|
-
12th June 25, 04:29 AM
#1
 Originally Posted by OC Richard
I wonder if the piece of cloth dug up on the Culloden battlefield will be in there somewhere.
(Sorry to be a bit cheeky but in truth its whereabouts are a mystery.)
That'll be because it never existed.
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to figheadair For This Useful Post:
-
12th June 25, 11:14 AM
#2
 Originally Posted by figheadair
That'll be because it never existed.
Stranger things have happened! Who knows, it might turn up someday.
DC Dalgliesh did state that it was "on loan" through from whom isn't stated. Was the peat cutter who found it the owner? In England such dug finds are property of the Crown, no?
The conditions of the loan are stated, viz being insured for 2,000 pounds and locked in a safe each night, but the duration of the loan is not.
So the questions are
1) did the cloth fragment ever exist?
2) if it did, who was considered the owner?
3) if DC Dalgliesh had the fragment on loan, was it ever returned to the owner?
4) if it exists, where is it now?
The fragment was said to resemble a MacDonald tartan, though which of the several MacDonald tartans isn't stated.
Proud Mountaineer from the Highlands of West Virginia; son of the Revolution and Civil War; first Europeans on the Guyandotte
-
-
13th June 25, 12:07 AM
#3
 Originally Posted by OC Richard
In England such dug finds are property of the Crown, no?
Not just England, the whole of the UK including Scotland.
But the law is for 'treasure' not everything or anything you might find, and is there to prevent people secretly digging up Saxon, Viking or Roman sites, finding 'treasure' in the form of gold and jewels and flogging it off on the black market. Think of the Sutton Hoo find or the bags of Roman gold coins that make the news.
When found items become the property of 'The Crown' by default, it is to put them into state guardianship or protection - the monarch, the government and the people have equal and joint responsibility and custodianship, but none has individual ownership. Being property of the Crown quite importantly protects it from a potentially greedy government.
Laws in the UK are usually the same across the United Kingdom, but the legal system allows for cultural or traditional differences locally - which is why a law might be named slightly differently and suffixed with 'England and Wales' or 'Scotland' accordingly and is restricted to that location. Despite common perception, Scotland has retained much of its pre-union independent identity in the form of laws, currency, public holidays etc.
The treasure-trove laws appear very sensible, in that they protect 'finds' of antiquities of national and historical importance and counter any finders-keepers claims. A centuries-old scrap of tartan in a peat-bog may have little commercial value, but it is priceless to historians - which, as Indiana Jones might rightly say, belongs in a museum.
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to Troglodyte For This Useful Post:
-
13th June 25, 02:00 AM
#4
 Originally Posted by OC Richard
Stranger things have happened! Who knows, it might turn up someday.
DC Dalgliesh did state that it was "on loan" through from whom isn't stated. Was the peat cutter who found it the owner? In England such dug finds are property of the Crown, no?
The conditions of the loan are stated, viz being insured for 2,000 pounds and locked in a safe each night, but the duration of the loan is not.
So the questions are
1) did the cloth fragment ever exist?
2) if it did, who was considered the owner?
3) if DC Dalgliesh had the fragment on loan, was it ever returned to the owner?
4) if it exists, where is it now?
The fragment was said to resemble a MacDonald tartan, though which of the several MacDonald tartans isn't stated.
I sought clarification along those lines from them some years ago. I also questioned whether the piece had been verified at the time (late 1940s) by the National Museum - it was not, and whether it was photographed. Unsurprisingly, given that this has all the hallmarks of a marketing hoax, I never received a reply.
Last edited by figheadair; 13th June 25 at 09:41 PM.
-
The Following 4 Users say 'Aye' to figheadair For This Useful Post:
-
13th June 25, 07:15 AM
#5
 Originally Posted by figheadair
I sought clarification along those lines from them some years ago.
I also questioned whether the piece had been verified at the time (late 1940s) by the National Museum - it was not, and whether it was photographed.
Unsurprisingly, given that this has all the hallmarked of a marketing hoax, I never received a reply.
This story does have an Allen Brothers ring to it.
However to give the Brothers due credit, had they been pressed to produce the cloth they would have done- literally.
Proud Mountaineer from the Highlands of West Virginia; son of the Revolution and Civil War; first Europeans on the Guyandotte
-
-
So what happens to their exclusive tartans? I can’t find the PEI(Canada) tartan anymore
Clan Logan Representative of Ontario
https://www.instagram.com/clanlogan_ontario_canada/ (that's where i post my blogs)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVgTGPvWpU7cAv4KJ4cWRpQ
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to Patty Logan For This Useful Post:
-
19th October 25, 11:07 AM
#7
Weaving some tartan from the liquidated DC Dalgliesh yarnstock
Just thought I'd let people know that some tartan is currently being woven from the yarn stock purchased from the liquidation of DC Dalgleish. There's been a lot of work over the last few months to get things going, yarn sorted and ready for weaving.
Have 2 Cunningham dancers weight tartans one in blue the other in red ready to weave in the loom this week, these weaves will be followed by 2 heavyweight tartans - MacLeod and Galloway. All weaves are doublewidth and are being contract woven in Scotland by a very experienced small team who have many decades of experience and currently contract weave to the tartan industry and others.
I'm planning on having a website available online later this month, eskdaletartans domain names have been registered. if anyone is looking for a tartan weave of at least 25m please get in touch.
 
-
The Following 8 Users say 'Aye' to Adrian For This Useful Post:
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