FOOTNOTES:

I wish to communicate to you an account of a very curious manuscript which I have great hope may interest you as much as it has done me. It is entitledLiber Vest[i]arium Scotia, otherwiseclippit the Garderope of Scotland, Beand ane Mirrour to shewe the true Tertaynis of the principal Scottyshe famylies, be Schyr Richarde Urquharde Knychte. The original belongs to Mr Allan Hay, father to the Messrs Hay, now residing at Logie House, within a mile of this place. It is written in beautifully clear and distinct black letter, and belonged to Lesly, Bishop of Ross, the historian, whose autograph is on it in the shape of a curious memorandum. To give you some idea of the style of the manuscript I shall copy the following commencement of the preface, in which the time when it was written is sufficiently marked by internal evidence:—Forasmeikle, &c. [The remainder of the quotation from the introduction is not written into the copy of Sir Thomas’s letter retained by him.]After this follows a dissertation on the rules for making tartan, which is prefaced thus:—First, for the manner of making and devising of tertennis, &c. [Here again the quotation stops short.]From this last quotation we are made aware of a fact of which I confess myself to have been always very sceptical hitherto. I mean that tartans were some centuries ago in use universally over Scotland, and accordingly the author of the manuscript, after giving us first descriptions of thirty-eight different tartans belonging to the principal Highland families, and eleven of the “terteinis of lesser famylies or houses, the quhilk be comand frae the cheff houses and original clannes,” goes on with “Here begynnethe off the Laich Cuntre Pairtes and Border clannes,” of which families he gives us the description of twenty-nine tartans. Among these last you may believe the tartan of the illustrious family of Scott is not forgotten. The descriptions are all so very particular that it is quite impossible to mistake them, and as I wished to possess myself of a copy of the manuscript (which I wrote out myself), Mr Charles Stuart Hay, with very great politeness, agreed to illuminate it for me, with drawings of all the tartans, a work which occupied him unceasingly for above three weeks, by which labour he has made me a most beautiful book. There is no printed copy of the manuscript, but the Messrs Hay, Junior, are in possession of a manuscript copy which is very old, and I have heard of another manuscript copy of it which did exist somewhere in Strathglass, but which has been ineffectually sought for as yet. The original came into the family of Mr Allan Hay from the unfortunate Prince Charles Stuart. So far as I know it is now the oldest and best authority (perhaps I should say the only authority) on the subject of tartans; and in these times of rage for tartans, when the most uncouth spurious modern “coats of many colours” are every day invented, manufactured, christened after particular names and worn as genuine, a book of this kind containing authority so invaluable must become extremely popular.At present a woful want of knowledge on the subject prevails. Some of the clans are at this moment ignorantly disputing for the right to the same tartans, which, in fact, belongs to none of them, but are merely modern inventions for clothing Regimental Highlanders. Hardly does one of the clans now wear its tartan with its legitimate sets, stripes, and spranges perfect in all their parts. The Messrs Hay have already instructed several of the chiefs of clans who have had webs of their true tartans made; and as one instance of this I may mention that Cluny Macpherson appeared at the late fancy ball at Edinburgh in his beautiful and genuine tartan as taken from the MS.: viz., “thre wyde stryppes of black upon a white fielde, and throuchout the mydward black ain yellowe, and upon the quite sett twa spranges of crimsoun of ten thredis;” which excited universal admiration. Macleod has got a sketch of his splendid tartan, “three black stryps upon ain yellow fylde,” &c. His and MacLauchlane’s, both families of Norwegian origin, being the only yellow fields. Comyn, who was quite ignorant of his tartan, has now worn more than ever at the Caledonian balls in London his “twa wyd strypis of greine upon ain scarlatt field,” &c.; and so of many more whom the Messrs Hay have enlightened as being their particular friends. A curious cor[r]oboration of the accuracy of the manuscript (if cor[r]oboration had been wanting) occurred in the case of Lovat. Talking of his tartan, he told the Messrs Hay that, although the tartan he then wore was that which was always worn by the Clan Fraser as their clan tartan, yet some old people of the name maintained that there should be a white sprainge through it. The Messrs Hay, on consulting the manuscript, found the tartan to be exactly as worn by Lovat, with the addition of the white sprainge, and described as follows:—“Frizzel hath fovr strippes upone ain scarlatt fyeld quhairoff the outerward be of greine, and the innerward of blewe, and upon the scarlatte sette ys ane sprainge of quhite of saxteine threids,” &c., &c. I need not mention any more but that of Scott, which is as follows:—“Scott hathe four stryppis upon ain fyeld,” &c., &c. But to illustrate this perfectly to you I have begged of my friend, Mr Charles Stuart Hay, to make for you the accompanying colored drawing, on the back of which you have the different colors accurately laid down of their proper relative breadths, and the whole of the proper size for weaving, so that you have only to send the sheet to Messrs Wilson, Carpet and Tartan manufacturers at Bannockburn, who will make you any quantity of the tartan, soft, hard, or delicately fine merino, as you may specify, and in every respect perfectly correct as to pattern, they having already executed many orders from similar drawings and directions by Mr Hay. So I hope to see both you and Miss Scott doing honour to the ancient garb of your antecessors (sic), though ladies, as you will afterwards see, being rather difficult to fix, were left very much to their “awin fauntasyes” in such matters. That I may complete the account of this curious manuscript I may add that after the tartans have been gone through we have a dissertation of “womenis quhite plaids clyppit Arryssadis, the quhilk are not orderit after their clannes, but after their awin conceits and as it liketh them.” Then we have a short treatise of “Hoses and Trewsis,” and then “Hereafter followethe of senyes of divers clannes,” &c., in the list of which I find “Scotte, Blaeberrye,” with which I hope Miss Scott will adorn her head at the next ball she honours with her presence,and so make war fairly under her proper badge. The whole concludes, as most books of those times were wont to do, with a L’Envoy in the following lines:—Dames and Lordyngis. [Here the quotation ends in Sir Thomas’s copy. It has been considered unnecessary to reprint the lines with which theVestiariumconcludes.]What Sir Richard Urquhart the author was I have not yet made out, but presume that he was of the Cromarty family, though I confess I cannot find one of the name corresponding to the times in the celebrated Urquhart genealogy, which begins with Adam. I think I have now told you enough of this curious MS. to lead you to approve of the advice I have given to the brothers Messrs Hay, that they ought to publish it without one moment’s delay, illustrated with minute specimens of all the tartans described in it, with a scale attached to each, so as to make one aware of the proper size the cloth should be wrought. This, I am happy to say, I have prevailed on them to do, and the plan they think of is to print it at their own expense after they shall have got as many subscribers as will ensure their being no losers; and as engravings would not only be deadly as to cost, but totally inadequate to the purpose of giving specimens of the tartans, and, indeed, useless where the effect cannot be given without colouring them with the same trouble that is bestowed on a drawing, they have resolved to get a given number of yards of silk ribbon woven of each pattern of the breadth of ladies sash ribbons, whence pieces of perhaps four or six inches in length may be cut and neatly laid down with paste on drawing paper, which will make a cheap, novel, very beautiful, and most satisfactory illustration to the work, and render it in every respect a popular as it will be an elegant national work for the drawing-room table, which cannot fail to be much in request.[85]I mean to write to Mr Cadell and the Taits to get information for the gentlemen as to the expense of printing and publishing the work, and they have already written to Wilson at Bannockburn about the silk ribbons. If you should happen to see Mr Cadell, your noticing the work to him would be very obliging; and if you find my description of it sufficiently interesting to induce you to talk of it to your friends, and, above all, if you could notice it publicly at the Royal and Antiquarian Societies, and at the Highland Society, and Celtic Society, Border Club, &c., you would do more good in paving the way for its success than a thousand advertisements, and would confer a very great obligation on the Messrs Hay.[86]

Forasmeikle, &c. [The remainder of the quotation from the introduction is not written into the copy of Sir Thomas’s letter retained by him.]

After this follows a dissertation on the rules for making tartan, which is prefaced thus:—

First, for the manner of making and devising of tertennis, &c. [Here again the quotation stops short.]

