Irish Kilt?

[OC Richard]

Yes, the bagpipe probably did begin in the Middle East

This is one of those things for which there is, as far as I have been able to discover, no evidence whatsoever, but which has through sheer repetition has come to be regarded as true (at least by those who choose not to be guided by evidence).

To me, the present distribution of bagpipe species indicates the opposite, that the type of bagpipe found in a wide swath from along the North African coast all the way to India is a relatively recent introduction.

With genetics and linguistics the region of greatest variation is usually the point of origin. Thus it's obvious that all modern humans had an African origin because of the far greater DNA diversity there (in fact all non-Africans on earth are an outgroup from a single African group). When you find relatively little DNA diversity over large areas it indicates a more recent and rapid spread. And the same is so in linguistics: you wouldn't have to know the history of the distribution of the English language to know that Britain is the point of origin and that it was introduced into Australia more recently than it was North America... the amount of variation vis a vis the size of the area of distribution tells you that.

And so it is with traditional things like musical instruments... they continuously (though slowly) evolve and are spread and the point of greatest variation is most likely the point of origin, and when you see very little variation spread over a vast area that tells of a recent introduction and rapid spread (as with the case of "Arabic" bagpipes).

So where is this area of greatest variation? I would say the Balkans, with dozens of species in a very small area, with things like counterdrones etc etc, and secondarily central France.

BTW that's great info there about the adoption of the Highland pipes by Irish revivalists. Francis O Neill, the great Irish champion of traditional Irish music and especially of the uilleann pipes, wrote disparagingly about the Irish rushing to adopt the Highland pipes at the very time it was happening (1900-1910). I've quoted his bitter remarks here before... he was afraid that the Highland pipes would oust the uilleann pipes altogether, and it's true that at that time the uilleann pipes were in decline. But now of course there are more uilleann pipers than ever, something Francis O Neill couldn't have forseen.

I should also point out that like the traditional Irish costume, the ancient Irish Warpipe also became extinct as a result of the English invasions. No examples exist and its exact construction and musical capabilities are unknown. However a number of tunes thought to be part of the ancient warpipe repertoire did survive in the uilleann repertoire and these suggest that the ancient Irish Warpipe was capable of playing at least one note in the second octave, the note which would be High B on the Highland pipes. Therefore the chanter may have had a less-steeply conical bore than Highland chanters, and more like the bores of the old Lowland Pipes chanters and Central French chanters.

Evidently the ancient Irish Warpipe had its two drones in a common stock, which BTW is a very common (!) thing in British bagpipes as well (even Highland pipes, early on, had the two tenors in a common stock). But it's not known if the two drones were in octaves or in 4ths or 5ths.

[Mike_Oettle]

This thread has taken a most interesting turn.
Might I ask what uniform the London Irish pipers wore?
If they had saffron kilts, it might be a better explanation of the uniform of the South African Irish band than deriving it from the Irish Guards.
Regards,
Mike

[MacSpadger]

This thread has taken a most interesting turn.
Might I ask what uniform the London Irish pipers wore?
If they had saffron kilts, it might be a better explanation of the uniform of the South African Irish band than deriving it from the Irish Guards.
Regards,
Mike

No problem Mike, yes indeed, they wore and still wear, (what's left of them), saffron kilts. Recent army shake ups mean that the London Scottish and the London Irish are now mere companies of the same regiment, the 14th London Regiment, and often parade together. [/QUOTE]

Richard, interesting post but of course there's no evidence that the "Irish warpipe" ever existed.
The Gaelic League took the name from the poem of an Englishman, John Derrik. The illustration accompanying the poem was engraved by a Dutchman working for the English printer John Daye in Fleet Street, London. Derrik, who was a customs official, had been to Ireland but the illustrators had not. It seems fairly likely that the "Irish Warpipe" that was later copied by Henry Starck as the "Dungannon" model was in fact taken from Daye's engravers, who in turn copied it from Durer's German Doodlesacker engraving. At the same time the Englishman Edmund Burt writes from Scotland about bagpipers there using the exact same phrase, "warpipes". It seems to be an English term and it exists neither in Irish or Scottish literature or records until the Gaelic League "revival". Even the Irish Pipe Band Assocaiation didn't officially recognise the term until 1930. I imagine that, just like anywhere else, Ireland had several different types of bagpipe, including the ones that were actually used in war, the simple "no-drones" bagpipes seen in the eyewitness illustration of Irish troops at the Siege of Orlean.
But, of course, that is yet another topic that seems to create ire in the USA and probably not suited for this forum, never mind this thread.

