Irish Kilts and Tartans

[M. A. C. Newsome]

when I read it I felt it had a slant against the Irish in Kilts and "Irish tartans". This my have just been the mood I was in at the time, but I still feel that way.

For what it is worth, the article was not meant to be "against" or "for" Irish kilts and tartans, but simply to tell the actual history behind the wearing of such, for the purpose of putting not a few myths to rest. Hopefully we have achieved that.

The Irish had long before that worn a belted garment that created a pleating effect. These were a saffron dyed tunic called a lein. To say a saffron(solid color) garment was worn in Scotland long before the Irish attempted to adopt the kilt is misleading. A saffron garment worn belted and down to the knee is definitely Irish, just not what is called a kilt at the time.

The garment you are describing is called a léine (essentially the Gaelic word for "shirt.") I suppose it had certain similarities to the modern kilt in that it was often worn knee length and certain styles could be pleated. However, it is essentially a very different garment. The léine is a shirt/tunic. The kilt is a wrap-around skirted garment.

The kilt did not, in fact, evolve from the léine, but rather from the wrap or mantle worn as an outer garment -- a brat or plaid.

Your post seems to suggest that you think "saffron" is the same as "solid color," which is not accurate. Saffron refers to the yellow color (supposedly from saffron dyes). We never made any mention of a saffron garment being worn in Scotland in this article. (Not that saffron dyed garments were not worn in Scotland -- they were -- but that is not in the scope of this article).

I did mention that solid color kilts were worn from an early period in Scotland, and I don't see how that fact is misleading. My reason for pointing this out is that in the beginning of the Irish kilt movement, all the kilts being worn were solid color -- so much so that many today assume the very concept of a solid color kilt itself is Irish. Many are unaware that there is a long tradition of solid color kilts in Scotland, and in fact the wearing of solid kilts can be shown to date back nearly to the very beginning of kilt wearing in Scotland.

So the use of solid color kilts is not particular to Ireland. Though certainly it is fair to say that the use of solid green or saffron is characteristic of Irish kilts.

When the Ulster tartar is mentioned it was probably
made in Scotland, which I have seen no proof otherwise. He was found wearing pants, BTW the Irish National, of fabric woven in Ireland.From what I remember most likely in Dublin. But of course it was added that "Ireland was at this time being settled heavily by Scottish emigrants, so it is at least conceivable that the cloth was woven by a Scottish weaver relocated to Ireland. That continued the feeling that the article was pulling everything back to a Scottish heritage.

What we actually wrote regarding the Ulster tartan was, "It was determined that the trews had likely been tailored in Scotland, but the tartan fabric itself woven in Ireland." This was not our conclusion, but the conclusion of Audrey Henshall of the Ulster Museum who examined the artifacts shortly after their discovery.

I was the one who added the comment, "It is worth noting that the Ulster region in Ireland was at this time being settled heavily by Scottish emigrants, so it is at least conceivable that the cloth was woven by a Scottish weaver relocated to Ireland."

This comment was not intended to be "anti-Irish," but simply to put the garment within its proper historical context. The fact that the garments were found in Ulster and can be positively dated to a period when Ulster was being settled very heavily by Scottish people, combined with the probability that the cloth was sent to Scotland to be tailored, means that we should at least consider the reasonable possibility that the cloth was woven by an Ulster Scot, or possibly worn by an Ulster Scot, rather than a native Irishman.

This is a possibility -- nothing more. The fact is we have absolutely no idea who wove the original tartan, or who wore the original clothing. That is why I wrote that "it is at least conceivable" and not "it is certain" or even "probable."

You say it makes it sound as if we are "pulling everything back to a Scottish heritage," and in a sense we are. For even those who were responsible for introducing and promoting the Irish kilt admitted that they looked to the traditions of Scotland for their inspiration -- that much is documented in the article.

[dfmacliam]

It is a very well written article, and with the information given, gives one something to think about.... I appreciate the efforts of Mathew and Todd, in this joint project.. both men are known for printing verifiable facts, and not just opinions. I would like to think the Irish kilt has a little deeper history, than recorded. The use of the kilts, by the military, in the early 1900's, had to have a source, to draw from.. and maybe one day, we can find a verifiable source for that..

I do not claim the kilt is an Irish invention, by no means. I feel I wear my Saffron and soon to be received O'Saffron as a statement of my Celtic pride. I wear my Leatherneck kilt, for my military service... I enjoy the comaraderie of wearing my kilt, with the other members of XMarks... reguardless of their nationality or origins.. We are all just brothers in kilts.....

[macwilkin]

Excellent article, lads. Very well written. It also looks like the annual St. Patrick's Day kilt debate starts early!

It could also be mentioned that the Canadian Irish Regiment is somewhat unique among Irish regiments in that they wear their own tartan (O'Saffron) rather than a self-coloured saffron kilt. Since this tartan was designed in the 1930s, it easily predates most other Irish tartans.

Also, the kilt and caubeen is the uniform of the whole regiment, not just their pipers. This allows them to make their claim as the only kilted Irish regiment in the world.

Quite right, and I need to add the mention of the Canadian Irish Regiment's uniqueness in the article.

T.

[MrShoe]

Matt - T.,

You had to know that the article would spark something like this. I never said that the leine was what lead to the modern kilt. What I said was. [I]The only difference in the begining was the use of the belt outside the plaid.(read that as blanket or cloak)/I]. That difference being the defining historical point where the Scots and Irish split in their dress. I admitted that the leine was a tunic and did not suggest it lead to the kilt. My reference to the leine was to indicate that a belted garment of solid saffron that went down to the knees was most certainly ancient Irish and predates the kilt. The leine was taken to Scotland and worn their and refereed to as Irish dress. That is all I was pointing out.

