Quote Originally Posted by M. A. C. Newsome View Post

Mackinnon's opinion that only one who has the surname has an "entitlement" to the tartan, while one without the surname is free to wear it but cannot claim "entitlement" in essence renders the whole idea meaningless. What on earth does it mean to claim some individuals have a special entitlement to a tartan, which he then admits that anyone else is free to wear? In effect it means that there is no such entitlement at all; the notion that there is serves only to "puff up" the man who actually bears the clan surname. It creates the illusion that he is somehow more "authentically Scottish" than the person with a sept name.
Hmmm...there ought to be a prize. Mackinnon seems to have solved the age old dilemma about how one can eat one's cake and have it, too!

Seriously, I have to agree with Matt. I am not a scholar, but to say that only certain people have an entitlement or a right to a particular tartan but that anyone can wear it, but without the entitlement or right, is sophistry of the worst and most transparent kind. If both statements are indeed true then the entitlement is meaningless.

As for me, my Scottish lineage comes to me through my mother. Her father was a McConnell and her mother an Anderson. I would not hesitate to wear either tartan. I may not have either of the names but I have some of the blood of each. If that doesn't "entitle" me....oh well

Regards,

Brian