Was Tartan ever actually banned?

[artificer]

#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

Unfortunately, this is a logical fallacy - burden of proof.

Lack of proof is /= to proof. In any logical argument the burden of proof falls to the party proposing a given argument, NOT against those disputing said argument.

There IS evidence of the ceremony having started in the States. There is NO existing evidence put forward thus far to establish that scraps of tartan were taken to the Kirk for a blessing (although, if rural Europe is used as a model for Scotland, it isn't outside the realm of reason. That said, the general consensus is that earlier Scots didn't lend the weight to 'TARTANS' that is given to them today- which is all based on Victorian romantic ideals)

Still, an interesting debate thus far, with only one yellow card needing to be issued

[MacMillans son]

Perhaps there would be less debate today if it had originally been called "Kirkin' of the Wallet" ?

By calling it "Kirkin' of the Tartan" it allows for the romantic revisionist focus to be put on the tartan, and appears to fuel the belief that the tartan was the item of reverence, and not the money.

It sounds to me like the current practice has value for those who participate in it, but it unfortunately shares the same name with a historic event(s) having nothing to do with the current practice.

So, much like wearing the kilt with hiking boots and tee shirt is just fine and dandy as long as I don't claim it to be traditional Highland attire, bringing your tartan to the church for blessing can be called Kirkin' of the Tartan as long as a person doesn't perpetuate the myth that that was the nature of the original event ?

Well, that's all I got!

[davidlpope]

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

Sure. Give me a little time and I will try to find and present acceptable source documentation.

In the meantime, peruse this thread:
http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...vention-56465/

None of our Scottish friends have any knowledge of the "Kirking of the Tartans" being a tradition in Scotland. Not dispositive, but it doesn't seem likely that Peter Marshall would be the sole recipient of a secret "age-old tradition" dating from the time of Proscription that he would only reveal in 1941 after emigrating to America...

David

[xman]

... Peter Marshall would be the sole recipient of a secret "age-old tradition" dating from the time of Proscription that he would only reveal in 1941 after emigrating to America...

Oh man, that's rich. This is where Occam comes in with, "Not bloody likely"!

[Kilted-Marine]

I did actually read that article prior to your posting the link.

It seems i am getting piled on here but.. what the heck. I will try and answer a few things as best I can.. Again in a debate sort of way and not as a argumentative way.
I am not sure that there ever was a tartan kirkin prior to the one in the USA - my argument is that either way their is no proof

"None of our Scottish friends have any knowledge of the "Kirking of the Tartans" being a tradition in Scotland."
I am not sure how many friends you asked but i doubt they hold the total knowledge of ancient Scottish wisdom or folklore.

however there are some reports of a tartan kirkin

http://ezinearticles.com/?Kirkin-O-t...tan&id=2028326
Legend says the Highlanders devised a plan to hide a piece of tartan in their clothing during church. At a set time during the service, they would hold the tartan and bless it. When the Scots were forced to fight for the British Army, it is said that the women would take a piece of their tartan to the Kirk (church) to be blessed and to pray for protection of their clan. Thus came the Scottish celebration known as the Kirkin' O' the Tartan.

http://www.calpresbyterian.org/Histo...TheTartan.html
It was 36 years before the Act of Proscription was revoked and, during all those years, Highland churches had a special day when the Highlanders gathered, each with a small piece of Tartan concealed under their outer clothing and, with the right hand held over the precious piece, they all joined in the prayer that it might please God speedily to cause the repeal fo the devastating Act of Proscription.

I could post 50 more articles that seem to suggest that the kirkin goes back to scotland -weather it does or not there is some evidence for it
------------
"Unfortunately, this is a logical fallacy - burden of proof.

Lack of proof is /= to proof. In any logical argument the burden of proof falls to the party proposing a given argument, NOT against those disputing said argument.

There IS evidence of the ceremony having started in the States. There is NO existing evidence put forward thus far to establish that scraps of tartan were taken to the Kirk for a blessing"

Actually we are both putting forth arguments.. mine is that it is impossible to prove that a kirkin did or did not happen in scotland. The other side is saying they believe it is all an american ideal and NEVER happened in scotland

In Logic there is a wonderful rule called "Excluded Middle" a statement must either be true or it is false, it can not however be both true and false at the same time in regards to the same object/subject
My statement is - there is no way to prove a kirkin either did or did not happen in Scotland prior to the kirkin in the USA - and to take one side over the other is to be leaning on what you believe not on what is FACT/TRUE.
It would be impossible for somebody to prove that no Scot ever took a piece of tartan to the kirk to have it blessed. It is also impossible for me to prove it did happen.

As to the burden of proof being on me - all I need to prove is that there is no way to prove either way -

There very well have NEVER been a kirkin in Scotland prior to the event in the USA - however..........

see my point

[macwilkin]

I did actually read that article prior to your posting the link.

