The Kilt's use in Irish Nationalism

[seanachie]

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.

I think your comment is very interesting, particularly the: " I wear a tartan representing my country/province." and being native born Irish. There are threads here that indicate that none of the Irish tartans have been officially adopted by any government/municipality/ city etc. I tried to contact the Irish culture minister last year but unfortunately it was around the general election and I did not receive a response. A few cynics have suggested the Irish tartans are a way to make a few Punts off Irish Americans. So are you quite happy with your County tartan and do you prefer HOE's tartans or the Marton Mills County Crest? Using Clare as an example (I used to own a flat in Ennis) the Banner County has such different tartans between HOE and Marton Mills. For myself I have spent a lot of time in Connemara, one of my favorite places, and like the tartan but the tartan unfortunately is not made in kilt weight. (PS I do note your avatar has the HOE tartan)

[CMcG]

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?

I support the Scottish Register of Tartans and am quite pleased that they accept all manner of designs. Whether or not a tartan is officially recognized has more do with the governing body that the tartan purports to represent than it does the register i.e. if a football club, university, county, province, city, country, etc recognizes a tartan, only then it is truly official.

In the case of the Ulster tartan, I don't think it has been inducted into law as the official tartan of that province. It certainly has wide recognition and in this case may have become semi-official through usage. We had a similar case in Canada with the Maple Leaf tartan that was widely used as our national tartan, but only last year was legally made official.

... 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.

Seeing as you identify as being Irish, you can go further than just wearing an Irish tartan. There is actually a whole range of options for kilting up in Irish style that parallel the Scottish style: Kilkenny jacket instead of Argyll, Brian Boru jacket instead of Prince Charlie, caubeen instead of Balmoral, Donegal tweed instead of Harris, shamrock/claddagh/harp motif items instead of thistle/lion, etc. Much to some people's dismay (apparently), the Irish kilt is quite well established in the retail world.

While the kilt seems to be more commonly worn by people of Irish ancestry outside of Ireland than on the Emerald Isle itself, I don't think other Irish kilt wearers are confused about their nationality either. On the other hand, I think modern identity is often more complicated than that and I also think that it depends on how the question is asked; if a Canadian asks another Canadian (especially in Canada) what their nationality is, they most likely mean their ancestral heritage. If a non-Canadian asks a Canadian that (especially abroad), they probably mean what is their citizenship.

Citizenship is clearly defined by the passport that one carries, but is not the be all and end all. There is also one's current and past neighborhood, city, county, and province/state. Unless one is adopted there is also family history and ancestry. As a Canadian, I am keenly aware of the fact that culture is both acculturated and enculturated, so it doesn't necessarily have to exactly reflect the other things I just mentioned and could also include elements that have nothing to do with one's heritage but were acquired along the way!

For many people these days, identity is bound to be plural and people will attach value to these variables in different amounts.

Here is just a silly, hypothetical example:

Person A is sitting next to person B at a large international airport
A: "Hi there! What's your nationality?"
B: "I'm Scottish."
A: "Neat, I've never seen a Scottish passport! Would you show me?"
B: "Actually I have a British passport."
A: "Oh, I see. So you live in Scotland?"
B: "No sorry, I run my business out of Hong Kong."
A: "But your family is in Scotland then, right?"
B: "Well... my family name is Scottish but my parents actually live in Wales now and most of my extended family is in Ireland. My mother is Irish you see."
A: "Uh... you must have been born in Scotland then?"
B: "Wrong again, I was born in Canada... but we moved back when I was two and I went to primary school in Inverness!"
A: "Ah, I get it. You grew up in Scotland?"
B: "After primary school is when my parents moved to Wales. But I later went to Uni in Edinburgh, though I then got my masters in the States."
A: "So you're really Scottish?"
B: "Yes!"

[O'Callaghan]

I think someone needs to add a few bits to the history, so it might as well be me. All that follows is well enough known.

The Dal Riada, aka the Scotii, were one of the five tribes of Gaels in Ireland, and they are the original source of many aspects of Scottish highland culture, as they added the highlands to their kingdom. This is why an old term for the highlanders is Erse, which means Irish. To be sure, they developped the kilt in Scotland, but it derives from the Irish brat, which was a cloak. The Irish already wore tartan cloaks by that period, although as someone pointed out tartan was around long before the Gaels brought it to Ireland, much less settled in Scotland.

