prohibited tartans

[escherblacksmith]

I think you guys missed the point of my post, I know I have a myriad of options, that is why it is difficult to pick just one. I was trying to explain why, perhaps, some people pick many different ones. It would seem my rhetorical questions were not quite rhetorical enough ;-)}. Again, for myself, with many linkages broken and rediscovered, it is very tempting to tie into everything. Because of Pride in Clan? I don't know, I really don't know what that would mean or feel like.

I suspect it is an America vs Scotland thing. We will never truly understand why the other does what it does, because we aren't them.

C'est La Vie.

[Moski]

My original post (from a cell phone) was to determine if a chief as said "no go" just so I can Definately tell any kilt police why they are wrong and where they can store their opinion for safe keeping (as in away from me). As "gentelman of a most certain tan" many uninformed persons automaticly take the position that I have "Absolutely NO RIGHT to wear a Tartan Kilt" since I'm obviously not of Scottish descent.

[Tim Little]

As "gentelman of a most certain tan" many uninformed persons automaticly take the position that I have "Absolutely NO RIGHT to wear a Tartan Kilt" since I'm obviously not of Scottish descent.

I daren't make any presumptions about your ancestry -- or how thoroughly you may have researched your genealogy -- but in your defense "a most certain tan" need not preclude Scottish descent.

And as for wearing a tartan kilt, even if you have no clan connection you at the very least have a "right" to wear district or universal tartans. Those who think they know better can safely be ignored.

[ohiopiper]

I knew a "gentleman of most certain tan" who was very much scottish. Well, half, anyway. His father was from Scotland and his mother from South Africa. They met and married in Ohio. I have no idea how.

These days of international travel and immigration, it's a very risky thing to assume anything about someone's ancestry or place of origin.

[CDNSushi]

I think we've talked about this before in other threads... But for the most part, colour of skin notwithstanding, I don't see why someone could not be adopted into or married into any given clan. If I'm a MacSomeoneorother who chooses to adopt a baby, then my son will surely be a MacSomeoneorother as well. Again, colour of skin notwithstanding. Wouldn't you say?

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Clan adoption across ethnic lines is not unheard of. I know a Japanese gentleman who was officially "adopted" into Clan Elliott by its chief twenty-odd years ago. Likewise, colour has little bearing on being Scottish, as evidenced by the former Secretary of State for the United States of America, Colin Powell, being granted arms by Lord Lyon on the basis of his Scottish ancestry.

The question concerning adoption within a family raises a different question. A Russian baby boy adopted into an Irish family would retain his descent, despite having an Irish surname. He might become "culturally" Irish, but not Irish in an "ethnic" sense. However, if he married an Irish girl, their children would be "ethnically" Irish (as well as "ethnically" Russian).

From a strictly heraldic point of view the adopted child would inherit his adoptive father's arms, but with a suitable charge placed on the arms indicating the adopted status of the individual. This is a rather recent development in heraldry, and not all jurisdictions have resolved this matter with the simplicity of College of Arms who now mark the arms of adopted children with a special charge composed of two links of a chain.

[claughmohr]

The US military tartans are restricted to veterans and active duty members of the various branches, you might need to show a DD 214 to gain access to these tartans. MacDonald tartans are open to any person of the Clan, excluding Lord of the Isles Green, this is restricted to the Clan Chief and his family and can be used with special permission. Again in the US we are not bound by many of these restrictions due to 7/4/1776, but it is in our best interest to respect the clans and persons associated with the tartans.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

The US military tartans are restricted to veterans and active duty members of the various branches, you might need to show a DD 214 to gain access to these tartans. MacDonald tartans are open to any person of the Clan, excluding Lord of the Isles Green, this is restricted to the Clan Chief and his family and can be used with special permission. Again in the US we are not bound by many of these restrictions due to 7/4/1776, but it is in our best interest to respect the clans and persons associated with the tartans.

One is absolutely not required to show any sort of documentation whatsoever to purchase any of the US military tartans, most of which actually don't have any official status with the various military branches they are named after. The US Coast Guard tartan is officially recognized by the Coast Guard, and the US Army tartan also has recently received official recogniztion by the Army. But the rest of the US military tartans are essentially fashion tartans, named for the military, with no official standing at all. These tartans can easily be purchased from any tartan supplier with no documentation required.

Regarding the green MacDonald of the Isles tartan, I've seen similar statements made before but I have yet to read a definitive statement from the clan cheif. There is nothing in the STA tartan notes that would indicate this. And, I should point out, this tartan is readily available in a number of color options from most all tartan mills. Generally, if a tartan truly is meant to be restricted to the cheif and his immediate family, it's not put into large scale production. An example would be the Robertson tartan, woven with a white line, is intended for the cheif only. You won't find this version for sale to the general public. The green MacDonald of the Isles, however, is widely available.

And, lest we forget, July 4, 1776, has absolutely NOTHING to do with any of this. (I especially fail to see how it has any relevance to the question of US military tartans).

[JSFMACLJR]

The US military tartans are restricted to veterans and active duty members of the various branches, you might need to show a DD 214 to gain access to these tartans. MacDonald tartans are open to any person of the Clan, excluding Lord of the Isles Green, this is restricted to the Clan Chief and his family and can be used with special permission. Again in the US we are not bound by many of these restrictions due to 7/4/1776, but it is in our best interest to respect the clans and persons associated with the tartans.

I wonder if HRH The Duke of Rothesay Lord of the Isles knows this!

[macwilkin]

Thanks, Matt -- I don't seem to recall Jefferson mentioning anything about "the right to wear restricted tartans" in the Declaration of Independence, although his first draft did specifically mention "Scotch & foreign mercenaries" sent against the colonists -- thankfully that was removed!

T.