My reference to internet information was not an attempt to discredit you research. I only indicated that I had already read most of what you put together during my research a while back. My research was done via the internet, but from backed up by the book resources as yours was.

The caubeen comment, however accurate the observation of that one picture, was definitely felt as a poke at the Irish tradition. One photo does not record all of history.

As for Plantation of Ulster, it is worth noting that the Ulster region in Ireland was at this time populated by the Irish , so it is at least conceivable that the cloth was woven by a Irish weaver located to Ireland. The Dungiven region was heavily populated with O'Cathan's and Mc Bloscaidh's


[I] you are misinterpreting our purpose for writing the article. It was not ever meant to be a slant against the Irish, one way or the other. If anything, it is attempting to tell the real story/I] AND You say it makes it sound as if we are "pulling everything back to a Scottish heritage," and in a sense we are
They have the appearance to contradict each other. I'm sure that was not your intention, but what it appeared to me. Every thing Tartan/Plaid/Kilt did not originate in Scotland.

I don't want to fight. I will just drop it, but I wanted to try and clear up any assumptions to my post.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

[I] you are misinterpreting our purpose for writing the article. It was not ever meant to be a slant against the Irish, one way or the other. If anything, it is attempting to tell the real story/I] AND You say it makes it sound as if we are "pulling everything back to a Scottish heritage," and in a sense we are
They have the appearance to contradict each other. I'm sure that was not your intention, but what it appeared to me. Every thing Tartan/Plaid/Kilt did not originate in Scotland.

There is no contradiction, I assure you. One can correctly point out that the use of the kilt in Ireland was inspired by Scottish tradition, without it being "a slant against the Irish." There is nothing anti-Irish in the fact that Irish kilt wearers borrow from Scottish tradition.

[macwilkin]

The caubeen comment, however accurate the observation of that one picture, was definitely felt as a poke at the Irish tradition. One photo does not record all of history.

No, but Harris is pretty clear in his book on the Irish Regiments that the caubeen's adoption as headgear for regimental pipers comes during and after the First World War. There are at least three photos of Irish pipers from before the war, and none are wearing caubeens. (or kilts for that matter) I don't understand why you're taking a simple statement of fact as a "poke" at the Irish tradition, when Harris and other sources are pretty much unanimous in their belief that the tradition began right around the time of the First World War. Again, you are making assumptions and taking personal offense at a simple observation for no good reason.

Perhaps you'd care to share your sources with us from your research? We'd love to see them, especially any "smoking guns" you might have in regards to Irish regimental dress.


T.

[macwilkin]

I do have one query about the article, though. It appears to place the British Army use of the saffron kilt (for pipers in Irish regiments) very late, after the Irish nationalists wore it. I have seen many references to much earlier use of the saffron kilt by the British Army in this way, even as early as 1857. Of course, I have no proof. Perhaps a little research into the Tyrone Fusiliers, or Royal Tyrone Fusiliers might either verify or disprove this, and reports of slightly later use by the Inniskillen or Enniskillen Regiment or Fusiliers might also be worth looking into.

All of the references to the Royal Tyrone Fusiliers I have found mention the adoption of the pipes, but nothing about the kilt, caubeen, etc. Harris, for example, documents the adoption of kilt by the pipers of the Inskillings in the 1920s, as our article states.

T.

[macwilkin]

No, but Harris is pretty clear in his book on the Irish Regiments that the caubeen's adoption as headgear for regimental pipers comes during and after the First World War. There are at least three photos of Irish pipers from before the war, and none are wearing caubeens. (or kilts for that matter) I don't understand why you're taking a simple statement of fact as a "poke" at the Irish tradition, when Harris and other sources are pretty much unanimous in their belief that the tradition began right around the time of the First World War. Again, you are making assumptions and taking personal offense at a simple observation for no good reason.

Perhaps you'd care to share your sources with us from your research? We'd love to see them, especially any "smoking guns" you might have in regards to Irish regimental dress.


T.

To further this point, there are photos of pipers of the Irish Army, some as late as the 1960s during the Congo crisis, wearing standard uniforms and not kilt, caubeen, etc.

T.

[MrShoe]

Is an item only "official" or "traditional" if and when it is adopted by the UK military?

Some of the Irish that fought in the American revolution were rumored to have worn them. I will look for picture if I must. In addition the throng of Irish that arrived in the USA during the potato famine 1845 and 1852 worn them as well. Not to use Hollywood as a source of truth, but in gangs of Gangs of New Your you can see the caubeen worn by the Irish.

If it must go back to a military source, in 1641 Owen Roe O'Neill lead the Irish Confederate Forces against those of Charles I. In painting of him and the battle he is wearing what resembles a Caubeen. Image Here. Owen Roe (the red haired) O Neill (1590-1649), a nephew of the great Hugh O Neill, Earl of Tyrone, was a professional soldier who had served thirty years in the Spanish army. He returned to Ireland and, in 1642, joined the new movement styled the Confederate Catholics of Ireland. He defeated the Scots under Monro at Benburb in County Tyrone in 1646. The O'Neills were one of the 7 major Ulster clan of which the Owen clan spun off (County Tyrone is the historical land that was named after them) The O'Cathan Clan were chieftains in the Owen Clan.

[Noel Christian Riddell]

Great read. I especially like this quote:

"...saying that the only objections to such a move would “come from the skinny-legged, knick-kneed type for whose faulty or undeveloped ‘understandings’ the pants as a covering are a veritable Godsend.”