Was Tartan ever actually banned?

[Mike_Oettle]

Speaking as a historian by training, I am afraid I must side with Cajunscot here.
He has evidence of the institution of the ceremony of Kirkin the Tartan from the man who introduced it.
All we seem to have on the other side of the argument is unsubstantiated folklore.
Now it may be that there is substantiation somewhere, but so far it has not cropped up. Reference has been made to articles in publications far from where the ceremony was instituted, but the sources of those articles have not (so far) been examined.
The abstract discussions of scientific proof are all very well, but need to be refined by historians’ definitions, not silly extrapolations about pink elephants.

With regard to the proscription of tartan, I will concede that the wording of the Act is tortuous, but it does clearly outlaw a) the kilt and b) the wearing of tartan, albeit in separate parts of the same long sentence.
Although tartan was specifically forbidden solely when worn as upper clothing (plaid or coat), its proscription in that sense went hand in hand with a ban on the kilt, which was at least frequently, and probably usually, made of tartan.
The word plaid is not more precisely defined, and could be applicable to either the belted plaid (breacan feile) or the plaid as worn with the philabeg (pinned to the shoulder).
The reference to “trowse” may be solely to trews in the sense of hose made of tartan on the bias, fitted to the leg, or could apply to all tartan trousers. It nonetheless bars leg-coverings deemed to be “Highland Clothes”.
The region in which the Act was (theoretically) effective seems to be the lands north of the Forth and Clyde, but since the Act specifically refers to “that part of Great Britain called Scotland”, with the rider “other than shall be employed as officers and soldiers in his Majesty's forces”, in a legal sense it should have applied everywhere north of the English border.
It does appear that the Act was only applied with rigour in the areas closest to the Great Glen, but we are (I believe) focusing on the wording of a piece of legislation.
While the wording “man or boy” does seem to exempt women, the question must be asked whether, when the law was enforced by His Majesty’s forces, women were permitted to retain their tartan garments, and whether thorough searches were made to discover and destroy all tartan remnants.
Regards,
Mike

[macwilkin]

Bro:. Aaron: I'll ignore your confrontational attitude and just say again that if someone can show-me a reliable source that documents a kirkin service from 18th century Scotland, I'll be the first to shout it from the rooftops. While it certainly is possible, I'm not convinced until we have the documentation. I'm always open to new sources and ways of looking at history when those sources are discovered.

But in the spirit of compromise, I will mention the discussion here recently about dirks & "The Holy Iron", which is documented -- if there was a blessing of a tartan, it would most likely take that form, instead of a formal liturgy. We know that Carmichael documents a Highland prayer for the weaver's cloth, for example. How's that for admitting it? :mrgreen:

And thanks for the leccture on John Ford. I teach Western/Frontier history, and I discuss Ford's symbolism in his Westerns. That was my attempt a humor, which obviously failed. I can't say I've never taught anyone at gunpoint, except for living history talks, but I'm not going to simply give people what they want to hear -- I'm not in politics.

And we use Turabian/Chicago. I'll accept your work in MLA, though, as Turbian tends to intimidate non-history types. (and that was meant in jest, btw)

[Slag101]

Bro:. Aaron: I'll ignore your confrontational attitude and just say again that if someone can show-me a reliable source that documents a kirkin service from 18th century Scotland, I'll be the first to shout it from the rooftops. While it certainly is possible, I'm not convinced until we have the documentation. I'm always open to new sources and ways of looking at history when those sources are discovered.

But in the spirit of compromise, I will mention the discussion here recently about dirks & "The Holy Iron", which is documented -- if there was a blessing of a tartan, it would most likely take that form, instead of a formal liturgy. We know that Carmichael documents a Highland prayer for the weaver's cloth, for example. How's that for admitting it? :mrgreen:

And thanks for the leccture on John Ford. I teach Western/Frontier history, and I discuss Ford's symbolism in his Westerns. That was my attempt a humor, which obviously failed. I can't say I've never taught anyone at gunpoint, except for living history talks, but I'm not going to simply give people what they want to hear -- I'm not in politics.

