Livingstone Tartan Mystery Update

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi All, Thought I should start a new thread on the topic of our clan tartan research. As an update, since determining that there is little chance that the Highland Society of London has an original swatch of what became known as Livingstone Tartan 1003, I have discovered something interesting. It would appear that the Highland Society of London in 1815 did not contact many of the principal clans in the CHief's Movern/Mull area. Or at least that it what is seems to me. Stewart of Appin, Macgilveray, MacLean and Macinnes did not make it in the Society of London Collection and yet a few years later Wilsons acknowledged in their 1819 collection that they had one pattern (447) from Clan MacGilverary and two paterns (58)and (387) from Clan MacLean of Duart. Another local tartan attributed to

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi All, As an update to my update. I see that Clan Carmichael some of whom have a long association with the Isle of Lismore is said to have submitted a sample of Carmichael clan tartan in the year 1907 to the Highland Society of London. ( I wonder which clans submitted tartans to them in later 1800's and the early 1900's.) The ancient friends of Clan Maconlea, the Macdougalls have several tartans, some apparently older than 1800. The Stewart of Appin tartan

[D.W.Livingston]

Hello Donald, This is some excellent information and I look forward to hearing more. I also have some updates on this and it seems to go in line with your finding about the Highland Society not contacting many of the principal chiefs. From the Tartan expert I've been talking to I got this when askign about how the numbering system for our 1003 or 1488 came about: "The number system that you quote is that belonging to the Scottish Tartans Authority which maintains the largest database (the International Tartan Index) containing all known tartans. The patterns are numbered as they were entered and now contains over 6000 entries but the principle is the same i.e. add the entry by name and the number is, in this case, automatically generated by the computer programme. So the first tartan to come through the Scottish Tartans Authority (which would have been the Campbell's) got a number of 1 and so on. This would mean that the documentation for the Livingston Tartan would have been the 1,003 to cross their desk and the MacLeay would have been the 1,488... this woudl mean the dress tartan (650) actually made it through the process before the (1003). I of course have an enquiry into them to see if they could give any information about the when's and how the tartan got placed into the International Tartan Index. I will keep you all informed with what they share. David

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi David, I always wondered about the number system. Well 1003 is about as far from Tartan no. 1 as you can get. So the older the tartan the lower the number. I have to confess that doesn't completely add up to me because most tartans can't be identified in terms of age, just when tartan manufacturer or whoever first catalogued them. ANd even then it a very dicey thing to rank a couple of thousand tartans by age. If one could do that it would make sense but I not sure there is any tartan expert on earth who could rank tartans by year of origin. Who really has that information. Dont get me wrong I am not criticizing the tartan experts I just think ultimately there is a lot grey areas as to the actuall ages and origins of alot of tartans. But it looks like one way or another our Tartan 1003 seems to have missed out on early identification and cataloguing by the highland society and tartan manufacturers. It is not looking promising for our poor Tartan 1003. Think of all the work I put into this silly piece of plaid fabric. I wonder what Niall's father remembers about the family tartans from his youth and if he has any insight into whether his father or grandfather or relatives wore Tartan 1003 or some variation. regards Donald

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi David, Sorry I think I need to backtrack that last e-mail a bit. Its late and I thought for a minute for some strange reason that Scottish Tartan Authority was using a chronological system. I am not certain how I came up with that idea. It is just late and I am tired. It will be interesting to learn more about the tartan index itself. How old is it etc. As far as now they just refer to Tartan 1003 with its specific thread count and list a source which they state is the RObert Bain book published in 1938. Again while our tartan 1003 may infact be not as old as I would hope, something inside me still clings to the hope that our clan MAconlea Livingstone had a tartan before the 2oth century. Maybe it is just the romantic Scot in me, but I keeping hoping for some clue. regards Donald

[Bachuil]

Rob wrote that According to the Clan Carmichael website, they originated in the lowlands in the 11th Century and get their name from "Caer Michael" or "Fort of Michael".

[D.W.Livingston]

I received a reply from Brian Wilson of the Scottish Tartan Authority on my requests about 1003 and 1488. Not a lot of new information about the Livingston Tartan but some things I did not know, and might assist in the "quest", about the Livingston/MacLeay (1488). "Thanks for your enquiry David. Dealing with the numbering system first. One can't attach a great deal of significance to the number in that it doesn't necessarily indicate either the age of the tartan or the date that it was entered. We not infrequently discover old tartans that are not in the database and of course they're given the next number in line. As to the Livingstone tartan (1003). Its first documented appearance was in the 1906 two-volume edition of The Tartans of the Clans & Septs of Scotland by W. & A.K. Johnston Limited. It wasn't in the reliable 1850 publication by the Smith brothers so one has to assume that it appeared between 1850 and 1906. Of course that only categorises it as either a new tartan or a newly discovered old tartan! The notes we have on it are as follows: "As #895 but with black instead of green lines between the green bands.

[Kyle2 MacLea]

These follow-ups are wonderful, David!

[Canadian Livingstone]

Hi David, That is interesting. It would be encouraging if Tartan 1003 was in fact an old family tartan not identified before 1906. I would like to think that history and Donald Maconleas kilt were on our side.Clearly there were a few that for whatever reasons weren't identified by the early tartan researchers ie, Highland Society of London, Wilsons of Bannockburn and Cockburn, but at this point were still a bit in the dark on this one. This was the Tartan list I was recently

[Bachuil]

Going since 1868 they were upmarket kiltmakers - now rivalled ny me..... Regards N