[Mike_Oettle]

A most interesting picture of the amalgamated pipe band.
Am I right in noting a blue plaid (mid-blue but not quite royal blue) and pale blue pipe ribbons on the London Irish pipers?
The contrast between their buckled shoes and plain hose and the spats of the London Scottish pipers is noticeable, but the blue hose (grey and blue, if I recall correctly) of the LS pipers tones in with the blues of the LI pipers.
And despite the remarks made earlier in this thread about sporrans “defiling Irish cloth”, I notice that the Irish pipers are wearing black leather sporrans, while the Scottish pipers have black hair sporrans with black tassels (silver-headed).
Regards,
Mike

[MacSpadger]

Pale blue ribbons for the London Irish, dark blue and white ribbons for the London Scottish. From what I recall the London Irish pipers wear a dark cloak, not a plaid, with the pale blue lining. The London Scottish sporran is grey with black tassles, the London Irish black leather with the Regt badge.
I don't see any problems with sporrans. Yes, it's true that the adoption of the Scottish sporran by Irish kilt wearers is a 20th century innovation and the sporran has no Irish connection, but the Irish pipe band is a 20th century creation too. The London Irish do, the Irish Guards (below) don't.

[Mike_Oettle]

Another most interesting picture.
Mind you, I find the contrast between the kilts and caubeens of the pipers and the bearskins and trousers of the drummers to be a bit weird.
I would never want to dictate to the Irish Guards pipers about what they wear, but personal experience has taught me the value of wearing a sporran
Regards,
Mike

[Laighneach]

....but of course there's no evidence that the "Irish warpipe" ever existed.

An odd choice of words which could be very easily misinterpreted.

It's apparent from the rest of your post you don't deny the existence of bagpipes - of whatever type(s) - amongst the Irish. Rather, you are questioning the use of the term 'Irish Warpipes' and the authenticity of bagpipes of the various designs developed since the revival (sorry "revival") period.

Firstly, I can't see how the common use of the term 'Irish Warpipes' in modern English is of any consequence.
Secondly, while the historical accuracy of some of the designs produced and the eventual adoption of the Highland bagpipes (or some slight variant of them) may be questionable I feel the efforts to revive Ireland's bagpipe tradition were entirely justified and the eventual settling on the version developed by our Scottish cousins, with whom our ancestors shared much of their culture, was probably the most sensible outcome. Most modifications intended to make them 'more Irish' - such as removing a drone - seem to be primarily cosmetic.
The adoption of many elements of (modern) Highland/Scottish, dress - a lot of it developed during the Victorian 'Tartan Craze' or by the British Army - seems far more questionable to me.


There are several accounts and depictions of Irish pipes that indicate they had drones. I find it strange that an illustration of a 15th century siege (do you have a link to it?) showing Irish bagpipes with no drones is so much more credible to you than any of these.

[kiltbook]

I would never want to dictate to the Irish Guards pipers about what they wear, but personal experience has taught me the value of wearing a sporran
Regards,
Mike

I know it may seem strange to many Scots, but many Irish communities around the world regard the wearing of a sporran as a Scottish custom. Civilian Irish attire has never been the same as that worn by bagpipers or members of the Irish military, where sporrans are sometimes used.

Pockets in other clothing worn with the kilt is normally used to hold keys, cell phones, etc. For instance, some men prefer to wear a security, pilot, or military shirt when kilted and the pockets in these shirts hold essential items. On more formal occasions a vest is customary, and all essential items are placed in the pockets of the vest.

Scots customs are more prevalant in some communities where sporrans, Irish tartans, and kilt jackets are normative.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with the statement I made about sporrans. This is what I was taught by my community.

[SeumasA]

One of the newer books on this subject is Tim Clarkson's "The Makers of Scotland: Picts, Romans, Gaels and Vikings". He covers this question in detail.

This was a popular view from the 1760's to the 1960's where the main source of this was Bede retelling Geoffrey of Monmouth. There was no real evidence to support this. Even as far back as 1845 historians such as J. M. Lappenberg were publishing books saying it was all nonsense. Even if you refer to where Geoffrey took his info from, the Irish Annals of Tigernach, it states Feargus Mor mac Earca cum gente Dal Riada partem Britaniae tenuit, et ibi mortuus est, (Fergus Mór mac Eirc, with the people of Dál Riata, held part of Britain, and he died there.) This section of the Annals appears to have been written about 500 to 600 years after this supposed event, it's not part of the original document and it's been made doubtful that such names existed in their written forms at that earlier time.
But, regardless of it being a forgery or not, note it doesn't mention Scotland, only Britain.
A more modern view of what is being taught in Scotland today can be found summarised fairly well here. http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...scotsirish.htm
No invasion from the Gaelic Irish, no Irish settlers, just a group of different peoples living in the extreme North West of Europe but with similar languages, customs and cultures.

What I briefly remember about that period from the survey course 'Scottish History 1' (c. 800 CE to 1707 CE) at Glasgow University was that the evidence pointed to two way traffic in trade, human migration and cultural cross-pollination between the north-east of Ireland (primarily Antrim, but even as far west as Donegal) and the western sea board of Scotland especially from Galloway to Argyll, and from much earlier than the formation of Dal Riata.

[O'Callaghan]

Mike, your post is good and has valid points. In my previous post I was merely pointing out what is accepted and being taught in our country today. The research has been conducted on both sides of the Irish Sea. There are many viewpoints about both Scotland & Ireland expressed on this forum that are not accepted in their homelands, and I don't see that changing very easily.

O'Callaghan, you are not so much disagreeing with me on just about everything as disagreeing with what is accepted and taught in Scotland and Ireland, as per my reply to Mike. If you disagree that much, why not write a paper and send it to the universities of Dublin and Strathclyde.
I can't help but notice that your only reference, although you don't name it, appears to be the 11th century Lebor Gabála Érenn which contains the 5 tribes history. Again, this is the stuff of myth and legend, a jumble by several different authors and not accepted as true nowadays. For anyone interested in the traditional history of Ireland, the story of the book and a good summary of it’s contents can be found here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebor_G...1la_%C3%89renn

I get really bored with the whole bagpipe biz. Yes, the bagpipe probably did begin in the Middle East, but there are many, many different kinds of bagpipes. The Great Highland Bagpipe as we know it went through a continuous process of development finally reaching a recognisable shape and identity round about 1810 after developments by Hugh Robertson of Edinburgh and Adam Barclay in the 1740’s. Two drone pipes were common around in Scotland for a few hundred years before that, both double tenor and bass/tenor configurations, as well as various types of smallpipes, border pipes, etc. No one in Scotland claims that the bagpipe was ever invented in Scotland, far from it, but important developments in both the instrument and the music that is played on it happened here.

My own research into the use of the bagpipe in Ireland is expansive and goes back more than 30 years. It is certainly enough to fill a book and has been enough to make a one hour BBC documentary aired in the 1990’s. There are a number of solid references to bagpipes in use in Ireland in history, just as there are for the majority of other European countries. Bagpipes have never been exclusive to Scotland or Ireland, any country may lay claim. One of the most solid, and perhaps well known, references to Irish bagpipes is from Holinshed’s Chronicles, written in 1577, describing an incident in May 1544: “In the same moneth also passed through the citie of London in warlike manner, to the number of seaven hundred Irishmen, having for their weapons darts and handguns with bagpipes before them: and in St. James Park besides Westminster they mustered before the king".