And we use Turabian/Chicago. I'll accept your work in MLA, though, as Turbian tends to intimidate non-history types. (and that was meant in jest, btw)

I am glad we can debate these topics openly. I was not aware of your occupation specializing in Western History. I also agree that John Ford was brilliant at putting symbolism and allegory to film. I also see that we can reach the agreement that lack of proof is simply that, lack of. I did not once say that I agree that it happened prior to 1941, just that the possibility exists. Then again, the possibility exists for UFOs to land and come to said Kirkin O the Tartan, but it is highly unlikely. I am sorry if my sarcasm was offensive to you, as tone does not translate well to text, but sarcasm is considered friendly banter here in North Jersey, in fact it is one of our primary languages, along with spanish, polish, russian, etc. Also, I hope you can accept my future work in MLA with a slant toward APA. I work in healthcare, writing my own thoughts is difficult, it is much easier to site the work of others. Try reading any medical research, half of every sentence is a citation of someone else's work, who in turn cited someone else.

[macwilkin]

I am glad we can debate these topics openly. I was not aware of your occupation specializing in Western History. I also agree that John Ford was brilliant at putting symbolism and allegory to film. I also see that we can reach the agreement that lack of proof is simply that, lack of. I did not once say that I agree that it happened prior to 1941, just that the possibility exists. Then again, the possibility exists for UFOs to land and come to said Kirkin O the Tartan, but it is highly unlikely. I am sorry if my sarcasm was offensive to you, as tone does not translate well to text, but sarcasm is considered friendly banter here in North Jersey, in fact it is one of our primary languages, along with spanish, polish, russian, etc. Also, I hope you can accept my future work in MLA with a slant toward APA. I work in healthcare, writing my own thoughts is difficult, it is much easier to site the work of others. Try reading any medical research, half of every sentence is a citation of someone else's work, who in turn cited someone else.

Apologies; I am the son of an Arizona father & Iowa mother. Sarcasm isn't as well known to those of us from west of the Mississippi River.

I do not require my students to use Chicago in my 100 and 200 level classes, as the majority of them will not be going on to be history majors, and MLA is much more prevalent in 100-level English classes. Your description of your citations sounds a lot like ours in history.

I use a number of Ford films in my class, including The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance and The Searchers. I also use Peckenpah's Junior Bonner as an allegory for the modern West, and I'm quite fond of The Shootist as well.

T.

[Kilted-Marine]

Ah, now I understand. We are discussing not just a kirkin of a tartan but a full blown orchestrated ceremony with three part harmony, a bagpiper, two choir boys, lit candles, and a formal march down the center of the Kirk, with flags held high and lots of tartan sashes openly displayed on wonderful preserved wooden staff.
Ya I doubt that happened in Scotland prior to 1940

I wish somebody had told me sooner

[macwilkin]

Ah, now I understand. We are discussing not just a kirkin of a tartan but a full blown orchestrated ceremony with three part harmony, a bagpiper, two choir boys, lit candles, and a formal march down the center of the Kirk, with flags held high and lots of tartan sashes openly displayed on wonderful preserved wooden staff.
Ya I doubt that happened in Scotland prior to 1940

I wish somebody had told me sooner

A Kirkin' of the Tartan is what the ceremony is normally called, Mark. As I mentioned earlier, "kirk" simply means "church", as in The Kirk, or the Church of Scotland. It's only through the ceremony that it has come to mean "the blessing" of the tartans, and thereby the clans/families they symbolize.

Again, I think your hypothetical example of an individual tartan being blessed might be possible, but not before the idea of a clan tartan became popular, and that certainly wasn't at the time the legend establishes it -- if we believe respected tartan scholars such as Newsome, Scarlett, MacDonald, Wilton, etc., then we can say that the concept of a tartan symbolizing an individual clan was not the established custom of the day during the Jacobite era, then that blows a major hole in the legend as promoted by many in the Diaspora community today.

One source that tends to support this is the observation of the Hon. Stuart Erskine in 1901 in his book The Kilt and How to Wear it. Erskine specifically notes that older Highland gentlemen "knew nothing" of clan tartans. Matt Newsome has an excellent article on Erskine here:

http://albanach.org/kiltandhowtowearit.htm

I'm hoping Matt will weigh in on this discussion soon.

Regards,

T.

[Kilted-Marine]

Beating a Dead Horse