Was Tartan ever actually banned?

[Slag101]

I know a lot folks subscribe to the John Ford School of history -- "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend" -- while I love John Ford, as a historian, I fight against that way of thinking everyday.

T.

That statement wasn't meant to teach a way of thinking, it was an artistic reflection of the reality of the world. John Ford used that line to represent that people want "legends" and what they symbolize. The average person doesn't want the real history behind William Wallace, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, etc. To quote yet another great movie that made the same point (My Favorite Year, starring Peter O'Toole), "People don't want the real Alan Swan, they want their Alan Swan larger than life, they want him as big as he comes."

This explains the reason why you have encountered resistance to the truth behind the Kirkin O the Tartans. I bet most people, if you really sit down with them, will admit that the legend is BS, but they like the story, and if you tell them the true story, they will say it is nice that "we" helped people out, but after all that, talk to them the next time and they will still be talking about the legend. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. I love history too, but I don't believe in teaching it to people, who don't want to learn it, at gun point.

[Slag101]

I would like to say, for all of us out there that like to keep an open mind, KiltedMarine is my hero today.

CajunScot, and everyone else, what part of, "Cannot prove or disprove" do you not get?

While I will agree it to be unlikely to have occurred before the first service in the US, you cannot disprove it either. Just admit to it.

To take logic one step further, there is no knowable truth. The truth is intangible by its very nature, as its interpretation is skewed by the observers morals, beliefs, understanding, knowledge, and physical ability. You name one historical "fact" and there are probably hundreds of versions of information about the same fact, and all of them will be slightly different.

Oh, and My reference for the above statement about logic is as follows:

Siegel, A.J. (2010). The Weakness of Act Utilitarianism.

Should I post all my responses on here in APA or MLA? What do you non-science types with degrees in history use?

[artificer]

CajunScot, and everyone else, what part of, "Cannot prove or disprove" do you not get?

While I will agree it to be unlikely to have occurred before the first service in the US, you cannot disprove it either. Just admit to it.

Unfortunately, in a logical argument, you cannot argue from a position of ignorance.

To argue that because there is a LACK of evidence to disprove doesn't equate to proof (or a 'win') in logic. "Cannot disprove" isn't a logical position. If you are proposing something, the burden of proof falls on your head, there is no burden to disprove.



That said;
From a purely deductive standpoint, and using countries in rural Europe as a model, it isn't out of the realm of possibility that on certain occasions (clan wars, conscription, long and dangerous journeys) that a Scottish wife might take some small memento of her beloved husband or son to the Kirk for a blessing.

Since many in the highlands were quite poor, a token might be as small as a lock of hair, or indeed a scrap of fabric from their clothes (POSSIBLY tartan).

Things like this were done (and probably still are in some places). What is missing here is ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that it was done in any organized fashion (ie "The Kirking Of The Tartan").

More damning still is the fact that Highlanders, by all historical accounts, didn't lend to their tartans the meaning that would be assigned later in Victorian times.

Thus, we COULD infer that while tartan MIGHT have been blessed in isolated cases, Tartan is unlikely to have been blessed en-mass (notice that I didn't say WASN'T).

I don't think anybody is denying that a Kirking couldn't have happened, somewhere along the way, I believe that most are saying that this particular service, especially in it's current form, originated in America.
This is based on all available historical evidence.

To take logic one step further, there is no knowable truth. The truth is intangible by its very nature, as its interpretation is skewed by the observers morals, beliefs, understanding, knowledge, and physical ability. You name one historical "fact" and there are probably hundreds of versions of information about the same fact, and all of them will be slightly different.

"Truth" is for Religion or Philosophy. Fact for the sciences. Conclusions can change given new information. As for History, you are talking about interpretations of facts.

A huge victory for one side may be an horrible betrayal and slaughter to the other. The fact that a battle happened on a given day is THE fact, everything else is POV.

[davidlpope]

Kirkin of the tartan - Is to ask a blessing on the tartans (and those families which fall under them).
Does it REALLY matter when, how, why it started?
If a person never knows the real story - does it matter?

Your post directly exhibits the problem that Todd has raised. The genuine and authentic purpose of the "Kirking of the Tartans" was not to "bless" tartan or the "clans" that each tartan represents, but rather to motivate Americans to provide assistance to the Scots (and British more generally) during their war efforts to defeat Germany. Instead, the erroneous (albeit romantic) myth that has been created out of whole cloth has so choked out the reality that kilt-wearers, whom one would expect to be more "in the know" than the average man on the street, believe that the purpose of this observance is to "bless" tartans and "clans".

