The Kilt's use in Irish Nationalism

[Paul Henry]

snip...
Whereas the Scottish government has fought to reserve the rights for labeling a whisky as Scotch, it has been much more welcoming of other people getting into the tartan game. This is evidenced in part by the various Irish tartans that have been recognized and recorded by the Scottish Register of Tartans.
....snip

Just a minor little point, the SRT doesn't recognise tartans in any "proper and official" way , I mean their only criteria is, is the design unique, and not actually likely to offend. They are at pains not to, in any sense,favour any tartan by giving it "recognition". And the same goes for the STA, both bodies are happy to register/record tartans but without giving a preference to them, so the fact that Irish, or American, or any other tartans have been recorded, only means that they are on a master list of tartans which can be easily accessed.

[CMcG]

Just a minor little point, the SRT doesn't recognise tartans in any "proper and official" way , I mean their only criteria is, is the design unique, and not actually likely to offend. They are at pains not to, in any sense,favour any tartan by giving it "recognition". And the same goes for the STA, both bodies are happy to register/record tartans but without giving a preference to them, so the fact that Irish, or American, or any other tartans have been recorded, only means that they are on a master list of tartans which can be easily accessed.

Thanks for the clarification. It is certainly true that to be registered and recorded does not de facto make any tartan official. My point was that if the Scottish government was as protective of tartan as they are Scotch whisky, an Irish tartan would never even be registered as a tartan in the first place.

[Blackrose87]

Thanks for the clarification. It is certainly true that to be registered and recorded does not de facto make any tartan official. My point was that if the Scottish government was as protective of tartan as they are Scotch whisky, an Irish tartan would never even be registered as a tartan in the first place.

Sorry for my ignorance, but seeing as the Ulster Tartan has been dated to the 16th century, why does it have less a claim of 'authenticity' than one which may have been worn in Scotland?

[Zardoz]

Thanks for the clarification. It is certainly true that to be registered and recorded does not de facto make any tartan official. My point was that if the Scottish government was as protective of tartan as they are Scotch whisky, an Irish tartan would never even be registered as a tartan in the first place.

Whiskey distilling in Ireland goes back about a thousand years....
just sayin'

[seanachie]

Sorry for my ignorance, but seeing as the Ulster Tartan has been dated to the 16th century, why does it have less a claim of 'authenticity' than one which may have been worn in Scotland?

That is good for a chuckle, my wife is Chinese and loves to jokingly say about various things, "we had it first". She has limited knowledge of tartan but knows 2 millenia old tartan was discovered in north west China.

[Blackrose87]

That is good for a chuckle, my wife is Chinese and loves to jokingly say about various things, "we had it first". She has limited knowledge of tartan but knows 2 millenia old tartan was discovered in north west China.

I don't think my post said anything about having tartan first.
I was merely asking why CmcG believes the Ulster tartan is less authentic than Scottish ones.
Are you talking about just the clan tartans, or just any tartan which is associated with Scotland. Are the football club or university tartans deemed to be more authentic than the Ulster one?

[CMcG]

Sorry for my ignorance, but seeing as the Ulster Tartan has been dated to the 16th century, why does it have less a claim of 'authenticity' than one which may have been worn in Scotland?

You are actually arguing for my point and not against it Tartan has been used in Ireland for quite a while, though technically I think the Ulster tartan was found as a pair of trews. Perhaps this is part of why the Scottish Register of Tartans doesn't try to limit the use of the word "tartan" to only Scottish designs?

A further extension of the protection of the "Scotch" designation for whisky vs. "tartan" for woven textile patterns, would be the word "kilt" itself. The Scottish government doesn't try to control the use of that word either, though the Welsh I believe use "cilt" instead.

That is good for a chuckle, my wife is Chinese and loves to jokingly say about various things, "we had it first". She has limited knowledge of tartan but knows 2 millenia old tartan was discovered in north west China.

True. But I'm pretty sure they didn't call it "tartan." On the other hand, if the Chinese (or anyone else) wants to call that type of pattern "tartan," their is no legal impediment, as there is with Scotch whisky.

Whiskey distilling in Ireland goes back about a thousand years....
just sayin'

Indeed! But you can't call it Scotch whisky...

To me it's still like saying "I found out my great grandfather was Japanese so I am going to wear an Indian turban as a symbol of Eastern identity" or "I found out my great grandfather was Candian so I am going to wear a Mexican sombrero as a symbol of cultural identity with The Americas".

Those are different linguistic/cultural groups. The Irish kilt is more like saying "I found out my great grandfather was Canadian, so I'm going to wear jeans, tee shirts, and baseball caps as a symbol of Anglo North American cultural identity." Oh wait, we do that already How about "I found out my great grandfather was from South Tyrol, so I'm going to wear lederhosen as a symbol of Germanic identity"?

The page on Locharron's site about the aforementioned Ulster tartan, sums it up nicely:

"During the Roman occupation of mainland Britain, the Romans referred to the Irish as "The Scotti". When the Romans left the Scotti, through raiding sorties, settled the north western part of Britain, hence the name Scotland. By the 16th century the flow was reversed."

[Blackrose87]

My apologies, I see what you're saying now CMcG.

Taking whiskey as an example, it needs to be distilled in Scotland to be 'Scotch Whisky', or distilled in Ireland to be 'Irish Whisky'

So maybe there should be an Irish Tartan Registry, which I guess would be a lot smaller.

Although what would happen to tartans with no historical basis? E.g American/Canadian ones, or more recent ones made here?
In a previous post I mentioned football club or university tartans which are very recently designed. Should these still be allowed on the Scottish Tartan Registry?

[Blackrose87]

The Irish kilt is more like saying "I found out my great grandfather was Canadian, so I'm going to wear jeans, tee shirts, and baseball caps as a symbol of Anglo North American cultural identity."

However, I don't believe this to be true for everyone. I'm under no illusion of my nationality. Born and raised in Ireland, and while I've been living in Scotland for a while, I'm still Irish.
To be honest, I like the look of the kilt, and enjoy wearing it. So instead of wearing a Scottish tartan, which I believe I have no right to, I wear a tartan representing my country/province.

[seanachie]

I don't think my post said anything about having tartan first.
I was merely asking why CmcG believes the Ulster tartan is less authentic than Scottish ones.
Are you talking about just the clan tartans, or just any tartan which is associated with Scotland. Are the football club or university tartans deemed to be more authentic than the Ulster one?

I know you did not say anything about who had tartan first, my comment was made with humor. I was expanding your question, with levity, to say who says Chinese tartan is less authentic? I hope it was received in the same spirit it was said.