|
-
18th December 15, 10:17 AM
#1
Ah, the name game. Or how kiltmakers keep themselves entertained for hours.
There are a few Tartans listed under the name Scott. What many people, and at least one weaving company, call Scott Red is actually listed as Scott, 1842. On the Scottish Tartans Authority it is #1005 There are two other common Tartans listed under the name Scott. They are Scott, Hunting #1546 and Scott, Green #825.
Because of the way Tartans are listed - Alphabetically by name first - I have been writing Tartan names - Scott, 1842, modern version.
Even though wrong as Barb points out, it has been sort of accepted that we list Tartans by the name first. Scott, then the identifier, then the version. But somehow we have dropped the commas and the word 'version'.
But not everyone has found the Scottish Tartans Authority or the Scottish Register of Tartans in their Google search so don't know that there is more than one Scott Tartan. They usually walk into my shop and say something like "I would like my kilt made in the Scott Tartan". Then the fun begins.
The color version of Tartans has also caused all sorts of confusion. Many people, not in the kilt world, would believe that using the words modern or ancient would refer to the age of the Tartan not the color. I see this all the time in the shop. The assumption that an ancient Tartan would be older and therefore the original or 'correct' one. So the poor customer walks into my shop and says "I would like the old Scott Tartan".
Last edited by Steve Ashton; 18th December 15 at 12:23 PM.
Steve Ashton
www.freedomkilts.com
Skype (webcam enabled) thewizardofbc
I wear the kilt because: Swish + Swagger = Swoon.
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to The Wizard of BC For This Useful Post:
-
18th December 15, 10:51 AM
#2
Steve's method of using commas is perfectly acceptable if I recall my grade school grammar. So would this I think: Scott tartan - 1842 -weathered, or Scott tartan/1842/weathered in our modern age.
"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience
well, that comes from poor judgement."
A. A. Milne
-
-
18th December 15, 10:55 AM
#3
But that kills all the fun.
We get the customer who comes in and is adamant that their name is Thompson or Thomson. They are positive that their spelling is the right one and want 'their' Tartan.
And don't get us started on the whole Mac vs Mc thing. We just break out the popcorn for that show.
Last edited by The Wizard of BC; 18th December 15 at 10:56 AM.
Steve Ashton
www.freedomkilts.com
Skype (webcam enabled) thewizardofbc
I wear the kilt because: Swish + Swagger = Swoon.
-
The Following 2 Users say 'Aye' to The Wizard of BC For This Useful Post:
-
18th December 15, 01:10 PM
#4
 Originally Posted by Liam
Steve's method of using commas is perfectly acceptable if I recall my grade school grammar. So would this I think: Scott tartan - 1842 -weathered, or Scott tartan/1842/weathered in our modern age.
I totally agree - that would be grammatically correct. And that was my point initially - it should either be Modern Green Scott or Scott, Modern Green or Scott, Green, Modern. The latter two are fine for lists, indexes, or stand-alone names (e.g., in a header), but they are not correct for a sentence, either written or in conversation, where the adjectives should come first as modifies of the noun.
Last edited by Barb T; 18th December 15 at 01:13 PM.
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to Barb T For This Useful Post:
-
18th December 15, 02:56 PM
#5
 Originally Posted by Barb T
I totally agree - that would be grammatically correct. And that was my point initially - it should either be Modern Green Scott or Scott, Modern Green or Scott, Green, Modern. The latter two are fine for lists, indexes, or stand-alone names (e.g., in a header), but they are not correct for a sentence, either written or in conversation, where the adjectives should come first as modifies of the noun.
Actually, Barb, in conversation if asked what my tartan was, I would likely reply: "It is the 1842 version of the Scott tartan in modern colours."
Although I might even omit the "in modern colour" as this is the most common.
Cheers....
"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience
well, that comes from poor judgement."
A. A. Milne
-
-
19th December 15, 08:59 AM
#6

Pretty rumpled. Wore it down the Grand Canyon in 2013.

Unrumpled and new I believe when this pic was taken.
Hope that helps a little. Its a 5 yarder, but close. Got it from Rocky
Last edited by Riverkilt; 19th December 15 at 09:01 AM.
Ol' Macdonald himself, a proud son of Skye and Cape Breton Island
Lifetime Member STA. Two time winner of Utilikiltarian of the Month.
"I'll have a kilt please, a nice hand sewn tartan, 16 ounce Strome. Oh, and a sporran on the side, with a strap please."
-
The Following 2 Users say 'Aye' to Riverkilt For This Useful Post:
-
18th December 15, 12:56 PM
#7
 Originally Posted by The Wizard of BC
Many people, not in the kilt world, would believe that using the words modern or ancient would refer to the age of the Tartan not the color. I see this all the time in the shop. The assumption that an ancient Tartan would be older and therefore the original or 'correct' one. So the poor customer walks into my shop and says "I would like the old Scott Tartan".
Except for those cases where "old" or "ancient" refer to the particular tartan being older than other clan tartans (e.g. Old Buchanan, Ancient MacMillan, etc.).
Within my own clan I've been advocating that we refer to the green, burgundy, and yellow tartan as "MacMillan Old Sett" to avoid confusion with the color schemes.
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks