors originated in Wales, moved to Scotland and then came to America.

Should I be shunned for wanting to wear a kilt if I can't verify any Scottish heritage??

Yea verily thou shalt not only be shunned but shall also be hunted down by the Kilt Police and flogged with fresh trout. And the Lord did grin.

Ok, slightly more seriously there has been a lot of great advice on this thread. If you can't find a direct family connection but have a connection to a district or military service feel free to wear a tartan associated with those.
(Or any other tartan you like)

When I wore my kilt out and about in Scotland last month I had several people ask if I had Scottish ancestors and they seemed happy that I did, but I don't think they would have been terribly upset if I had said No. Or at least they would have hidden it well.

[Nighthawk]

I have a new friend who is a Scot just out of the RAF. He bought himself an acrylic Black Watch tartan kilt this last weekend at a festival he and I attended. (He bough it against my urging, by the way.) He went into one of the portaprivies to change into it and out of his great kilt. He asked me if I liked it, and I mentioned that all the traditionalists I knew would tell him that it was too long. It hung to the bottom of his knee, which is where I wear mine. As soon as I said the word "traditionalist" he started on a long and to my American ears, only half coherent rant on self righteous kilt police, and how if he's going to wear something, he's going to be comfortable, arrogant traditionalists be damned, etc etc. He wants a Hay tartan kilt (as that’s his clan association and he doesn't have one, so I directed him to USA Kilts), he wanted a Utilikilt until he saw the price, which was when I suggested Flamingo and Amerikilts, which made him very happy- two contemporaries for the price of one Utilikilt! He was like a kid in a candy store with all the New World Celtic products that he was seeing. He was surprised at how those of us in the New World have embraced our past, and he wanted to be a part of it. So that’s my latest experience with a native born Scot. Everything he said and did were completely contrary to the intolerance to change that I have experienced in other places. It was very refreshing. (I was wearing my black Amerikilt, black hose, and Dress MacLeod flashes that day, and mentioned to him that I was feeling too lazy that morning to wear a real kilt. He looked at me and said "That looks like a real kilt me! I want one!")

And I have to say- the Scottish gentleman at the Highland Park whiskey tasting was a very interesting and enjoyable person to chat with, as well.

[gilmore]

One reason some names are on multiple sept lists is that people of that name in different geographical areas may have been affiliated with different clans.
....

"There is no official list of recognised septs. This is a matter for each chief to determine. But where a particular sept has traditionally been associated with a particular clan it would not be appropriate for that name to be treated by another clan chief as one of its septs."

The Court of the Lord Lyon, http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/240.html

and that is that.

[gilmore]

Agreed...fun thread. I read a very enlightening piece from a well-known Tartan Scholar (I think it was Matt Newsome) on the origins of tartans and the "falsity" (my word, not his) of the notion that all of these tartans are deeply rooted in family and clan connections...in fact they were imposed by the Monarchy in the 1800s and then commercialized by the tartan weavers...post Culloden. I wish I could remember what site it was on now. ...

Not accurate. There are a few tartans that were associated with specific clans before Culloden. E.g., Red Morrison/Gilmore.

[Stratherrick]

The whole idea about wearing a tartan is that you're, intentionally or otherwise, identifying with a clan. Feel free to wear what you like, I say. If I saw somebody in one of the many Fraser kilts who wasn't either a Fraser or from one of the associated septs, I'd still call them a brother or sister if they wanted me to!

Slainte

Bruce

[Nick the DSM]

Not accurate. There are a few tartans that were associated with specific clans before Culloden. E.g., Red Morrison/Gilmore.

I thought that tartan was dated 1747? You could be right though.

[gilmore]

I thought that tartan was dated 1747? You could be right though.

"The tartan is based on a sett which was first found in 1935, when an old Morrison family bible was uncovered in a Black House which was to be demolished on Lewis. The piece of tartan was wrapped around the bible, and inside a note referencing the sett was dated 1745."

Since the existence of the sett preceded the writing of the note, the tartan itself is of course likely older than that. But let's be modest.

The battle of Culloden occured in 1746

[Bruce Scott]

Agreed...fun thread. I read a very enlightening piece from a well-known Tartan Scholar (I think it was Matt Newsome) on the origins of tartans and the "falsity" (my word, not his) of the notion that all of these tartans are deeply rooted in family and clan connections...in fact they were imposed by the Monarchy in the 1800s and then commercialized by the tartan weavers...post Culloden. I wish I could remember what site it was on now. Anyways...agreed on the interest in conducting more geneaological research on the family roots...but in the meantime, I'm not going to feel guilty about wearing a tartan that I like either.

Imposed upon whom, I wonder......?

[O'Callaghan]

"There is no official list of recognised septs. This is a matter for each chief to determine. But where a particular sept has traditionally been associated with a particular clan it would not be appropriate for that name to be treated by another clan chief as one of its septs."

The Court of the Lord Lyon, http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/240.html

and that is that.

Doesn't actually seem to stop them, though, does it?