From this last quotation we are made aware of a fact of which I confess myself to have been always very sceptical hitherto. I mean that tartans were some centuries ago in use universally over Scotland, and accordingly the author of the manuscript, after giving us first descriptions of thirty-eight different tartans belonging to the principal Highland families, and eleven of the “terteinis of lesser famylies or houses, the quhilk be comand frae the cheff houses and original clannes,” goes on with “Here begynnethe off the Laich Cuntre Pairtes and Border clannes,” of which families he gives us the description of twenty-nine tartans. Among these last you may believe the tartan of the illustrious family of Scott is not forgotten. The descriptions are all so very particular that it is quite impossible to mistake them, and as I wished to possess myself of a copy of the manuscript (which I wrote out myself), Mr Charles Stuart Hay, with very great politeness, agreed to illuminate it for me, with drawings of all the tartans, a work which occupied him unceasingly for above three weeks, by which labour he has made me a most beautiful book. There is no printed copy of the manuscript, but the Messrs Hay, Junior, are in possession of a manuscript copy which is very old, and I have heard of another manuscript copy of it which did exist somewhere in Strathglass, but which has been ineffectually sought for as yet. The original came into the family of Mr Allan Hay from the unfortunate Prince Charles Stuart. So far as I know it is now the oldest and best authority (perhaps I should say the only authority) on the subject of tartans; and in these times of rage for tartans, when the most uncouth spurious modern “coats of many colours” are every day invented, manufactured, christened after particular names and worn as genuine, a book of this kind containing authority so invaluable must become extremely popular.At present a woful want of knowledge on the subject prevails. Some of the clans are at this moment ignorantly disputing for the right to the same tartans, which, in fact, belongs to none of them, but are merely modern inventions for clothing Regimental Highlanders. Hardly does one of the clans now wear its tartan with its legitimate sets, stripes, and spranges perfect in all their parts. The Messrs Hay have already instructed several of the chiefs of clans who have had webs of their true tartans made; and as one instance of this I may mention that Cluny Macpherson appeared at the late fancy ball at Edinburgh in his beautiful and genuine tartan as taken from the MS.: viz., “thre wyde stryppes of black upon a white fielde, and throuchout the mydward black ain yellowe, and upon the quite sett twa spranges of crimsoun of ten thredis;” which excited universal admiration. Macleod has got a sketch of his splendid tartan, “three black stryps upon ain yellow fylde,” &c. His and MacLauchlane’s, both families of Norwegian origin, being the only yellow fields. Comyn, who was quite ignorant of his tartan, has now worn more than ever at the Caledonian balls in London his “twa wyd strypis of greine upon ain scarlatt field,” &c.; and so of many more whom the Messrs Hay have enlightened as being their particular friends. A curious cor[r]oboration of the accuracy of the manuscript (if cor[r]oboration had been wanting) occurred in the case of Lovat. Talking of his tartan, he told the Messrs Hay that, although the tartan he then wore was that which was always worn by the Clan Fraser as their clan tartan, yet some old people of the name maintained that there should be a white sprainge through it. The Messrs Hay, on consulting the manuscript, found the tartan to be exactly as worn by Lovat, with the addition of the white sprainge, and described as follows:—“Frizzel hath fovr strippes upone ain scarlatt fyeld quhairoff the outerward be of greine, and the innerward of blewe, and upon the scarlatte sette ys ane sprainge of quhite of saxteine threids,” &c., &c. I need not mention any more but that of Scott, which is as follows:—“Scott hathe four stryppis upon ain fyeld,” &c., &c. But to illustrate this perfectly to you I have begged of my friend, Mr Charles Stuart Hay, to make for you the accompanying colored drawing, on the back of which you have the different colors accurately laid down of their proper relative breadths, and the whole of the proper size for weaving, so that you have only to send the sheet to Messrs Wilson, Carpet and Tartan manufacturers at Bannockburn, who will make you any quantity of the tartan, soft, hard, or delicately fine merino, as you may specify, and in every respect perfectly correct as to pattern, they having already executed many orders from similar drawings and directions by Mr Hay. So I hope to see both you and Miss Scott doing honour to the ancient garb of your antecessors (sic), though ladies, as you will afterwards see, being rather difficult to fix, were left very much to their “awin fauntasyes” in such matters. That I may complete the account of this curious manuscript I may add that after the tartans have been gone through we have a dissertation of “womenis quhite plaids clyppit Arryssadis, the quhilk are not orderit after their clannes, but after their awin conceits and as it liketh them.” Then we have a short treatise of “Hoses and Trewsis,” and then “Hereafter followethe of senyes of divers clannes,” &c., in the list of which I find “Scotte, Blaeberrye,” with which I hope Miss Scott will adorn her head at the next ball she honours with her presence,and so make war fairly under her proper badge. The whole concludes, as most books of those times were wont to do, with a L’Envoy in the following lines:—

Dames and Lordyngis. [Here the quotation ends in Sir Thomas’s copy. It has been considered unnecessary to reprint the lines with which theVestiariumconcludes.]

What Sir Richard Urquhart the author was I have not yet made out, but presume that he was of the Cromarty family, though I confess I cannot find one of the name corresponding to the times in the celebrated Urquhart genealogy, which begins with Adam. I think I have now told you enough of this curious MS. to lead you to approve of the advice I have given to the brothers Messrs Hay, that they ought to publish it without one moment’s delay, illustrated with minute specimens of all the tartans described in it, with a scale attached to each, so as to make one aware of the proper size the cloth should be wrought. This, I am happy to say, I have prevailed on them to do, and the plan they think of is to print it at their own expense after they shall have got as many subscribers as will ensure their being no losers; and as engravings would not only be deadly as to cost, but totally inadequate to the purpose of giving specimens of the tartans, and, indeed, useless where the effect cannot be given without colouring them with the same trouble that is bestowed on a drawing, they have resolved to get a given number of yards of silk ribbon woven of each pattern of the breadth of ladies sash ribbons, whence pieces of perhaps four or six inches in length may be cut and neatly laid down with paste on drawing paper, which will make a cheap, novel, very beautiful, and most satisfactory illustration to the work, and render it in every respect a popular as it will be an elegant national work for the drawing-room table, which cannot fail to be much in request.[85]I mean to write to Mr Cadell and the Taits to get information for the gentlemen as to the expense of printing and publishing the work, and they have already written to Wilson at Bannockburn about the silk ribbons. If you should happen to see Mr Cadell, your noticing the work to him would be very obliging; and if you find my description of it sufficiently interesting to induce you to talk of it to your friends, and, above all, if you could notice it publicly at the Royal and Antiquarian Societies, and at the Highland Society, and Celtic Society, Border Club, &c., you would do more good in paving the way for its success than a thousand advertisements, and would confer a very great obligation on the Messrs Hay.[86]

Sir Walter’s reply is dated 7th June 1829. That portion of it relating to the present subject is here transcribed:—

I need not say I have the greatest interest in the MS. which you mention, in case it shall really prove an authentic document. There would not be the leastdifficulty in getting the Bannatyne Club to take, perhaps, 100 copies, or obtaining support enough so as at the least to preclude the possibility of loss to the ingenious Messrs Hay Allans. But I think it indispensable that the original MS. should be sent for a month or so to the Register House, under the charge of the Deputy Register, Mr Thomson, that its antiquity be closely scrutinised by competent persons. The art of imitating ancient writing has got to a considerable perfection, and it has been the bane of Scottish literature and disgrace of her antiquities that we have manifested an eager propensity to believe without inquiry and propagate the errors which we adopt too hastily ourselves. The general proposition that the Lowlanders ever wore plaids is difficult to swallow. They were of twenty different races, and almost all distinctly different from the Scoto-Irish, who are the proper Scots, from which the Royal Family are descended. For instance, there is scarce a great family in the Lowlands of Scotland that is not to be traced to the Normans, the proudest as well as most civilised race in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Is it natural to think that, holdin[g] the Scots in the contempt in which they did, they would have adopted their dress?... I could shew, I think, that there is no period in Scottish history when the manners, language, or dress of the Highlanders were adopted in the low country. They brought them with them from Ireland, as you will see from the very curious prints in Derricke’s picture of Ireland, where you see the chief and followers of the wild Irish in the ordinary Highland dresstemporeQueen Elizabeth. Besides this, where has slept this universal custom that nowhere, unless in this MS., is it even heard of? Lesley knew it not, though the work had been in his possession, and his attention must have been called to it when writing concerning the three races of Scots, Highlanders, Lowlanders, and bordermen, and treating of their dress in particular. Andrew Borde knows nothing of [it], nor the Frenchman who published the geographical work from which Pinkerton copied the prints of the Highlander and Lowlander, the former in a frieze plaid or mantle, while the Lowlander strides away in a cloak and trunk hose, like his neighbour the Fleming. I will not state other objections, though so many occur, that the authenticity of the MS. being proved, I would rather suppose the author had been some tartan weaver zealous for his craft, who wished to extend the use of tartan over the whole kingdom. I have been told, and believe till now, that the use of tartan was never general in Scotland (Lowlands) until the Union, when the detestation of that measure led it to be adopted as the national colour, and the ladies all affected tartan screens.

To this letter Sir Thomas sent a reply dated 20th July 1829:—

The Messrs Hay have shewn no backwardness to obey your wishes [i.e., to send the MS. for inspection]. I read to them that part of your letter intended for their ears (keeping, of course, strictly to myself all that was confidential) [Sir Thomas, no doubt,refers to the second portion of Sir Walter’s letter relating to the descent of John Sobieski Stuart and his brother Charles Edward, which, as having no relation to the subject of this work, has not been reproduced], when they displayed every possible readiness to get the older copy of the MS. sent from London, where it is in their father’s possession, to Edinburgh, as you desire; and accordingly they took an early opportunity of writing to their father to beg he would send it without delay. Meanwhile they immediately put into my hands the old copy of the MS. in their possession,[87]with full powers to transmit it to you. In the event of their father having any doubt about parting with what he values as the apple of his eye, they suggested the alternative of the MS. being examined in London by Meyrick, or any of the people about the British Museum, or any one else, in short, in whose judgment in such matters you could have confidence. I may repeat again that there are two copies of the MS. in their family, viz., that which is believed to be the original, which is in possession of the father in London, and that which is presumed to be a copy (though a copy of above a century old). The latter is in my custody at this moment, ready to be sent you. But I very much regret that the father not only refuses the request made to him about sending down the London MS.,[88]but also expresses the strongest objection to its publication. I shall copy for you what he says by-and-bye, but before doing so I shall copy for you the description of the London or original MS., which description was sent down some time ago at my request in a letter from the father:—My copy of theVest[i]arium Scotiæis written on vellum in the common black letter hand of the sixteenth century, with illuminated capitals at the heads of sections of the kind used in ordinary missals. There are thirty-four pages in the book, which is a small quarto, bound in white vellum, and stamped and gilt. I never heard of any other MS. copy of the work than that in our possession, but there was a printed copy made by order of the late prince, with an introduction describing the book and containing facsimiles of the capitals, and the Bishop of Ross’s date. By the former it appeared that the original had been in the Library of the Scots College at Douay, and from it was removed, with many other of the MSS. of that body, and presented to His Royal Highness some time afterwards. The printed copy was in possession of His Royal Highness the Cardinal of York a short time before his death, and is supposed to have fallen into the hands of the English Government, and along with what they obtained of the Stuart papers.In addition to this information about the MS. (which I asked for that I might put it as a memorandum on my own copy), Mr Hay sent me a traced facsimile of the Bishop of Ross’s name and notandum, which I read, “Jo. Rossen, primo Maii 1571. I tuck my feaver and ageu at ix huris at nyt.” This I now enclose for your inspection, with a request that you will have the goodness to return it to me safely when you have had leisure to satisfy yourself perfectly with it, as I mean to paste it on to a blank leaf in my copy. It is not impossible that you may know of or hear of some signatures of John Leslie’s to be found in some of the public collections in Edinburgh. If so, itwould be curious to compare this facsimile with it. And now with regard to the father’s letter refusing to send the original MS. I copy itverbatimfrom the first half sheet of it, which his son has torn off and sent me:—July 5th, 1829.—My dearest Ian,—I have been reflecting upon all which you request concerning the MS., but you know that there are certain things about which I never consult either the feelings or the opinions of others, but act up to previous unalterable determinations; therefore I feel sorry that you did not consult me before you gave any acquiescence to the purpose of publishing theGarderope of Scotland, as you ought to have remembered the private memorandums written on the blank leaves, and that it was impossible, coupled with other circumstances, to subject them to common curiosity, which neither I nor you can think of for a moment to reclaim the whole history and use of tartan from oblivion. [As to the opinion of Sir Walter Scott, inasmuch as I never heard it respected among antiquaries as of the least value, it is quite indifferent to me.][89]I wish for no connection with the public either for me or mine, or anything in my possession; and if you had kept still more retired from observation the relics of which I gratified you and Charles by the keeping, it would have been a much better proof of your regard for them and respect to the memory of those to whom they belonged. Love to all, and believe me, my dearest Ian, your affectionate father,J. T. Stuart Hay.

My copy of theVest[i]arium Scotiæis written on vellum in the common black letter hand of the sixteenth century, with illuminated capitals at the heads of sections of the kind used in ordinary missals. There are thirty-four pages in the book, which is a small quarto, bound in white vellum, and stamped and gilt. I never heard of any other MS. copy of the work than that in our possession, but there was a printed copy made by order of the late prince, with an introduction describing the book and containing facsimiles of the capitals, and the Bishop of Ross’s date. By the former it appeared that the original had been in the Library of the Scots College at Douay, and from it was removed, with many other of the MSS. of that body, and presented to His Royal Highness some time afterwards. The printed copy was in possession of His Royal Highness the Cardinal of York a short time before his death, and is supposed to have fallen into the hands of the English Government, and along with what they obtained of the Stuart papers.

In addition to this information about the MS. (which I asked for that I might put it as a memorandum on my own copy), Mr Hay sent me a traced facsimile of the Bishop of Ross’s name and notandum, which I read, “Jo. Rossen, primo Maii 1571. I tuck my feaver and ageu at ix huris at nyt.” This I now enclose for your inspection, with a request that you will have the goodness to return it to me safely when you have had leisure to satisfy yourself perfectly with it, as I mean to paste it on to a blank leaf in my copy. It is not impossible that you may know of or hear of some signatures of John Leslie’s to be found in some of the public collections in Edinburgh. If so, itwould be curious to compare this facsimile with it. And now with regard to the father’s letter refusing to send the original MS. I copy itverbatimfrom the first half sheet of it, which his son has torn off and sent me:—

July 5th, 1829.—My dearest Ian,—I have been reflecting upon all which you request concerning the MS., but you know that there are certain things about which I never consult either the feelings or the opinions of others, but act up to previous unalterable determinations; therefore I feel sorry that you did not consult me before you gave any acquiescence to the purpose of publishing theGarderope of Scotland, as you ought to have remembered the private memorandums written on the blank leaves, and that it was impossible, coupled with other circumstances, to subject them to common curiosity, which neither I nor you can think of for a moment to reclaim the whole history and use of tartan from oblivion. [As to the opinion of Sir Walter Scott, inasmuch as I never heard it respected among antiquaries as of the least value, it is quite indifferent to me.][89]I wish for no connection with the public either for me or mine, or anything in my possession; and if you had kept still more retired from observation the relics of which I gratified you and Charles by the keeping, it would have been a much better proof of your regard for them and respect to the memory of those to whom they belonged. Love to all, and believe me, my dearest Ian, your affectionate father,

J. T. Stuart Hay.

Sir Thomas Dick Lauder considered this refusal to be quixotic; but it was absolute. He addresses himself at great length to the task of proving the high character for veracity of the Messrs Hay, and he adds:—

I cannot for a moment believe that the brothers Allan Hay could be guilty of the fraud of attempting to foist a forged manuscript upon me. And, indeed, for what purpose should they attempt so base a thing? Not, certainly, from a thirst for publication, because they never entertained the idea of printing it until repeatedly urged to do so by myself and some other friends who happened to see it, not through any ostentation of theirs, but more as matter of accident than anything else, for they did not seem to set any great value on their old copy.But although you may be very ready to acquit the Allan Hays of being the impostors, yet it must be admitted that the MS. may nevertheless be a forgery. But if the Allan Hays be acquitted and their story be believed, we then establish that, if there be forgery at all, it must be a forgery of some antiquity. Now, in trying this alternative I confess I think it much more difficult to believe that any one could have undertaken so tedious and fruitless a labour in times when MSS. were much less cared about than they are now, than to believe that the MS. in question really is what it pretends to be. And I do think that the internal evidence of the manuscript itself is very strongly in its favour, and that it is extremely unlikely that any one could have constructed a cheat with so many genuine characters about it. With all this, I must also own that the mere circumstance that Sir Walter Scott doubts is enough to shake the firmest opinion.

But although you may be very ready to acquit the Allan Hays of being the impostors, yet it must be admitted that the MS. may nevertheless be a forgery. But if the Allan Hays be acquitted and their story be believed, we then establish that, if there be forgery at all, it must be a forgery of some antiquity. Now, in trying this alternative I confess I think it much more difficult to believe that any one could have undertaken so tedious and fruitless a labour in times when MSS. were much less cared about than they are now, than to believe that the MS. in question really is what it pretends to be. And I do think that the internal evidence of the manuscript itself is very strongly in its favour, and that it is extremely unlikely that any one could have constructed a cheat with so many genuine characters about it. With all this, I must also own that the mere circumstance that Sir Walter Scott doubts is enough to shake the firmest opinion.