Everything Matt's article says about Irish kilts is true, as far as it goes. They do derive from Scottish kilts, he just leaves out how those in turn derive from the Irish brat, and how the saffron colour derives from the Irish leine (but from the dye, not from the actual colour, because the fabrics are different). The word leine does translate to shirt in modern Gaelige, but that doesn't mean it was a modern shirt, as you may be liable to arrest if you wear the latter without trews.

And of course, what was not historically accurate in the 19th century has become a part of Irish history simply by the passage of time.

As for being celts or not, this all has to do with the DNA in most people being mainly that of the conquered peoples and not their conquerors. So, yes, the English have mainly celtic DNA, but celtic culture and language were stamped out in most of England and replaced by Germanic culture, but survived to a much greater extent in the 'celtic fringe'.

And there were two types of celts in the history of the British isles, the Britons who came earlier and spread widely, and the Gaels who later came to Ireland and then spread from there into the Scottish highlands and the Isle of Man. There were many other groups who came and went and moved around during the course of history, but those are the most relevant to our discussion.

So, yes it is mainly pipers who wear kilts in Ireland, but they have a history from the 19th c celtic revival, plus they derived from ancient Irish brat (or cloaks) anyway.

As for Irish pipers having been taught by Scots, and Irish war pipes being Scottish pipes with a drone removed, this is because the Irish version had fallen into disuse. Bagpipes are originally of middle eastern origin, anyway, not Irish or Scottish. The Scots added the third drone, but they used to have two there as well, and the only reason Irish bagpipes only have two is that bagpipes fell out of use in Ireland before the addition of the 3rd drone.

I have a feeling of deja vu all over again when it comes to this thread, LOL!

[CMcG]

I think someone needs to add a few bits to the history, so it might as well be me. All that follows is well enough known.

...

I have a feeling of deja vu all over again when it comes to this thread, LOL!

Nice post sir!

And yes, this is a perennial topic of discussion around here... especially as Saint Pat's draws nigh.

[Blackrose87]

In the case of the Ulster tartan, I don't think it has been inducted into law as the official tartan of that province. It certainly has wide recognition and in this case may have become semi-official through usage. We had a similar case in Canada with the Maple Leaf tartan that was widely used as our national tartan, but only last year was legally made official.

How could the Ulster tartan be made official though? There's no governing body over the whole province. And seeing that the province of Ulster is spread over both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, neither governments could claim a tartan for the whole province.

[CMcG]

How could the Ulster tartan be made official though? There's no governing body over the whole province. And seeing that the province of Ulster is spread over both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, neither governments could claim a tartan for the whole province.

That's a tough question... it would seem to require an unprecedented level of cooperation between the British and Irish governments, eh? I think the widespread use and public recognition is enough to give the Ulster tartan unofficial official status Its antiquity also lends it some symbolic weight.

[seanachie]

How could the Ulster tartan be made official though? There's no governing body over the whole province. And seeing that the province of Ulster is spread over both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, neither governments could claim a tartan for the whole province.

There is hope that this could happen. I can not put my finger on it the moment but I saw a recent article saying that certain authorities are no longer the exclusive province of Stormont or Dublin and this is a gradual process of joint cooperation. I am confident that the one mentioned was fisheries, and that this one of the first agencies to start the process.

[MacSpadger]

The Dal Riada, aka the Scotii, were one of the five tribes of Gaels in Ireland, and they are the original source of many aspects of Scottish highland culture, as they added the highlands to their kingdom.

I see this repeated over and over on the internet as if it is fact. It's not history at all, no more so than the tales of King Arthur. The tale comes from an mythological history which was written down by Bede in the 10th Century in his 'Senchus Fer n'Alban' (History of the Men of Scotland).

People that quote Bede regarding the Scotti also seem to miss out the other stuff about giants and magical wizards and lost tribes of Egyptians, as well as King Arthur, maybe because it doesn't fit in?

