animal sporrans ... symbolism, historic purpose, magick?

[Seawolf]

I would tend to believe that what one perceives in regards to his or her own appointments and accessories that they may contain or perceive to contain power. healing, ritualistic totem. Totems in our case the fur sporran, can be the symbol of a tribe, clan, family or individual. Some people think that each person has nine animal essences or totems that walk through life with them, teaching and guiding them and in some cases, protecting them. To each his own. What I carry in my sporran for protection, luck or whatever is entirely op to me the individual.

So much for my comments it is all in your beliefs.....or not.

Slàinte mhor a h-uile là a chi 's nach fhaic!


Seawolf

[guardsman]

well Chas , take it bragging rights were granted, have you had a round of applause before LOL

[dea3369]

OC Richard, I'm wondering if the reason for the lack of documented rationale for buying fur sporrans, especially for magical or ritualistic reasons, is that no such rationale existed. Written history or rationale might be missing, but context would provide clues if such powers were thought to be associated with the fur sporran.

I tend to believe that availability of materials -- small critters, horses, sheep, etc. -- probably had a lot to do with the choice. Daniel Boone likely didn't have any particular divine reason to have his coonskin cap. I have little experience with processing hides, but does keeping the fur make it easier/faster for the leather-maker to have material with which to work? Scraping off all that hair takes time.

For that matter, are there indications that sporrans were made of anything but leather? Did people from the early days of kilts make sporrans out of tartan cloth? How about other parts of the animal, such as bones?

[OC Richard]

There is one thing which shows up in Gaelic folk art from time to time which is quite ancient, and originally had a magical purpose, but as people forgot about the meaning it became merely decorative.

That's the "goddess' eyes" decoration, each "eye" being a set of concentric circles.

There's a c13th century bone pipe from Wales which is covered with them.

Here's an 18th century bagpipe featuring them

http://www.flickr.com/photos/a-evans...7594545296033/

and they were a quite common decoration in the Highlands, for example a common decoration used on early sporran cantles



http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...62/index5.html

and even modern sporrans often use them

http://www.scotchcorner.com/Argyll-kilt.html

But it's not just Celtic, but a very old European thing. Bulgarian bagpipes, especially the Kaba Gaidi, are often covered with them.

[Deirachel]

OC Richard, I'm wondering if the reason for the lack of documented rationale for buying fur sporrans, especially for magical or ritualistic reasons, is that no such rationale existed. Written history or rationale might be missing, but context would provide clues if such powers were thought to be associated with the fur sporran.

This is unfortunately not true. The absence of documentation is not proof of non-existence, even if more broad information is available; nor is the existence of documents proof of something occurring. A good example of the first is found in the Norse Sagas. Within many of the stories there is mention of a weapon called a hewing spear, and it's clearly differentiated from a "normal" spear. But, no known example of such weapon has been found. But, we can not rule out they existed, nor can we assume they did exist either. An example of the second is the depictions of battle found in Medieval illuminations and tapestry. Modern experiments using techniques and materials matching the samples found have shown it's very unlikely, if not impossible, for an axe or sword to split a helmet in the manner depicted in these battle scenes, yet we see split Norman helms in almost all battle scenes of the period. (See also dragons being in almost every mythology in the world in one form or another.)

There is very little clear documentation on the religious beliefs of the early Picts/Cruithni, Scotti, Gaels, Britons, Celts, et al. We have some descriptions from the Roman perspective, but these can be circumspect as, of course, they were enemies at the time. After that, there are some descriptions from the early Christian missionaries, but again, their record has been shown to be biased against the old pagan religions.

Part of the problem is much the same problem with understanding the ancient Egyptian religion in the detail we know today. Language barrier. The details (such as shamanic meaning of a specific animal, plant, or stone) may be available and staring us right in the face. However, the ancient writing (such as Ogham) is not fully understood. For the hieroglyphs to be translated it took the Rosetta Stone, and we are even today revising and correcting translations long thought to be "correct" due to a better understanding of the syntax. We don't have the proverbial Rosetta stone for these forms of writing (there are some examples of Furthark runic and Ogham being together on artifacts. This is what has allowed what is know of Ogham to be known.)

What we do have are the songs, legends, and prose which have come down in the form of myth and legend (The Mabinogion) and archeology. Unfortunately, there are no known (that I've found anywhere) texts from the early Dark Ages or prior from Scotland specifically. All of these tales were carried orally for many millenia. From these, we do get some clear information, but not a huge amount. What we do know is much knowledge from the "uncultured north" was specifically suppressed by the Catholic Church as they moved into formerly pagan areas. Comparatively, much of the Roman and Greek religions are very well known, as the Church recognized the value of much of the accumulated knowledge of these civilizations (it's rather easy to see it's worth saving when it's the society you grew out of and it's this knowledge that literally allowed the building of your house.)