To Sir Thomas Dick Lauder’s letter of 20th July Sir Walter Scott replied on 19th November, and that portion of his reply which relates to theVestiariumis in the following terms:—

As for theVestiarium, without pretending to know how it may have been got up, it is not, as Audrey says, a true thing, and, allowing the ingenuity of your arguments, one is obliged to allow so many extremely improbable circumstances and mere possibilities, that if any single one of them is not so weighty as to break down the whole system, their combined influence certainly will do so.I cannot believe there is any copy of such a work among the Cardinal Duke of York’s papers. I am one of the commissioners for examining these papers, which are to a certain extent already catalogued. I will, however, keep a look out for the work of Master Urquhart, which I think his name is. To suppose Lowlanders to be Highlanders we must suppose that they spoke the Gaelick, and held the system of clanship. Without this there could be no occasion for wearing clan tartans. Now, every law or regulation concerning clanship is limited to the Highlands and to the Borders, who seem to have it as a tie of communion calculated to bind a tribe strongly together. But we are now required to believe that there was none of that distinction of dress at all, and if not of dress, why should there have been any difference of language or laws? A nation’s dress is much more easily changed than its manners and language; but here the dress alone remains, the manners and language that associated with it are totally gone. The idea of distinguishing the clans by their tartans is but a fashion of modern date in the Highlands themselves; much less could it be supposed to be carried to such an extent in the Lowlands as the manuscript pretends. Tartan itself is unquestionably a Lowland word, and the stuff “tiretain” fetched from Flanders, and I suspect the Highlander wore a frieze mantle like the Irish chief, without what we now call the bracken.

I cannot believe there is any copy of such a work among the Cardinal Duke of York’s papers. I am one of the commissioners for examining these papers, which are to a certain extent already catalogued. I will, however, keep a look out for the work of Master Urquhart, which I think his name is. To suppose Lowlanders to be Highlanders we must suppose that they spoke the Gaelick, and held the system of clanship. Without this there could be no occasion for wearing clan tartans. Now, every law or regulation concerning clanship is limited to the Highlands and to the Borders, who seem to have it as a tie of communion calculated to bind a tribe strongly together. But we are now required to believe that there was none of that distinction of dress at all, and if not of dress, why should there have been any difference of language or laws? A nation’s dress is much more easily changed than its manners and language; but here the dress alone remains, the manners and language that associated with it are totally gone. The idea of distinguishing the clans by their tartans is but a fashion of modern date in the Highlands themselves; much less could it be supposed to be carried to such an extent in the Lowlands as the manuscript pretends. Tartan itself is unquestionably a Lowland word, and the stuff “tiretain” fetched from Flanders, and I suspect the Highlander wore a frieze mantle like the Irish chief, without what we now call the bracken.

To this letter Sir Thomas replied on 29th November 1829. By that time the terrible calamity, of which he gives so vivid a picture in theMoray Floods, had happened to Relugas, and he appears to have had little heart to write about anything else. But he makes an allusion to theVestiarium; and a very striking one it is. With all deference to the very distinct expressions of opinion by his distinguished correspondent, he observes:—

I confess I am still a believer. What do you think of the facsimile of old Leslie’s handwriting? By-the-bye, I will thank you to send it me in Mr Hay’s parcel,[90]to save me from sending to London for another. I have examined the old copy of the manuscript in my possession,[91]and find the water-mark of the paper to be ante-Union, the supporters to the arms being two unicorns.

Here closes this remarkable correspondence, and we hear no more of theVestiariumuntil its publication by Tait in 1842, with the name of John Sobieski Stuart on the title-page as editor. So remarkable a work could not fail to attract attention. The most striking criticism on the book, so far as ability and bitterness went, and the only one to which any reply was vouchsafed, is that contained in theQuarterly Reviewfor June 1847.[92]This criticism the brothers Stuart believed to have been written by the late Mr Dennistoun, but it was in reality the work of the late Professor George Skene, of Glasgow University, brother of the late Dr. William Forbes Skene, from materials furnished chiefly by the late Dr. Mackintosh Mackay. One half of the criticism consists of an unsparing attack on the alleged claims of the brothers to Royal descent, and the other of an attack upon the authenticity of theVestiarium. Professor Skene first proposed to discuss the printed text for indications of its genuineness, or the reverse. Had he done so, the result could hardly have failed to be interesting, the language of the work offering a fair field for criticism. He not only did not do so, but fell into a series of very extraordinary errors regarding facts. He wrote:—

We cannot find that the actual MS., “which belonged to the Douay College,” and “contains the signature of the Bishop of Ross,” has ever been exhibited to any learned society in the north, or even to any individual scholar or antiquary unconnected with the present publication; but about twenty years ago, adescriptionof the MS., with atranscriptof part, at least, if not the whole of it, was sent to the Society of Scottish Antiquaries, with a request that they would patronise its publication; and by their secretary the specimen was placed in the hands of Sir Walter Scott, who kindly undertook to examine it, and give the society the benefit of his opinion as to its authenticity. The secretary, accompanied by our informant, a reverend friend deeply versed in Highland lore, waited upon him shortly afterwards to ascertain the result of the scrutiny. Sir Walter assured them that the style and dialect of the specimen shewn him were utterly false, a most feeble and clumsy imitation of the genuine writing of the period, and indignantly declared his conviction that the manuscript itself must be an absolute fabrication.[93]

To this attack the editor of theVestiariummade the following reply:—

The reviewer proceeds to proclaim an opinion asserted to have been delivered by Sir Walter Scott, that the MS. was a clumsy imitation of the genuine writing of its professed period, “and unentitled to any credit.” The reviewer, however, has concealed that Sir Walter Scott never saw the original MS., and that he died some years before the publication of the printed edition—consequently that he never had any opportunity of forming a judgment even from a careful and formal copy. According to the acknowledgment ofthe reviewer himself, the asserted opinion of Sir Walter was founded upon a “description of the MS., with a transcript of a part, if not the whole.” How far any critic could presume to form a judgment upon any “transcript,” especially an imperfect “part,” of a work, we leave to the experience of those accustomed to the criticism of old writings. But the reviewer has farther concealed the nature of the “transcript” said to have been exhibited to Sir Walter Scott. After the originals of theVestiariumwere in the possession of its editor, there never was made more than one “transcript,” that alluded to by the reviewer as “a transcript obtained by a gentleman in the north.” This copy, or, as admitted by the reviewer, “a part,” was transmitted by the transcriber to some of his friends in Edinburgh, at which time we believe, as asserted by the reviewer, it was casually shewn to Sir Walter Scott. The reviewer, however, has concealed the nature of this transcript, upon which Sir Walter’s asserted opinion is so maliciously quoted. Far from being, as might have been expected, a critical facsimile, or even matter-of-fact copy from the original, it was a sort of “Hood’s Comic Almanack” of tartans, neatly written, not in “clerks’,” “scriveners’,” or any other MS. text of the sixteenth century, but in ordinary Roman letter, consequently, exhibiting no “imitation” of the “genuine writing” of the period, said to have been contra-distinguished in Sir Walter’s observation, and still farther at variance with the original, or any object of serious criticism, by being illustrated in vermilion, with bizarre caricatures in the form of burlesque head and tail pieces, generally graphic puns and hieroglyphics for the name of each family whose title they adorned. Of their description, consequently, of the serious character of the MS. of which Sir Walter Scott’s criticism is so gravely reported, a conclusion may be formed by a few examples, such as, for “Dundas” the sketch of a small “Dun,” and on its summit an “ass.” For Brodie (pronounced in Scots Broadie), a large,i.e., a “Broad” “eye.” And for Montgomery the view of a mount, enlivened by several dancing figures, intended to associate the idea of “go-merry,” and the like. Such is the manuscript said to have been exhibited to and condemned by Sir Walter Scott as “of no authority whatever.” Its removal from authority, however, was farther extended by the fact that it was not even a transcript of the oldest MS. on which the reviewer sits in judgment, but of an inferior, tattered, and inaccurate copy, no older than the year 1721, and which was the only one “in the north” when the amiable and distinguished friend[94]of the possessor, designated by the reviewer after that borealian locality, made the transcript, with which he amused some idle winter days, with the conceits which, it was then predicted, would extend to the original a connection of misconception and ridicule.According to this expectation, all those who became acquainted with the tract only through the medium of the copy supposed that the illustrations, as well as the text, were equally facsimiles of the original MS.; and if Sir Walter Scott had no explanation to the contrary, he, of course, entertained the same conclusion, and thus must have supposed the tract a greater enormity of absurdity than has even been assumed by the reviewer.[95]

According to this expectation, all those who became acquainted with the tract only through the medium of the copy supposed that the illustrations, as well as the text, were equally facsimiles of the original MS.; and if Sir Walter Scott had no explanation to the contrary, he, of course, entertained the same conclusion, and thus must have supposed the tract a greater enormity of absurdity than has even been assumed by the reviewer.[95]

Professor Skene, writing of what happened “about twenty years ago”concerning an affair in which he took no part, may well have fallen into casual error, but his “reverend friend deeply versed in Highland lore” ought to have had some memory. The correspondence between Sir Thomas Dick Lauder and Sir Walter Scott clearly shows that John Ross’s MS. was first brought under Sir Walter’s notice in June 1829, a period fairly enough corresponding in 1847 to “twenty years ago.” But the only “description,” or “transcript,” of the part or whole he ever saw was that contained in Sir Thomas’s letter of 1st June 1829, and how far the materials there given enabled Sir Walter to form a judgment of the style, dialect, or writing of the original may be gathered from the fact that he made no attempt to do so. There are Sir Walter’s own letters of 7th June and 19th November 1829 on the subject, in which his unfavourable opinion of the authenticity of theVestiariumis based, not upon the appearance or language of the manuscript, which he had no opportunity of examining, but upon its ascription of tartans to the Lowlanders, to the lack of express notices on the subject by early writers, and to the use of the tartans as distinguishing the clans. Sir Walter wrote with the knowledge of his period, and how far his views are borne out by later investigation may be gathered by a study of the contents of the preceding pages.