However, there does not seem to be any factual basis in the "Irish Invasion" story at all, you can read about the first strong investigations into the myth in the 1970's here, if you read the article you will see that there is plenty evidence to make the whole myth nonsense. Please do read the article, it's good fun. Dr Ewan Campbell's archaelogical investigations have also shown the whole thing to be an interesting story, but no more. Other teams have had similar findings.
If you watch this clip here, you will see what is being taught in schools over here today, the main reason for the cultural differences between Scotti and Picts is simply because the mountains located between their kingdoms kept the cultures separate.

This is why an old term for the highlanders is Erse, which means Irish.

Erse was a term used in South East England to describe Gaelic speakers. As Alcock has pointed out, this included not just Ireland but also Britain's western coast, including Cornwall, Devon, Dyfed, Anglesey and south-west Scotland.

To be sure, they developped the kilt in Scotland, but it derives from the Irish brat, which was a cloak. The Irish already wore tartan cloaks by that period, although as someone pointed out tartan was around long before the Gaels brought it to Ireland, much less settled in Scotland.

I find it a real stretch to see how the Irish brat developed into the Highland kilt by the early 1700's, especially as we have amusing documentation as to the invention of the modern kilt in 1720's Lochaber by Rawlinson, not to mention that the brat was made from several sections. The kilt relies on modern weaving methods, the brat could not. Anyway, as has been said before, it's just not true that the Gaels came in over the water from Ireland.

Everything Matt's article says about Irish kilts is true, as far as it goes. They do derive from Scottish kilts, he just leaves out how those in turn derive from the Irish brat, and how the saffron colour derives from the Irish leine (but from the dye, not from the actual colour, because the fabrics are different). The word leine does translate to shirt in modern Gaelige, but that doesn't mean it was a modern shirt, as you may be liable to arrest if you wear the latter without trews.

I do find this funny, because when the Irish Kerne who fought for Henry VIII at the Seige of Boulogne assembled in St James Park, London in May 1544, the Irish troops outraged the English by their manner of dress, which consisted of only a shirt and short jacket. Writing in 1544, Dean Gunter White called them, "naked men but only their shirts and smallcoats, and many times when it comes to the bicker but barenaked, saving their shirts to hide their privities". Engravings of the Kerne done at the time currently in the National Army Museum in Chelsea do indeed show barelegged men in only shirts and short jackets. You can see the base of their buttocks, but thankfully the illustration are in profile and their "privities" are not visible.

And of course, what was not historically accurate in the 19th century has become a part of Irish history simply by the passage of time.

I would strongly suggest that the phrase should be "not historically accurate in any century".

As for being celts or not, this all has to do with the DNA in most people being mainly that of the conquered peoples and not their conquerors. So, yes, the English have mainly celtic DNA, but celtic culture and language were stamped out in most of England and replaced by Germanic culture, but survived to a much greater extent in the 'celtic fringe'.

And there were two types of celts in the history of the British isles, the Britons who came earlier and spread widely, and the Gaels who later came to Ireland and then spread from there into the Scottish highlands and the Isle of Man. There were many other groups who came and went and moved around during the course of history, but those are the most relevant to our discussion.

Jings, min! I'm running out of time here! There's so much wrong here it would take me a day to reference and refute.

So, yes it is mainly pipers who wear kilts in Ireland, but they have a history from the 19th c celtic revival, plus they derived from ancient Irish brat (or cloaks) anyway.

As for Irish pipers having been taught by Scots, and Irish war pipes being Scottish pipes with a drone removed, this is because the Irish version had fallen into disuse. Bagpipes are originally of middle eastern origin, anyway, not Irish or Scottish. The Scots added the third drone, but they used to have two there as well, and the only reason Irish bagpipes only have two is that bagpipes fell out of use in Ireland before the addition of the 3rd drone.

See my last sentence above. Sorry for disagreeing, but your post relies heavily on myth, not history.

[Blackrose87]

Oh dear, what have I started? The topic seems to have gone way off course

[Glen]

A: "Neat, I've never seen a Scottish passport! Would you show me?"
B: "Actually I have a British passport."

A passport do not a Scott make - sorry Richard....