Another question about clans--adopted children

[TheOfficialBren]

I have a cousin who is adopted. He is as much a part of our family as any of the rest of us.

Would it be considered inappropriate for him to wear our tartan?
Would he be as "entitled" (whatever that means--waves hand in a passé manner) to wear the colours that represent his adopted family that reared him from very young childhood?

I understand that "clan" means "family," often a group unconnected by blood but rather by geography and symbiosis.

I don't mean to start a thread with any controversy. I know that this could be a very emotional thread. Let's keep it cool.

Thank you.

[cessna152towser]

From a Scottish perspective, many servants historically took the surname of the laird whom they served, so I would see no objection to anyone wearing the tartan of the family who adopted them.

[Jock Scot]

Not quite the same situation, but nearly. When I re-married I "inherited " step children, when they were old enough to choose they were offered the choice of wearing "my" tartan, or the tartan of their late father's. They made their choice and that is fully respected by all. In your position , why not ask your cousin and then respect his decision? It is no other's business other than your family's.

[TheOfficialBren]

That is a very good point, Alex. It's quite historically sound.

Jock, that just makes sense! Thank you for sharing the personal annecdote. I will ask him if the subject comes up.

Thanks, chaps.

[Chas]

I have a cousin who is adopted. He is as much a part of our family as any of the rest of us.

Would it be considered inappropriate for him to wear our tartan?
Would he be as "entitled" (whatever that means--waves hand in a passé manner) to wear the colours that represent his adopted family that reared him from very young childhood?

I understand that "clan" means "family," often a group unconnected by blood but rather by geography and symbiosis.

I don't mean to start a thread with any controversy. I know that this could be a very emotional thread. Let's keep it cool.

Thank you.

I have some expertise in this field.

The adopted person will always know that they are adopted. It is not that they feel unwanted, or unneeded, or unloved - no, not that at all. But still in the back of their minds is the knowledge that they are adopted.

For the sake of the mental health and peace of mind of the adopted person, I would never mention it. If the question of a tartan arises, then they should be told that yours is their family tartan. Inclusiveness and similarity rather than emphasising differences.

Regards

Chas

[Laird_M]

My eldest is from my wife's first marriage and he has fully embraced his adopted heritage.

As JS and Cessna point out, its quite acceptable.

Historically bondsmen and vassals and those 'fostered' by another Clan often wore a tartan of the Clan they joined. And as Chas so succintly points out, it shouldn't ever be made an issue. Shehan is a member of our Clan, so will wear MacLeod tartan with pride.

Originally, the Scottish Tartan was a distinction of rank or position. It was not identified by weave but by the number of colours in the weave. If only one colour was used it depicted a servant, two, a farmer rank, three, an officer rank, five, a chieftain, six for a poet, and seven for a Chief. Eventually, clans or families adopted their own tartan, using a range of animal and earth colours which were frequently secret, only known to the weavers of the islands. They included yellows, blues, whites, greens, browns, reds, black and purple. Some say that a keen eye can identify the colour with a particular island, almost like a wine taster can identify the year and the vineyard. Obviously this restriction is not followed these days, and most tartans are just 'ancient', 'hunting' etc., so there is no reason why he can't wear his adopted clan's tartan.

[Paul Henry]

snip....
Originally, the Scottish Tartan was a distinction of rank or position. It was not identified by weave but by the number of colours in the weave. If only one colour was used it depicted a servant, two, a farmer rank, three, an officer rank, five, a chieftain, six for a poet, and seven for a Chief. Eventually, clans or families adopted their own tartan, using a range of animal and earth colours which were frequently secret, only known to the weavers of the islands. They included yellows, blues, whites, greens, browns, reds, black and purple. Some say that a keen eye can identify the colour with a particular island, almost like a wine taster can identify the year and the vineyard. Obviously this restriction is not followed these days, and most tartans are just 'ancient', 'hunting' etc., so there is no reason why he can't wear his adopted clan's tartan.

Where on earth do you get this idea from,it's complete nonsense, whilst there are instances of finer cloth being used for wealthier people or perhaps an unusual colour for a special person, the idea that you can classify tartans or wearer of tartan in this way is just another one of the many romanticisms and are simply without credibility and shouldn't be broadcast as fact

[Laird_M]

Can't remember where I got the info, but it was from several sources. But then again, you shouldn't beleive everythign you read I guess.

[Jock Scot]

Can't remember where I got the info, but it was from several sources. But then again, you shouldn't beleive everythign you read I guess.

I too have seen this written and indeed spoken about from time to time, but I have always considered it as a prime example of, " tourist board clap-trap".

[creagdhubh]

From a Scottish perspective, many servants historically took the surname of the laird whom they served, so I would see no objection to anyone wearing the tartan of the family who adopted them.

***