Professor Skene’s statements—first, that a description of the manuscript, with a transcript of part, if not the whole of it, was sent to the Society of Scottish Antiquaries, with a request that they would patronise its publication; second, that the specimen was placed by their secretary in the hands of Sir Walter Scott, who undertook to express an opinion upon it; and, third, that the secretary and “our informant” afterwards waited upon Sir Walter to ascertain what his opinion was—are unverified. All that has yet been discovered, indeed, goes to show that nothing of the kind ever took place, and that the “facts” stated in theQuarterly Reviewhad their origin only in the imagination of the learned professor’s “reverend friend.” The minutes of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland for that period are yet in existence. They are kept with a careful, even a tedious minuteness; and is it possible to suppose that the series of events detailed in theQuarterly Reviewof June 1847 as having taken place “about twenty years ago,” involving questions of such importance to antiquaries, especially to Scottish antiquaries, could have been entirely omitted from them? Yet they are. No mention whatever of the circumstances stated by Professor Skene to have occurred “about twenty years ago” appears.

John Sobieski Stuart’s position in the affair is quite plain. We find fromthe correspondence that all Sir Walter really saw was the description and extracts contained in Sir Thomas’s letter of 1st June 1829; but the editor of theVestiarium, aware of the fact that Sir Thomas had a transcript of the work, which he had expressly offered to show Sir Walter, and confronted with the absolute statement by Professor Skene, on the authority of his “reverend friend,” that Sir Walter had seen a transcript, arrived naturally at the conclusion that the transcript Sir Walter was asserted to have seen was the only one in existence, that made by Sir Thomas Dick Lauder, and directed his reply accordingly. Had he been aware of the real facts of the case, his reply to Professor Skene might have been even more crushing than it was.

Professor Skene made an attack in another quarter. He questioned the authenticity of the work on the ground that there were several and serious errors in the genealogies of the clans whose tartans are described, and he specified particularly M’Nab, Farquharson, Clan Gun, Cluny Macpherson, and Mackintosh, the occurrence of errors in regard to whose genealogies, he urged, demonstrated that theVestiariumwas a forgery. To reply to these criticisms John Sobieski Stuart seriously set himself, and with remarkable ability and success.[96]

Finally, Professor Skene fell foul of the Bishop of Ross’s signature.

It matters little to the public who was the perpetrator of the present forgery. It may have been “the lateMr Robert Walker,”[97]who is so ready with an entry from “the Bishop’s Diary” in its support—a “Diary” which, like Mr Sobieski Stuart’s MS. itself, formed “part of the Douay papers.”[98]It may have been the defunct porter of Auld Reekie, John Ross, from whom one of the copies is said to have been procured. Andaproposof this latter possibility we would recommend Mr Sobieski Stuart to again look at his original MS., and consider whether what he has taken for the signature of the well-known bishop, John of Ross, be not in fact a quaint attempt of his friend the sword-player to write his own name in an old hand, after practising upon the fever and ague notice which accompanies it.[99]

To this taunt John Sobieski Stuart made no reply. Possibly it was beyond his power to give any example of the bishop’s signature beyond the one in his possession. And yet the propriety of comparing an authoritative example of Leslie’s handwriting with that appearing in theVestiariumobviously suggests itself, and did not escape Sir Thomas Dick Lauder’s observation. He wrote on 20th July 1829,[100]enclosing Sir Walter Scott a traced facsimile of the signature for his satisfaction, and adding “it is not impossible you may know of or hear of some signatures of John Leslie’s to be found in some of the public collections in Edinburgh. If so, it would be curious to compare this facsimile with it.” Of this request no notice appears to have been taken by Sir Walter, and Sir Thomas again returns to the charge on 29th November,[101]when he asked Sir Walter for his opinion of the authenticity of the signature, and requesting him to return the facsimile. But the day of Sir Walter’s own trouble had come, and he contented himself with returning the facsimile to Sir Thomas without any attempt at verification. One obvious explanation of Sir Walter’s proceeding is that the public records were not then so accessible as they are now, and a search must have proved both tedious and expensive.

Of Leslie’s signature as Bishop of Ross (Jo. Rossen.) not many examples are available, but the Editor’s attention has been drawn to one in theLord Treasurer’s Accounts. It is submitted that the reader may be able to form an opinion as to whether the facsimile in theVestiariumis more likely to represent the signature of the Bishop of Ross or the scrawl of an Edinburgh street porter of 1819.

D. W. S.

Signatures[102][103][104]