It seems i am getting piled on here but.. what the heck. I will try and answer a few things as best I can.. Again in a debate sort of way and not as a argumentative way.
I am not sure that there ever was a tartan kirkin prior to the one in the USA - my argument is that either way their is no proof

"None of our Scottish friends have any knowledge of the "Kirking of the Tartans" being a tradition in Scotland."
I am not sure how many friends you asked but i doubt they hold the total knowledge of ancient Scottish wisdom or folklore.

however there are some reports of a tartan kirkin

http://ezinearticles.com/?Kirkin-O-t...tan&id=2028326
Legend says the Highlanders devised a plan to hide a piece of tartan in their clothing during church. At a set time during the service, they would hold the tartan and bless it. When the Scots were forced to fight for the British Army, it is said that the women would take a piece of their tartan to the Kirk (church) to be blessed and to pray for protection of their clan. Thus came the Scottish celebration known as the Kirkin' O' the Tartan.

http://www.calpresbyterian.org/Histo...TheTartan.html
It was 36 years before the Act of Proscription was revoked and, during all those years, Highland churches had a special day when the Highlanders gathered, each with a small piece of Tartan concealed under their outer clothing and, with the right hand held over the precious piece, they all joined in the prayer that it might please God speedily to cause the repeal fo the devastating Act of Proscription.

I could post 50 more articles that seem to suggest that the kirkin goes back to scotland -weather it does or not there is some evidence for it
------------
"Unfortunately, this is a logical fallacy - burden of proof.

Lack of proof is /= to proof. In any logical argument the burden of proof falls to the party proposing a given argument, NOT against those disputing said argument.

There IS evidence of the ceremony having started in the States. There is NO existing evidence put forward thus far to establish that scraps of tartan were taken to the Kirk for a blessing"

Actually we are both putting forth arguments.. mine is that it is impossible to prove that a kirkin did or did not happen in scotland. The other side is saying they believe it is all an american ideal and NEVER happened in scotland

In Logic there is a wonderful rule called "Excluded Middle" a statement must either be true or it is false, it can not however be both true and false at the same time in regards to the same object/subject
My statement is - there is no way to prove a kirkin either did or did not happen in Scotland prior to the kirkin in the USA - and to take one side over the other is to be leaning on what you believe not on what is FACT/TRUE.
It would be impossible for somebody to prove that no Scot ever took a piece of tartan to the kirk to have it blessed. It is also impossible for me to prove it did happen.

As to the burden of proof being on me - all I need to prove is that there is no way to prove either way -

There very well have NEVER been a kirkin in Scotland prior to the event in the USA - however..........

see my point

Mark,

If clan tartans are a "Victorian invention", why on earth would an 18th century Highlander, wearing a tartan with no real significance to a particular clan, take it to be blessed? That's where the argument falls apart: clan tartans do not have an ancient pedigree.

I can't say I've ever taken any of my regular clothes to my priest to be blessed. I've had saint's medals, icons and other religious items blessed, and in the British Army, regimental chaplains bless unit colours. When my wife & I bought our house, we had our parish priest bless the house, in celebration of our new home. The point being is that those items being blessed have significance.

If we believe reliable historians such as Matt, Jamie Scarlett, et al, and recognize that clan tartans originated after the '45, then the reason for John Highlandman to a padre for a blessing (if he was RC or Episcopalian) doesn't make as much sense. For a Presbyterian, it would smack of "popery" (I use that term for informational purposes only).

I understand what you're trying to say, but from a historian's POV, if I had tried that logic while working on my MA, my committee would have laughed me out of the department. The simple fact is that historians work with primary & secondary sources, and the legitimate sources we do have point to Marshall as the the one who started the tradition. Most of the web sites you mention do not document their sources, and like much information on the Internet, are copied from other pages.

I will gladly post the details of the two sermons of Dr. Marshall that were given to me by my friend in Louisiana. They were obtained from the St. Andrew's Society of Washington DC in the 1990s. I have them at my office, so I'll post when I can.

Again, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but in my opinion, there's no need to create a mythical legend when the real story is just as impressive, if not more so. I know Scottish-Americans love the '45 and romantic Highlanders, but we also need to tell the story of our ancestors, many of whom who contributed to our country without fanfare, song or story. The Marshall version of the Kirkin' service combines the best of both the old world & the new.

Regards,

Todd

[Kilted-Marine]

I agree. All I was saying is that there APPEARS to be some evidence (no matter how slim) for a tartan blessing prior to the one in the USA.
No Historian would say there was never a Tartan kirkin prior because it is impossible to prove there was not

[macwilkin]

I agree. All I was saying is that there APPEARS to be some evidence (no matter how slim) for a tartan blessing prior to the one in the USA.
No Historian would say there was never a Tartan kirkin prior because it is impossible to prove there was not

And again, in over a decade of researching the Kirkin' service, I have not found any reliable evidence that there was one before 1941. If someone has one, I would love to see it.

As a historian, I wouldn't say there was one before 1941 until a reliable source turns up. If it does, I'll gladly update my article.


T.

[Kilted-Marine]

And again, in over a decade of researching the Kirkin' service, I have not found any reliable evidence that there was one before 1941. If someone has one, I would love to see it.

T.

I am not sure what reliable evidence you would need or accept. A hand written note from somebody dated 1790, A church entry that talked about it. Neither of which you will find since Folklore talks about it happening when the tartan was banned and paper was not as available as it is today.

As too a decade of study - it took Howard carter 31 years to find King Tut.. keep looking - i would like to know the truth

I stand by my statement that it may not have happened but it it is impossible to prove that it did not happen.

[Bugbear]

Untestable hypothesis? Use probability...