As for the availability of animals, that does fit to a point. But, we do know there are specific examples for items found in Highland dress which have specific meaning, but are also examples of materials which are not easily obtained. Of course, I am referring to the eagle feathers in the bonnet. We know these feathers were originally gathered directly from eagles or their nests. Prior to firearms, eagles were not easily killed. Even with the fabled accuracy of the proverbial master Longbowman, hitting a target of that size was extremely difficult. Wild birds used in feasts were commonly harvested via nets. Some game animals were killed by sling or bow, but these birds are mostly ground animals. The eagle feather being a sign for a leader was due to the skill, strength, and bravery of the individual collecting them. As someone with visible proof of their worthiness to lead, this man was followed. Today, there are few chiefs climbing cliffs to collect their own feathers.

It would fit at some point certain animal hides had specific meaning. Even to the more modern period, I can easily see the A & S Highlanders picking the badger mask sporrans due to the aggressive and tenacious nature of the beast (the rankers having the horsehair sporran can obviously be seen to mimic the badgers in color and form, if not in material) as a symbol.



No documentation does not equal no meaning.

[Riverkilt]

Wasn't in a magical place when I asked Miss April's Carpetbags to sew up a sporran made from hair on buffalo to my specifications. I love how it came out since its thick leather, very sturdy - ain't gonna whimp out - and the buffalo hair is beautiful and soft.

Would for sure be happy if it gave me some "buffalo power" though.

[MacSpadger]

As for the availability of animals, that does fit to a point. But, we do know there are specific examples for items found in Highland dress which have specific meaning, but are also examples of materials which are not easily obtained. Of course, I am referring to the eagle feathers in the bonnet. We know these feathers were originally gathered directly from eagles or their nests. Prior to firearms, eagles were not easily killed. Even with the fabled accuracy of the proverbial master Longbowman, hitting a target of that size was extremely difficult. Wild birds used in feasts were commonly harvested via nets. Some game animals were killed by sling or bow, but these birds are mostly ground animals. The eagle feather being a sign for a leader was due to the skill, strength, and bravery of the individual collecting them. As someone with visible proof of their worthiness to lead, this man was followed. Today, there are few chiefs climbing cliffs to collect their own feathers.

This is a kind of specialist subject of mine, by that I mean one that I have studied and gained qualification in and spent probably over 25 years researching. But, I can't possibly condense that, so here are the nub points.
As mentioned, full face animal sporrans are a fairly recent invention in terms of Scottish history. They seem to co-incide with the more widespread use of firearms but, up until the Victorian period, are extremely rare, (if not non-existent), outside of the British Army. Likewise the wearing of eagle feathers is not a long established tradition, it's not mentioned in any of the Gaelic tales or descriptions of chief's clothing, and some of them are quite detailed in how a chief dressed. Some authors say that Lord Lyon papers indicate the custom began in the 1860's. The mid 1800's sees the "establishment" of a lot of "Highland tradition".
The badger head sporrans were originally worn by the 93rd Regiment of Foot officers, which later amalgamated (1881) with the 91st
to become the Argyll and Sutherland highlanders. There are some examples of these early officers badger sporrans around, and they were made in London by Scott Adie in London, who began trading in the 1860's as Victorian London became tartan and kilt obsessed. As with a lot of officers in the Scottish regiments since Culloden, the officers would have been English or men from Scottish families raised under the English boarding school system. This makes a bit of a guessing game as to why the badger was chosen as a symbol, as it has never been a common animal in Scotland, although they are plentiful in England.
**EDIT* Although I have to add badgers are more common in Scotland nowadays.

[OC Richard]

post removed

[dea3369]

This is unfortunately not true. The absence of documentation is not proof of non-existence, even if more broad information is available; nor is the existence of documents proof of something occurring.
...
No documentation does not equal no meaning.

Thank you for the detailed explanation.

Thanks also to OC Richard for the "eye of goddess" example. It reminded me of the Turkish "Nazar Boncugu" (which some call an "evil eye" even though it's really a charm *against* the evil eye).

But now the chicken-or-egg question: Was the sporran, then, a pouch/bag that took on special meaning based on its material composition? Or was it a charm/magical item/article of belief that later developed a practical use as a container/bag?

(I hope that none of you take offense at these stupid questions, especially when they result in heated discussions that border on personal attacks. Books and Internet are nice and informative, but I find the exchange of ideas and opinions very much more educational.)

[sydnie7]

Thanks for the "goddess eyes" explanation, that design is also common on petroglyphs in the U.S. but obviously its meaning is lost to time.

I saw a fabulous [relatively] modern interpretation in silver cantle and belt buckle on eBay but it went for far more than we were willing to pay! Wish I had kept the picture. . .

EDIT: Just got this pic through a daily e-mail called Very Short List -- the root site is Patternity -- but now we really know where the goddess eyes came from LOL

http://www.patternity.co.uk/wordpres...TACLEDOTS.jpeg