FOOTNOTES:[1]The Heimskringla, or Chronicle of the Kings of Norway. Translated from Icelandic of Snorro Sturleson, with a preliminary dissertation, by Samuel Laing, Esq. London: Longmans, 1844. Magnus Barefoot’s Saga (written by Snorro Sturleson 1178-1241), Vol. III., p. 139.[2]Laing translates the word “kyrtlu” as “kirtles;” Gregory and Skene translate it “tunics.”[3]Registrum Episcopatus Aberdonensis, Vol. II., p. 8. Spalding Club.[4]Scotichronicon, Gregory’s translation.Transactions of the Iona Club, p. 27.[5]Borthwick’s Remarks on British Antiquities.Edinburgh, 1776, p. 139.[6]Pinkerton’s History of Scotland from the Accession of the House of Stuart.London, 1797, Vol. I., p. 493.[7]Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, Vol. I., Part I., p. 114, note.[8]Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, edited by Thomas Dickson, Curator of the Historical Department of H.M. General Register House, Vol. I., 1473-1498, Preface, p. clxxxv, and note; and Glossary, p. 441.[9]Scottish Collection of Gaelic MSS. in Advocates’ Library, No. XVI., A.A., line 2. For the correct reading as well as translation of this interesting manuscript the Editor is indebted to Professor Mackinnon. In the “Report of the Committee of the Highland Society of Scotland appointed to inquire into the nature and authenticity of the Poems of Ossian” (Edinburgh, 1805), it is, on the authority of Mr Astle, stated to be a writing of the ninth or tenth century (Report, p. 305). In the opinion of Professor Mackinnon the manuscript cannot be assigned to an earlier period than about 1400.[10]Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1429, Record Issue, Vol. II., p. 18.[11]Constable’s edition of Major, published for the Scottish History Society. Edinburgh, 1892, pp. 48, 49.[12]Ibid., p. 333.[13]Ibid., p. 359.[14]Lord High Treasurer’s Accounts, 1537-38, fol. 63, MS., H.M. General Register House.[15]See letter printed in full inBannatyne Miscellany, Vol. I., and also inCollectanea de Rebus Albanicis. The Editor is indebted for a correct transcription of the above portion to Mr Augustus W. Franks, C.B., British Museum.[16]Histoire de la Guerre d’Escosse pendant les Campagnes, 1548 et 1549.Par Jean de Beaugué. Maitland Club. The translation is that of Donald Gregory. SeeTransactions of the Iona Club, p. 31.[17]Register of the Privy Council, Vol. I., p. 136.[18]The Chronicles of Scotland, by Robert Lindsay of Pitscottie, Edition 1814, Vol. I., Introduction, p. xxiii.[19]The Historie of Scotland, wrytten first in Latin by the most Reverend and Worthy Jhone Leslie, Bishop of Rosse, and translated in Scottish by Father James Dalrymple Religious in the Scottis Cloister of Regensburg the zeere of God 1596. Edited for the Scottish Text Society by the Rev. Father E. G. Cody, O.S.B., 1885, pp. 90-94. This quaint Scots version is given in preference to the ordinary one from the Latin, as it conveys an extremely vivid picture of the ancient dress written by a contemporary.[20]Ibid., p. 377.[21]Aikman’s translation ofBuchanan’s History of Scotland, Vol. I., pp. 40, 41. Buchanan’s description was incorporated inCerteine Matters concerning the Realme of Scotland, composed together as they were Anno Domini 1597, by John Monipennie, who also included it in theSummarie of the Scots Chronicles, 1612.[22]The Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Vol. I., pp. 331, 335. Bannatyne Club.[23]Extracts from the Council Register of the Burgh of Aberdeen, 1570-1625, as printed by the Spalding Club, Vol. II., pp. 27, 373.[24]The Image of Irelande, 1581.Reprinted by A. & C. Black, Edinburgh, 1883, p. 50.[25]Ibid.p. 105.[26]La Navigation du Roy d’Escosse Iaques Cinquiesme du nom, referred to in theTransactions of the Iona Club, pp. 36, 37.[27]The Great Seal Register, 1580-1593, edited by John Maitland Thomson, M.A., Advocate, No. 1491.[28]Vestiarium Scoticum.William Tait, Edinburgh, 1842, Introduction, p. 59; andA Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum. William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh, 1848, p. 23.[29]Register of Signatouris in the Office of Comptrollerie, Vol. XII., 1587-1589, fol. 82.[30]Charge of the Temporalitie of Kirklandis: North Side of the Forth.MS. in H.M. General Register House, fol. 94.[31]Register of Signatouris in the Office of Comptrollerie, Vol. XXXIV., 1617, fol. 120.[32]Ibid., Vol. XLVII., 1630, fol. 208.[33]The Pourtrait of True Loyalty exposed in the Family of Gordon without interruption to this present year 1691, with a relation of the Siege of the Castle of Edinburgh in the year 1689.MS. in Advocates’ Library. It is partially quoted inDe Rebus Albanicis.[34]Iona Club Transactions, pp. 37, 38.[35]Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, Vol. II., i. 156.[36]The Montgomery Manuscripts, containing Accounts of the Colonization of the Ardes in the County of Down in the Reigns of Elizabeth and James.Printed from the Original Manuscripts and Transcripts of MSS., composed by William Montgomery, Esq., second son of Sir James Montgomery, between the years 1698 and 1704. Belfast, 1830, pp. 53, 54.[37]Camden’s Britannia(Gough’s Edition, 1789), Vol. III., p. 389.[38]The Pennyless Pilgrimage, or the Moneylesse Perumbulation of John Taylor, alias the Kings Majesties Water-Poet: How he travelled on Foot from London to Edenborough in Scotland, not carrying any money to or fro, neither Begging, Borrowing or asking Meate, Drinke, or Lodging.Hume Brown’s Edition. Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1892, pp. 120, 121.[39]History of Scots Affairs from 1637 to 1641, by James Gordon, Parson of Rothiemay. Spalding Club, Vol. III., Appendix to Preface, pp. xliii., xliv.[40]Defoe’s Works:Memoirs of a Cavalier, Vol. II., pp. 112, 113. Bohn, London, 1854. As to the genuine authorship of this work, see Lee’s Bibliography in his edition of Defoe’s Works.[41]Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1661, Vol. VII., p. 186.[42]Brome’s Travels, Second Edition, London, 1707, pp. 179, 180.[43]Tours in Scotland, 1677 and 1681, by Thomas Kirk and Ralph Thoresby, edited by P. Hume Brown. Edinburgh, David Douglas, 1892, pp. 28, 29.[44]See the letter quoted inBlackwood’s Magazine, April 1817, p. 69. The present extract has been compared with the original in the Advocates’ Library. In theTransactions of the Iona Club“not one of ten of them hath breaches” is made to read “not one of them hath breaches,” and this very serious error has been duly copied by subsequent writers on the Highland dress.[45]A Collection of Several Poems and Verses composed upon various occasions, by Mr William Cleland, Lieutenant-Colonel to my Lord Angus’s Regiment.Printed in the year 1697, pp. 11-13.[46]Lyon Register in H.M. General Register House, Edinburgh. Matriculation dated about 1672.[47]Alexander Nisbet’s Heraldic Plates, originally intended for his System of Heraldry.Waterston and Sons, Edinburgh, 1892.[48]Nisbet MS., Advocates’ Library, pp. 33-35.[49]Introduction toNisbet’s Heraldic Plates, p. xlvi.[50]The Grameid: an Historic Poem descriptive of the Campaign of Viscount Dundee in 1689, by James Philip of Almerieclose. 1691. Translated by the Rev. Alexander D. Murdoch, F.S.A. Scot., for the Scottish History Society, 1888.[51]Some Account of the Battle of Killiecrankie and what Followed thereupon.The MS. is cited inThe Costume of the Clans, p. 104.[52]An Account of the Isle of Man, ... with a Voyage to I-Columb-Kill, by William Sacheverell, Esq., late Governor of the Isle of Man. 8vo. Manx Society, 1859, p. 99. The first edition was published in 1702.[53]A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland, by M. Martin, Gent.The first edition of this work appeared in 1703, and a second, “very much corrected,” in 1716. It is from this second edition, pp. 206-210, that the extract is taken.[54]A Collection of Original Papers about the Scots Plot.London, 1704, pp. 3, 4.[55]Court Books of the Regality of Grant, 1703-1710.MSS. in H.M. General Register House.[56]By the courtesy of the families in possession of the portraits referred to in the text, the author, for the purposes of the present work, has had repeated opportunities of making careful examinations of those referred to.[57]The Present State of Scotland, Second Edition, 1711.[58]A Journey through Scotland, by the author of The Journey through England(John Macky). London, 1723, p. 194.[59]System of Heraldry, Edition 1804, Vol. I., p. 415. The original edition of this work was published in 1722, but was most probably written fifteen or twenty years before that date.[60]MS., Lyon Office. See facsimile of a portion of the page containing the Cluny reference in the Introduction to theNisbet Plates, p. xlii.[61]The original is at Fingask. It has been engraved as the frontispiece toThe Threiplands of Fingask.[62]Captain Burt’sLetters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland, 1818, Vol. I., pp. 84-5; Vol. II., pp. 7, 84-86, 87-91. Jamieson’s Edition.[63]Burt’sLetters, Vol. II., pp. 102-105. Jamieson’s Edition.[64]Scotland and Scotsmen in the Eighteenth Century, from the MSS. of John Ramsay, Esq. of Ochtertyre, edited by Alex. Allardice. Blackwood, Edinburgh, 1888. Vol. I., p. 540; Vol. II., pp. 87, 88.[65]Caledonian Mercury, 14th January 1740.[66]Ibid., 19th February 1740.[67]Caledonian Mercury, 4th October 1745.[68]A mistake of the writer for “Ness.”[69]A Journal of the Expedition of Prince Charles Edward in 1745, by a Highland Officer.Lockhart Papers, Vol. II., p. 505.[70]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 112, Edition 1822.[71]General Orders to the Army in Scotland, 22nd December 1748.[72]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 113.[73]Orders to 20th Foot [now the Lancashire Fusiliers], dated Bamff 1752.[74]Edinburgh Evening Courant, February 21, 23, 26, 28, 1760.[75]Ibid., July 9, 14, 1760.[76]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 114.[77]Travels in the Western Hebrides from 1782 to 1790, by the Rev. John Lane Buchanan, Missionary Minister to the Isles from the Church of Scotland. London, 1793, pp. 84-90.[78]Camden’s Britannia(Gough’s Edition, 1789), Vol. III., p. 390.[79]Vestiarium Scoticum.From the Manuscript formerly in the Library of the Scots College at Douay, with an Introduction and Notes by John Sobieski Stuart. Edinburgh, William Tait, 1842.[80]Preface toVestiarium Scoticum, pp. i.-vii.[81]Advertisement annexed toA Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum. Edinburgh, Blackwood, 1848.[82]A Reply to the Quarterly Review, p. 6.[83]See notes on p. 47.[84]A Reply to the Quarterly Review, p. 7.[85]It may be proper to point out here that the Editor discussed the idea of issuing a work on rare tartans, to be illustrated by examples of the actual fabrics, with his publisher several years ago, and it was not until the illustrations for the present work were considerably advanced that he became aware of the existence of Miss Dick Lauder’s copy of theVestiarium, which she has so handsomely placed at his disposal, and which contains the statement in the text.[86]Copy of original letter in possession of Miss Dick Lauder. Copies of Sir Thomas Dick Lauder’s letters to Sir Walter Scott, along with the originals of the latter’s replies, are bound up with the copy of theVestiariummade by Sir Thomas in 1828-9, referred to on page 45. The volume, now in possession of Miss Dick Lauder, daughter of Sir Thomas, also contains the cleverly executed water-colours by Charles Edward Stuart referred to in the above letter and the quaint illustrations by Sir Thomas Dick Lauder subsequently referred to.[87]This, it will be remembered, was the copy which belonged to John Ross, the old sword-player.[88]i.e., the Douay MS.[89]The words within brackets do not occur in Sir Thomas’s letter to Sir Walter. They appear, however, in the original letter written by the father of the Messrs Hay, and preserved by Sir Thomas in the volume now in Miss Dick Lauder’s possession.[90]Sir Walter did so, and it is reproduced on page 56.[91]This, it will be remembered, was the copy got from John Ross with the date 1721.[92]Quarterly Review, No. CLXI., June 1847, Art. II., p. 57, “The Heirs of the Stuarts.”[93]Ibid., pp. 63, 64.[94]Sir Thomas Dick Lauder.[95]A Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum.William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh, 1848, pp. 4-7.[96]SeeReply, pp. 8-16.[97]An evident misprint for “Watson” in theQuarterly Reviewarticle.[98]Professor Skene’s reference here is to a statement in the preface to theVestiarium, to the effect that the Bishop of Ross noted his acquisition of Sir Richard Urquhart’s work in his Diary (which he quotes in full) remaining among a portion of the Douay papers, in the possession of the “late Mr Robert Watson, well known in the history of the Stuart papers.” For an account of Watson’s remarkable career see an article by Andrew Lang in theIllustrated London Newsof 12th March 1892.[99]Quarterly Reviewarticle, p. 67.[100]Ante, p. 49.[101]Ante, p. 51.[102]Facsimile of John Leslie’s signature as Bishop of Ross in theLord Treasurer’s Accounts, 1564-6, H.M. General Register House, Edinburgh. The date of the audit, to which the bishop’s signature is affixed, is 27th June 1566.[103]Facsimile of the signature contained in theVestiarium Scoticumreferred to on preceding page.[104]An example fromNichols’ Autographs, obtained from the bishop’s letter to Lord Burleigh, dated Paris, 28th February 1579, preserved in the British Museum.[105]Why the simple red and black check receives the title of Rob Roy is something of a mystery. InAuthenticated Tartans of the Clans and Families of Scotland(Smith: Mauchline, 1850) it is asserted, and the statement is repeated inThe Tartans of the Clans of Scotland(W. & A. K. Johnston: Edinburgh, 1886) without attempt at verification, that three genuine portraits of Rob Roy represent him as wearing it; but these and other so-called Rob Roy portraits—be their value what it may—afford no sanction whatever for the design. The Editor is not aware on what authority the portraits are classed as Rob Roy. He has seen seven paintings, including the three above referred to, in which the figure is identical, all known as Rob Roy, and in each a separate pattern appears, none of them showing the simple red and black check. The tartan is accepted by sound authorities as the old Macgregor clan pattern. There are fine examples of it in a collection of tartans made by the Highland Society of London in 1816-17, labelled and sealed “The MacGregor Tartan for undress ordinary clothing. The Seal of Arms of Sir John MacGregor Murray of MacGregor, Baronet. [Signed] John M. Murray.”