Unfortunately this info gets cut and pasted from internet site to internet site without any further thought of research. There are three much more detailed contemporary references to this event, which refers to the muster of Irish soldiers in the service of the English King, Henry the 8th,in London. Not only do we know which Irish Earls the pipers served, we know the exact names of who the pipers were, where they were from and where they ended up. We also know from a contemporary and very clear engraving of one of these regiments being led by it's Earl and it's piper, what kind of bagpipe was being used, and it didn't look anything like the Highland Bagpipe, in fact it has no drones, which is why I feel I can say there were several different types of bagpipe in use in Ireland, as per anywhere else in Europe at that time. The large mouthblown bagpipe fell out of fashion in Ireland, as it did everywhere else in Europe except the Highlands of Scotland.

As part of the “Gaelic revival” in Ireland, the issue of bagpipes to Irish regiments began in 1903, instigated by Lord Castletown of the Gaelic League. The pipes were made by the David Glen company of Edinburgh and instruction was given by the P/M of the Kings Own Scottish Borderers. Early civilian Irish bands followed in the same decade, with tuition from Scottish instructors and playing Glen pipes. Scotsman Alex Meikle was one of many Scots who did a great deal of teaching in the Dublin area, for example, and some of his pupils went on to form the Fintan Lalor Pipe Band, among others. The Glen company did well out of the revival, well enough to open a branch in Dublin and a branch in Belfast.
In 1906 the year that the wonderfully named Hercules Pakenham was appointed the Commanding Officer of the London Irish Rifles, and decided he wanted a pipe band along the lines of the London Scottish Regiment. He then enrolled Albert Starck, (of German stock) as tutor and bagpipe supplier, to the raw rank and file.
In 1916 the Irish Guards C.O. wanted a pipe band similar to the Scots Guards, and lessons were given by members of the London Irish, under Starck, (who also supplied the instuments).
The Irish Pipers club was started by the Gaelic league in 1909, under the tuition of the Highlander Donald MacKay. His most famous pupil was the son of wealthy London socialites, Louis Noble. Ironically Louis became the face of Irish piping for many. Read more on Louis here: http://www.cuffenet.com/bpipe/noble.html
The Gaelic League made the decision to make the instrument different from the Scottish one simply by removing one tenor drone. Noble objected to this and played a set of Scottish Lawries with two drones, bass and 2 tenors. These had previously belonged to his tutor, Donald MacKay. Noble then crossed the Irish Sea to found the Tralee Pipe band, but then went on to become the teacher of the Dublin Tramway Pipe Band before being recruited by Michael Collins early in 1914 and coming back to London to train the No. 1 Co. of the London Irish Volunteers in St Pancras Road, (in drilling and instruction, not piping). Louis Noble taught in Mackay’s style and trained many pipers in Ireland, before becoming the Instructor of Pipe Bands in the Irish National Army in 1924. Noble moved to the United States in 1947 and helped found the Celtic Pipe Band of Rochester and continued playing and teaching in the USA where he was a massive influence on American-Irish pipe bands. He continued to teach in MacKay's style.

So, “The Scots merely added a third drone”; It goes quite a bit deeper than that, to say the very least, and I’ve only just summarised the influence of Highland piping on the Irish and American-Irish scene here.
O'Callaghan, I don’t know your point is unless it’s solely to wind people up for your own amusement, in which case I’m probably wasting my time here.

If you think I'm winding up people for my own amusement, I must say I take that as a personal insult.

You haven't even proposed any alternative theory to the Irish myths and legends, much less tried to actually justify such a theory. Or perhaps you think the first Gaelic speaker crawled fully formed out of a hole in Mulngavie? Not very likely is it? (Quite apart from the fact that it is in the lowlands).

I am not necessarily saying that the population came en masse from Ireland, but it seems reasonable that the language and many aspects of the culture indeed did. Need I remind you that highlanders used to be referred to in Scotland as Erse (Irish)?

I am not a historian, and won't be writing a paper anytime soon, but you have failed to present a case that would convince me, and now you accuse me of trying to wind people up. I'd better not continue this discussion, as it cannot end well.