Lowland/Scotch-Irish/American Colonists vs. Highlanders.

[Luke MacGillie]

Lowland Scots, the Scots language ....are Germanic rather than Celtic in origin. Although there has been considerable mixing , you can not say Irish or Highland culture is Germanic.

I wasnt saying that, I was simply commenting on folks that I know that are engaging in say their Balkan Celtic heritage, the same as many of us are involved in expressing our Scottish heritage.

[TheMcManus]

I wasnt saying that, I was simply commenting on folks that I know that are engaging in say their Balkan Celtic heritage, the same as many of us are involved in expressing our Scottish heritage.

Actually you did say that "Celts of all types, not just those from Scotland are a "Safe" place where people can exercise their desire to be part of a tribe, normally without any nasty accusations of cultural appropriation."

It really doesn't matter any one can wear a Kilt, you can wear a Sioux War bonnet or African Headdress if you want. I'm not a Highland Scot, my family is pretty pure bred Irish, but I wear kilts to highland Games and think they are cool so what ever.

[ThistleDown]

Another good read is We're Indians Sure Enough : The Legacy of the Scottish Highlanders in the United States: https://www.amazon.com/Were-Indians-.../dp/0971385807

Thanks, Luke. Yes, an important addition to the list.

[ThistleDown]

It really doesn't matter any one can wear a Kilt, you can wear a Sioux War bonnet or African Headdress if you want. I'm not a Highland Scot, my family is pretty pure bred Irish, but I wear kilts to highland Games and think they are cool so what ever.

Yes, of course, although I would think care should always be taken and respect given when you cross over cultural or spiritual boundaries.

Davidlpope in his original post that began this thread said: It's ironic, then, that descendants of Lowland Scots and Ulster Scots in North Carolina have adopted the trappings of Highland culture (tartan, kilts, bagpipes) as a means of celebrating their own heritage. I think that's what we are really discussing here despite the wanderings. There are reasons for the adoption and at its extreme one of those might just be that it's 'cool' to wear someone else's gear. Sort of cultural cross-dressing.

[TheMcManus]

Yes, of course, although I would think care should always be taken and respect given when you cross over cultural or spiritual boundaries.

Davidlpope in his original post that began this thread said: It's ironic, then, that descendants of Lowland Scots and Ulster Scots in North Carolina have adopted the trappings of Highland culture (tartan, kilts, bagpipes) as a means of celebrating their own heritage. I think that's what we are really discussing here despite the wanderings. There are reasons for the adoption and at its extreme one of those might just be that it's 'cool' to wear someone else's gear. Sort of cultural cross-dressing.

The only time care has to be given is when people "appropriate" non European cultural items, due to the Politically Correct environment of the times, the Pakistani and Jewish tartans are examples of this, mean while some people are very invested in driving people from yoga and Cinqo De Mayo parties have become just terribly offensive..ugh

[ThistleDown]

We will have to agree to disagree there. IMO respect must always be given in whichever direction there is cultural or spiritual appropriation. I respect the origin of the shemagh and recognise it is not from my culture, but I wear it because it is comfortably warm in cool weather.

Many tartans today were designed by and named by non-Scots, including the two 'Jewish' tartans I know of. American designers in both cases, I believe? Tartans are assigned names by the designers, however, and are not always representative of anything more than that. I'm not sure there is a 'Pakistan' tartan but I do know of the Singh family tartan. Of course, the Singh family is of Indian and not Pakistani origin and is Scottish. Surely they will have as much if not greater right to design and wear family tartan than a Lowland- or Ulster-origin family living in, say, North Carolina -- to keep to the OP's original point -- since named tartans came later than the settlement of North Carolina.

[BVR68]

Looking up family history and I have learned that my family comes from Dunfermline, Fife, Scotland on my dad's side. I am doing more research to see how far back I can go. My mother's family also comes from Scotland but I have not gotten as far with research yet. So going by what I have been reading on posts here is that as a lowland Scot descendant I shouldn't wear a kilt. I like wearing my kilts, so I shall continue.

[Luke MacGillie]

We will have to agree to disagree there. IMO respect must always be given in whichever direction there is cultural or spiritual appropriation. I respect the origin of the shemagh and recognise it is not from my culture, but I wear it because it is comfortably warm in cool weather.

Many tartans today were designed by and named by non-Scots, including the two 'Jewish' tartans I know of. American designers in both cases, I believe? Tartans are assigned names by the designers, however, and are not always representative of anything more than that. I'm not sure there is a 'Pakistan' tartan but I do know of the Singh family tartan. Of course, the Singh family is of Indian and not Pakistani origin and is Scottish. Surely they will have as much if not greater right to design and wear family tartan than a Lowland- or Ulster-origin family living in, say, North Carolina -- to keep to the OP's original point -- since named tartans came later than the settlement of North Carolina.

Funny you should bring up shemagh's. The first "real" shemaghs I bought, from an off base souk in Afghanistan were ones that were if not Lamont tartan something awfully close, and that is why I bought them.

[davidlpope]

Davidlpope in his original post that began this thread said: It's ironic, then, that descendants of Lowland Scots and Ulster Scots in North Carolina have adopted the trappings of Highland culture (tartan, kilts, bagpipes) as a means of celebrating their own heritage. I think that's what we are really discussing here despite the wanderings. There are reasons for the adoption and at its extreme one of those might just be that it's 'cool' to wear someone else's gear. Sort of cultural cross-dressing.

Surely they will have as much if not greater right to design and wear family tartan than a Lowland- or Ulster-origin family living in, say, North Carolina -- to keep to the OP's original point -- since named tartans came later than the settlement of North Carolina.

Rex,

Yes. You've hit the nail squarely on the head. Kilts and tartans as a symbol of "pan-Scottishness" didn't take off until well after 1822/1842/1852, depending on which date one chooses as the beginning of this fad. By that time, the descendants of Lowland and Ulster Scots had been in North Carolina for at least 50-75 years, and fought two wars against Great Britain, including bloody fights against Highlanders (e.g. Moore's Creek Bridge, New Orleans). Their identity was firmly American.

So, the adoption by the descendants of Lowland and Ulster Scots in North Carolina is doubly ill-fitted: First, their ancestors never wore the kilt. Second, the connection of tartans to those families was generations after these Lowland and Ulster Scots had left Scotland.

Although I'm part of this phenomenon, myself, I do find it curious. Perhaps better to simply dwell on the fact that kilts and bagpipes are cool.

David

[tripleblessed]

Am enjoying this thread. My Scots in this area (N.C.) lived around present-day Lumberton and Maxton, and came from
Skye and Angus in the 1770's. Some fought in the Continental Army, at least one at least abetted, maybe served,
the Loyalist side. At least one went home to Skye until the war was over. My Lowland Scots mostly came into
Virginia around 1650-1660 from the Borders. Their service was likely Continental Army, but not yet firmly established.
Early Irish lines about 1720. English lines after 1640. Earliest were Welsh, first birth here in 1609. English, Irish,
and Welsh all stood for the colonies. One Scots line, of clan Donald, arrived as a slave, sold by Cromwell after the
battle of Worcester. Likely only the Highlanders had worn kilts, but I find them comfortable, so I wear them. I don't
feel like I'm "appropriating" anything. Doesn't necessarily mean I'm not, just that it doesn't feel that way. I'm not
militant about it, don't take offense at other views, just mostly dress in kilts.