So, yes, knowing the real story is vitally important to ensure that such fallacies don't continue to exist.

David

[Kilted-Marine]

Your post directly exhibits the problem that Todd has raised. The genuine and authentic purpose of the "Kirking of the Tartans" was not to "bless" tartan or the "clans" that each tartan represents, but rather to motivate Americans to provide assistance to the Scots (and British more generally) during their war efforts to defeat Germany. Instead, the erroneous (albeit romantic) myth that has been created out of whole cloth has so choked out the reality that kilt-wearers, whom one would expect to be more "in the know" than the average man on the street, believe that the purpose of this observance is to "bless" tartans and "clans".

So, yes, knowing the real story is vitally important to ensure that such fallacies don't continue to exist.

David

But during the service the Tartans WERE blessed and they raised money. This tradition continues but without the money being raised.

Is your objection that:
A. People have forgot that it started to raise money
B. That Kirkin continues today
C. or something else

[macwilkin]

But during the service the Tartans WERE blessed and they raised money. This tradition continues but without the money being raised.

Is your objection that:
A. People have forgot that it started to raise money
B. That Kirkin continues today
C. or something else

I haven't seen a single source that says that Dr. Marshall blessed tartans in 1943. Years ago I wrote the NY Ave. Presbyterian Church and asked if they have any original service leaflets from the first Kirkin's, but I don't remember remember receiving one. I do have some material provided to me by a friend in the Caledonian Society of Baton Rouge, but nothing pointed to the blessing of tartans.

Remember that the word "kirk" means "church" -- by naming it the "Kirkin' of the Tartans", Marshall was calling the clans together to the kirk.

Personally, I love the service -- I just wish the legend had not taken a life of its own.

T,

[Kilted-Marine]

Personally, I love the service -- I just wish the legend had not taken a life of its own.

T,

I am not sure why it is an issue that the kirkin has taken on a life of its own. It is a wonderful celebration and time to have a gathering of the Scots, some of whom would otherwise only get to church for weddings or funerals.

I just chalk it up to a new tradition (although 70+ years old) that I hope last many many years that celebrates the bonds of family and friends and the brotherhood between Canada, USA, and our home soil Scotland

I for one am glad the new tradition did not die after WWII

[davidlpope]

But during the service the Tartans WERE blessed and they raised money. This tradition continues but without the money being raised.

Is your objection that:
A. People have forgot that it started to raise money
B. That Kirkin continues today
C. or something else

My objections are:

1. I don't believe that any tartans were "blessed" in the original "Kirkings"; so the current practice involving a long line of "clan" representatives carrying oversized tartan banners into a church sanctuary to be "blessed" is really a brigadoonery that has grown up here in the US.

2. Modern-day "Kirking of the Tartans" observances invariably attribute their origin to an erroneous myth that the "Kirking of the Tartans" was a practice that originated in Scotland after the Act of Proscription (see, this isn't completely OT) when clanspeople secreted away shredded tatters of tartan cloth which were secretly brought before a priest/minister to be "blessed", instead of the genuine and impacting origin that involves Peter Marshall.

David

[Kilted-Marine]

My objections are:

1. I don't believe that any tartans were "blessed" in the original "Kirkings"; so the current practice involving a long line of "clan" representatives carrying oversized tartan banners into a church sanctuary to be "blessed" is really a brigadoonery that has grown up here in the US.

2. Modern-day "Kirking of the Tartans" observances invariably attribute their origin to an erroneous myth that the "Kirking of the Tartans" was a practice that originated in Scotland after the Act of Proscription (see, this isn't completely OT) when clanspeople secreted away shredded tatters of tartan cloth which were secretly brought before a priest/minister to be "blessed", instead of the genuine and impacting origin that involves Peter Marshall.

David

David

I do not want to let this get into an argument so can we agree that this is just a friendly debate of facts?

In answer to #1 - YOU do not believe any tartans were blessed but there is no evidence either way as to what was done during that service - so you are not basing your understand on facts but rather on what you think may have or not have happened. In my research there is not even a copy of the original sermon.

#2 as to the (erroneous-your word) myth of a practice in Scotland years ago, there is again no evidence to prove or disprove the practice of taking a small piece of tartan to the Kirk (Church) to be blessed. So you are again basing your idea off of what you think did or did not happen

remember a lack of evidence is not evidence

[Kilted-Marine]

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it...

And God blessed the seventh day

blessed the work of his hands...

It is more blessed to give than to receive...

I think reading though the bible we can see that - Objects, Actions, and People can be blessed

Knox can stop rolling now