[1]The Heimskringla, or Chronicle of the Kings of Norway. Translated from Icelandic of Snorro Sturleson, with a preliminary dissertation, by Samuel Laing, Esq. London: Longmans, 1844. Magnus Barefoot’s Saga (written by Snorro Sturleson 1178-1241), Vol. III., p. 139.

[2]Laing translates the word “kyrtlu” as “kirtles;” Gregory and Skene translate it “tunics.”

[3]Registrum Episcopatus Aberdonensis, Vol. II., p. 8. Spalding Club.

[4]Scotichronicon, Gregory’s translation.Transactions of the Iona Club, p. 27.

[5]Borthwick’s Remarks on British Antiquities.Edinburgh, 1776, p. 139.

[6]Pinkerton’s History of Scotland from the Accession of the House of Stuart.London, 1797, Vol. I., p. 493.

[7]Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, Vol. I., Part I., p. 114, note.

[8]Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, edited by Thomas Dickson, Curator of the Historical Department of H.M. General Register House, Vol. I., 1473-1498, Preface, p. clxxxv, and note; and Glossary, p. 441.

[9]Scottish Collection of Gaelic MSS. in Advocates’ Library, No. XVI., A.A., line 2. For the correct reading as well as translation of this interesting manuscript the Editor is indebted to Professor Mackinnon. In the “Report of the Committee of the Highland Society of Scotland appointed to inquire into the nature and authenticity of the Poems of Ossian” (Edinburgh, 1805), it is, on the authority of Mr Astle, stated to be a writing of the ninth or tenth century (Report, p. 305). In the opinion of Professor Mackinnon the manuscript cannot be assigned to an earlier period than about 1400.

[10]Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1429, Record Issue, Vol. II., p. 18.

[11]Constable’s edition of Major, published for the Scottish History Society. Edinburgh, 1892, pp. 48, 49.

[12]Ibid., p. 333.

[13]Ibid., p. 359.

[14]Lord High Treasurer’s Accounts, 1537-38, fol. 63, MS., H.M. General Register House.

[15]See letter printed in full inBannatyne Miscellany, Vol. I., and also inCollectanea de Rebus Albanicis. The Editor is indebted for a correct transcription of the above portion to Mr Augustus W. Franks, C.B., British Museum.

[16]Histoire de la Guerre d’Escosse pendant les Campagnes, 1548 et 1549.Par Jean de Beaugué. Maitland Club. The translation is that of Donald Gregory. SeeTransactions of the Iona Club, p. 31.

[17]Register of the Privy Council, Vol. I., p. 136.

[18]The Chronicles of Scotland, by Robert Lindsay of Pitscottie, Edition 1814, Vol. I., Introduction, p. xxiii.

[19]The Historie of Scotland, wrytten first in Latin by the most Reverend and Worthy Jhone Leslie, Bishop of Rosse, and translated in Scottish by Father James Dalrymple Religious in the Scottis Cloister of Regensburg the zeere of God 1596. Edited for the Scottish Text Society by the Rev. Father E. G. Cody, O.S.B., 1885, pp. 90-94. This quaint Scots version is given in preference to the ordinary one from the Latin, as it conveys an extremely vivid picture of the ancient dress written by a contemporary.

[20]Ibid., p. 377.

[21]Aikman’s translation ofBuchanan’s History of Scotland, Vol. I., pp. 40, 41. Buchanan’s description was incorporated inCerteine Matters concerning the Realme of Scotland, composed together as they were Anno Domini 1597, by John Monipennie, who also included it in theSummarie of the Scots Chronicles, 1612.

[22]The Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Vol. I., pp. 331, 335. Bannatyne Club.

[23]Extracts from the Council Register of the Burgh of Aberdeen, 1570-1625, as printed by the Spalding Club, Vol. II., pp. 27, 373.

[24]The Image of Irelande, 1581.Reprinted by A. & C. Black, Edinburgh, 1883, p. 50.

[25]Ibid.p. 105.

[26]La Navigation du Roy d’Escosse Iaques Cinquiesme du nom, referred to in theTransactions of the Iona Club, pp. 36, 37.

[27]The Great Seal Register, 1580-1593, edited by John Maitland Thomson, M.A., Advocate, No. 1491.

[28]Vestiarium Scoticum.William Tait, Edinburgh, 1842, Introduction, p. 59; andA Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum. William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh, 1848, p. 23.

[29]Register of Signatouris in the Office of Comptrollerie, Vol. XII., 1587-1589, fol. 82.

[30]Charge of the Temporalitie of Kirklandis: North Side of the Forth.MS. in H.M. General Register House, fol. 94.

[31]Register of Signatouris in the Office of Comptrollerie, Vol. XXXIV., 1617, fol. 120.

[32]Ibid., Vol. XLVII., 1630, fol. 208.

[33]The Pourtrait of True Loyalty exposed in the Family of Gordon without interruption to this present year 1691, with a relation of the Siege of the Castle of Edinburgh in the year 1689.MS. in Advocates’ Library. It is partially quoted inDe Rebus Albanicis.

[34]Iona Club Transactions, pp. 37, 38.

[35]Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, Vol. II., i. 156.

[36]The Montgomery Manuscripts, containing Accounts of the Colonization of the Ardes in the County of Down in the Reigns of Elizabeth and James.Printed from the Original Manuscripts and Transcripts of MSS., composed by William Montgomery, Esq., second son of Sir James Montgomery, between the years 1698 and 1704. Belfast, 1830, pp. 53, 54.

[37]Camden’s Britannia(Gough’s Edition, 1789), Vol. III., p. 389.

[38]The Pennyless Pilgrimage, or the Moneylesse Perumbulation of John Taylor, alias the Kings Majesties Water-Poet: How he travelled on Foot from London to Edenborough in Scotland, not carrying any money to or fro, neither Begging, Borrowing or asking Meate, Drinke, or Lodging.Hume Brown’s Edition. Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1892, pp. 120, 121.

