Wearing a clans tartan

[Highlander775]

For what it's worth,through my research,I've learned that Clan Tartans are a relatively recent invention.Prior to the 19th century(Victorian Era)a clan wore whatever tartan that was most affordable for their Chieftan.The first "officially" recognized tartan was "Government Sett" or "BlackWatch" tartan.This was easy to see since the wearing of the kilt was illegal in the Highlands under the "Disarming Acts" after the Jacobite defeat at Culloden in 1746.The "Government Sett" however was worn by the Black Watch and other highland independent companies who were in the service of the crown and acted as a highland constabulary.The right to wear the kilt again for highlanders not serving in the British Army did not happen until after the American Revolution when the Highlanders had distinguished themselves in that war and the French & Indian War. 8)




"Bringing History To Life"

[mcnice]

as the tartans had been designed just after the hipe from queen victoria II around 1830, they are not really the patterns worn by the high time of clan system during middle age or renaissance.

i feel that there are just to many nice looking tartans that we would not give a good service to kilt wearing if we don t wore them.
this concerns especially non-scots who only would have the right to wear non clan related tartans.

the author of an interetsing book wrote that the scots are much to proud of their history and sensible with their traditions, that they would never allow the mainstream abuse of tartans if they really had been historical ;)

[Donnie]

If the only waty to be able to wear a tartan was by permission or right, there would be far fewer tartans to choose from. It would be too expensive to purchase! The mills wouldn't make the material in as large a quantity, if at all. I like to have a connection with a tartan as a conversational tool.( ) Wear what you want!

[macwilkin]

I've posted this web site before, but it seems germane to post it again on this thread:

http://www.albanach.org/

Matt is the curator of the Scottish Tartans Museum in Franklin, North Carolina.

Check out the article entitled "Pre-Culloden Tartans", as well as the other articles -- very good research & advice.

A point of clarification: the Chief didn't necessarily determine the tartans in "ye olde days"; more likely, it was the women of the village, clan, etc. that did, because they were the ones producing it. You'll see quite a few paintings of Chiefs wearing tartan that looks nothing like the "clan tartan" for that clan today.

Case in point: in 1815, the Chief of the MacDonalds, Lord MacDonald, received a request from the Highland Society of London asking for his "clan tartan:. LMcD wrote back with the reply:

Being really ignorant of what is exactly The MacDonald Tartan, I request that you will have the goodness to exert every Means in your power to obtain a perfectly genuine pattern, such as will warrant me in authenticating it with my arms.

From: "Tartans" by Blair Urquhart

Cheers,

T.

[Miah]

Just my thoughts but, I feel a person can wear any tartan they like. With that said personaly i like to know a little about the tartan I am wearing. I do this mostly so i can speak about it when i get questions about clans and so on.

[macwilkin]

Just my thoughts but, I feel a person can wear any tartan they like. With that said personaly i like to know a little about the tartan I am wearing. I do this mostly so i can speak about it when i get questions about clans and so on.

I agree. Since, as Thompson has stated, there is no such thing as a "right" to wear a tartan, then as long as the tartan is not "restricted", such as the Balmoral or certain clan/family tartans (the material has to be purchased from the Chief and/or society with appropriate documentation), it is open for wear -- but, as you have stated, if you are going to wear the tartan, you should be prepared to explain why you chose it and know your tartan, as Jimmy has advised on many occasion.

Personally, the least connection, no matter how small it is, is better than none at all.

Cheers,

T.

[Jerry]

I've already posted my reply to this topic, but here is one other piece of info. You are allowed to wear most tartans, but when it comes to the Clan Coat of Arms, it is registered to the clan Chieftan and only he may display it. A clan member is allowed to wear a clan badge, but it must be the clan symbol encircled by a belt. Witness the MacNeil of Barra Clan badge in my Avitar.

[macwilkin]

JerMc,

You are quite correct; in the UK and the Republic of Ireland, arms belong to the individual, and not everyone bearing that surname. An individual with arms is known as an "armiger". In Scotland, heraldric laws comes under the jurisdiction of the Lyon Court, whose chief officer is the Lord Lyon, who oversees all matter heraldic in Scotland. England & Wales have the College of Arms, Erie the College of Heraldry, but Scotland's heraldry laws are certainly the most strict when it comes to who can display arms. Other countries, like South Africa, Spain and Canada have their own Heraldic authorities.

But, I will stop there because we are digressing from tartans -- but the Chief's Crest Badge -- not technically a clan badge, since the device in the center of the badge is the Chief's Crest, i.e. the device above the helm on a coat-of-arms -- is proper for anyone bearing allegiance to that Clan & its Chief.

I used to presentations on heraldry for our genealogy department at the public library where I worked, so I'm kinda passionate about this subject! :mrgreen:

A final note: the crest makes up one part of a coat-of-arms. Beware of the "Bucket Shops" here in America peddling "family coats-of-arms", since there is no such thing.

Cheers,

T.