Was Tartan ever actually banned?

[figheadair]

I'm sure that I'm not the only one that was brought up on the fact that tartan was banned by the Act of Proscription. The other day I was re-reading transcripts of the Act and find myself wondering whether it's been misunderstood/misinterpreted over the past 100 years or so.

Unfortunately the original is not available (yet) on-line and so one has to work with various transcriptions but in general they all give the following:

And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the first day of August, one thousand seven hundred and forty seven, no man or boy, within that part of Great Briton called Scotland, other than shall be employed as officers and soldiers in his Majesty's forces, shall on any pretence whatsoever, wear or put on the clothes commonly called Highland Clothes (that is to say) the plaid, philibeg, or little kilt, trowse, shoulder belts, or any part whatsoever of what peculiarly belongs to the highland garb; and that no tartan, or partly-coloured plaid or stuff shall be used for great coats, or for upper coats; and if any such person shall presume, after the said first day of August, to wear or put on the aforesaid garments or any part of them, every such person so offending, being convicted thereof by the oath of one or more credible witness or witnesses before any court of justiciary, or any one or more justices of the peace for the shire or stewartry, or judge ordinary of the place where such offence shall be committed, shall suffer imprisonment, without bail, during the space of six months, and no longer; and being convicted for a second offence before a court of justiciary or at the circuits, shall be liable to be transported to any of his Majesty's plantations beyond the seas, there to remain for a space of seven years

Note the section highlighted. Neither here, nor anywhere else in Act, does it state that possession of tartan was banned, merely that the wearing tartan or parti-coloured Highland clothes by men was forbidden. Now it may of course be that some 'authorities' choose to interpret the Act more rigerously (as with the judge that classified the Pipes as a weapon of war despite the fact that they're not mentioned in the Act), we just don't know but it's an interesting subtle difference and may be the reason that some plaid/blankets etc survived.

Food for thought.