Tartan: From Fraud to Fact

Tartan, From Fraud to Fact!

originally published in The Scottish Banner, May 2009

Anyone with more than a passing interest in tartan studies will sooner or later encounter the name Sobieski Stuart, and reference to a mysterious volume called the Vestiarium Scoticum. Usually the reference denounces the work as a fraud, and little more is said of it. However, even fraud can become an important and influential factor in the history of tartan.

John Hay Allan, and his younger brother, Charles Hay Allan, were born to a mother whose maiden name was Sobieski. Around 1811 they were told that their grandfather was none other than Charles Edward Stuart (Bonnie Prince Charlie); a fact disputed by history but believed by many at the time, and probably even by the brothers themselves.

They were helped greatly by their physical resemblance to the Stuart monarchs, and very soon they became quite famous, traveling around Scotland making the most of their royal reputation.

At some point they claimed to have been shown a manuscript from the sixteenth century that supposedly contained all of the “original clan tartans” from before the Act of Proscription (1746-1782). No one other than the brothers ever saw the original, but their copy was published in 1842 under the title Vestiarium Scoticum: from the manuscript formerly in the Scots college at Douay. It contained written descriptions and color illustrations of some 75 tartans, many appearing for the first time.

Eventually the whole thing was proven to be a hoax. In all likelihood, the majority of the tartans included in the Vestiarium Scoticum were in fact invented by Charles, who is credited with the artwork.

This fact has often been used as reason to deride tartans from the Vestiarium as “forgeries.” People might be tempted to disdain any tartan from this source. In point of fact, they are not “forged” tartans, for to make a forgery is to create a copy or a replica of an original item. These tartans were not copied. They were created new. The hoax involved in their introduction was the false historical claim associated with them. But that does not mean that these are not actual tartans.

One interesting phenomenon is that the Vestiarium included not only tartans for Highland clans such as MacDonald, MacDougall, and MacLeod, but also many Lowland families, such as Armstrong, Hay, and Johnstone. For most of these families, this reference was the first time a tartan was even associated with the name.

I am related to the Armstrong family, though my maternal grandmother. I proudly wear a kilt in the Armstrong tartan, which first made its appearance in the Vestiarium Scoticum and was in all likelihood designed by Charles Hay Allan. Do I feel awkward or uncomfortable wearing a “fraud” tartan? The answer is no, not really.

This tartan has been around for over a century and a half. It is the only tartan that has ever been used by the family. It is still in use today and is universally accepted as the Armstrong tartan. There is no doubt, if one wants to wear a tartan to identify one’s self with the Armstrongs, this is the choice.

The point here is that a tartan’s particular origin has very little to do with whether or not that tartan is “authentic.” It has very much to do with whether that tartan is accepted by the clan chief, titled head of family, or in the absence of such, the testimony of long use and acceptance by the clan or family.

The same could be said about many other clans and families. The Johnstones, the Lindsays, the Homes and others have never had a tartan other than what was in the Vestiarium. Yet all are commonly recognized today.

Other clans and families have variations of their tartans included for the first time in the Vestiarium. Some have become quite common place today, such as the yellow MacLeod tartan, the grey Douglas tartan, and the green Hunting MacLean. By contrast, some tartans in this reference are rarely if ever seen today, including their version of the MacNeil, Gunn, and Graham tartans.

Then there are those Vestiarium tartans which have the explicit approval of the clan chief. The MacGregor tartan is a prime example. Of course, one must also point out that the MacGregor tartan did not make its first appearance in this infamous tome. It was included in the collection of Gen. Sir William Cockburn c. 1815 and likely dates earlier.

Which brings us to another point, and that is that just because a tartan appears in the Vestiarium Scoticum does not mean that it was not worn previously nor that it was invented by the Sobieski Stuarts. Some tartans, like the MacGregor, we can find evidence of before 1842. The Ogilvie tartan given in the Vestiarium is another example. It is very similar to the Ogilvie of Inverarity tartan included in one of the pattern books produced by tartan weaver Wilsons of Bannockburn, c. 1840.

It makes sense when one thinks about it. Why invent new tartans whole cloth for clans and families who already have recognized tartans? The Sobieski Stuarts, in addition to creating new tartans, doubtless recorded and included in their work many tartans for clans which were already being worn at the time.

But in the end, it matters not whether a tartan can be dated to pre-1842, or pre-1746, or any other arbitrary date; whether it was invented by a tartan merchant, an ancient clan chief, or created for an elaborate hoax. If that tartan has the approval of the clan chief (or other competent authority), or is accepted by the wont and usage of the clan, it becomes the authentic clan tartan. Its origins, whatever they may be, only add to the already colorful world of tartan studies.