[39]History of Scots Affairs from 1637 to 1641, by James Gordon, Parson of Rothiemay. Spalding Club, Vol. III., Appendix to Preface, pp. xliii., xliv.

[40]Defoe’s Works:Memoirs of a Cavalier, Vol. II., pp. 112, 113. Bohn, London, 1854. As to the genuine authorship of this work, see Lee’s Bibliography in his edition of Defoe’s Works.

[41]Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1661, Vol. VII., p. 186.

[42]Brome’s Travels, Second Edition, London, 1707, pp. 179, 180.

[43]Tours in Scotland, 1677 and 1681, by Thomas Kirk and Ralph Thoresby, edited by P. Hume Brown. Edinburgh, David Douglas, 1892, pp. 28, 29.

[44]See the letter quoted inBlackwood’s Magazine, April 1817, p. 69. The present extract has been compared with the original in the Advocates’ Library. In theTransactions of the Iona Club“not one of ten of them hath breaches” is made to read “not one of them hath breaches,” and this very serious error has been duly copied by subsequent writers on the Highland dress.

[45]A Collection of Several Poems and Verses composed upon various occasions, by Mr William Cleland, Lieutenant-Colonel to my Lord Angus’s Regiment.Printed in the year 1697, pp. 11-13.

[46]Lyon Register in H.M. General Register House, Edinburgh. Matriculation dated about 1672.

[47]Alexander Nisbet’s Heraldic Plates, originally intended for his System of Heraldry.Waterston and Sons, Edinburgh, 1892.

[48]Nisbet MS., Advocates’ Library, pp. 33-35.

[49]Introduction toNisbet’s Heraldic Plates, p. xlvi.

[50]The Grameid: an Historic Poem descriptive of the Campaign of Viscount Dundee in 1689, by James Philip of Almerieclose. 1691. Translated by the Rev. Alexander D. Murdoch, F.S.A. Scot., for the Scottish History Society, 1888.

[51]Some Account of the Battle of Killiecrankie and what Followed thereupon.The MS. is cited inThe Costume of the Clans, p. 104.

[52]An Account of the Isle of Man, ... with a Voyage to I-Columb-Kill, by William Sacheverell, Esq., late Governor of the Isle of Man. 8vo. Manx Society, 1859, p. 99. The first edition was published in 1702.

[53]A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland, by M. Martin, Gent.The first edition of this work appeared in 1703, and a second, “very much corrected,” in 1716. It is from this second edition, pp. 206-210, that the extract is taken.

[54]A Collection of Original Papers about the Scots Plot.London, 1704, pp. 3, 4.

[55]Court Books of the Regality of Grant, 1703-1710.MSS. in H.M. General Register House.

[56]By the courtesy of the families in possession of the portraits referred to in the text, the author, for the purposes of the present work, has had repeated opportunities of making careful examinations of those referred to.

[57]The Present State of Scotland, Second Edition, 1711.

[58]A Journey through Scotland, by the author of The Journey through England(John Macky). London, 1723, p. 194.

[59]System of Heraldry, Edition 1804, Vol. I., p. 415. The original edition of this work was published in 1722, but was most probably written fifteen or twenty years before that date.

[60]MS., Lyon Office. See facsimile of a portion of the page containing the Cluny reference in the Introduction to theNisbet Plates, p. xlii.

[61]The original is at Fingask. It has been engraved as the frontispiece toThe Threiplands of Fingask.

[62]Captain Burt’sLetters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland, 1818, Vol. I., pp. 84-5; Vol. II., pp. 7, 84-86, 87-91. Jamieson’s Edition.

[63]Burt’sLetters, Vol. II., pp. 102-105. Jamieson’s Edition.

[64]Scotland and Scotsmen in the Eighteenth Century, from the MSS. of John Ramsay, Esq. of Ochtertyre, edited by Alex. Allardice. Blackwood, Edinburgh, 1888. Vol. I., p. 540; Vol. II., pp. 87, 88.

[65]Caledonian Mercury, 14th January 1740.

[66]Ibid., 19th February 1740.

[67]Caledonian Mercury, 4th October 1745.

[68]A mistake of the writer for “Ness.”

[69]A Journal of the Expedition of Prince Charles Edward in 1745, by a Highland Officer.Lockhart Papers, Vol. II., p. 505.

[70]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 112, Edition 1822.

[71]General Orders to the Army in Scotland, 22nd December 1748.

[72]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 113.

[73]Orders to 20th Foot [now the Lancashire Fusiliers], dated Bamff 1752.

[74]Edinburgh Evening Courant, February 21, 23, 26, 28, 1760.

[75]Ibid., July 9, 14, 1760.

[76]Stewart’s Sketches, Vol. I., p. 114.

[77]Travels in the Western Hebrides from 1782 to 1790, by the Rev. John Lane Buchanan, Missionary Minister to the Isles from the Church of Scotland. London, 1793, pp. 84-90.

[78]Camden’s Britannia(Gough’s Edition, 1789), Vol. III., p. 390.

[79]Vestiarium Scoticum.From the Manuscript formerly in the Library of the Scots College at Douay, with an Introduction and Notes by John Sobieski Stuart. Edinburgh, William Tait, 1842.

[80]Preface toVestiarium Scoticum, pp. i.-vii.

[81]Advertisement annexed toA Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum. Edinburgh, Blackwood, 1848.

[82]A Reply to the Quarterly Review, p. 6.

[83]See notes on p. 47.

[84]A Reply to the Quarterly Review, p. 7.

[85]It may be proper to point out here that the Editor discussed the idea of issuing a work on rare tartans, to be illustrated by examples of the actual fabrics, with his publisher several years ago, and it was not until the illustrations for the present work were considerably advanced that he became aware of the existence of Miss Dick Lauder’s copy of theVestiarium, which she has so handsomely placed at his disposal, and which contains the statement in the text.

[86]Copy of original letter in possession of Miss Dick Lauder. Copies of Sir Thomas Dick Lauder’s letters to Sir Walter Scott, along with the originals of the latter’s replies, are bound up with the copy of theVestiariummade by Sir Thomas in 1828-9, referred to on page 45. The volume, now in possession of Miss Dick Lauder, daughter of Sir Thomas, also contains the cleverly executed water-colours by Charles Edward Stuart referred to in the above letter and the quaint illustrations by Sir Thomas Dick Lauder subsequently referred to.

[87]This, it will be remembered, was the copy which belonged to John Ross, the old sword-player.

[88]i.e., the Douay MS.

[89]The words within brackets do not occur in Sir Thomas’s letter to Sir Walter. They appear, however, in the original letter written by the father of the Messrs Hay, and preserved by Sir Thomas in the volume now in Miss Dick Lauder’s possession.

[90]Sir Walter did so, and it is reproduced on page 56.

[91]This, it will be remembered, was the copy got from John Ross with the date 1721.

[92]Quarterly Review, No. CLXI., June 1847, Art. II., p. 57, “The Heirs of the Stuarts.”

[93]Ibid., pp. 63, 64.

[94]Sir Thomas Dick Lauder.

[95]A Reply to the Quarterly Review upon the Vestiarium Scoticum.William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh, 1848, pp. 4-7.

[96]SeeReply, pp. 8-16.

[97]An evident misprint for “Watson” in theQuarterly Reviewarticle.

[98]Professor Skene’s reference here is to a statement in the preface to theVestiarium, to the effect that the Bishop of Ross noted his acquisition of Sir Richard Urquhart’s work in his Diary (which he quotes in full) remaining among a portion of the Douay papers, in the possession of the “late Mr Robert Watson, well known in the history of the Stuart papers.” For an account of Watson’s remarkable career see an article by Andrew Lang in theIllustrated London Newsof 12th March 1892.

[99]Quarterly Reviewarticle, p. 67.

[100]Ante, p. 49.

[101]Ante, p. 51.

[102]Facsimile of John Leslie’s signature as Bishop of Ross in theLord Treasurer’s Accounts, 1564-6, H.M. General Register House, Edinburgh. The date of the audit, to which the bishop’s signature is affixed, is 27th June 1566.

[103]Facsimile of the signature contained in theVestiarium Scoticumreferred to on preceding page.

[104]An example fromNichols’ Autographs, obtained from the bishop’s letter to Lord Burleigh, dated Paris, 28th February 1579, preserved in the British Museum.

[105]Why the simple red and black check receives the title of Rob Roy is something of a mystery. InAuthenticated Tartans of the Clans and Families of Scotland(Smith: Mauchline, 1850) it is asserted, and the statement is repeated inThe Tartans of the Clans of Scotland(W. & A. K. Johnston: Edinburgh, 1886) without attempt at verification, that three genuine portraits of Rob Roy represent him as wearing it; but these and other so-called Rob Roy portraits—be their value what it may—afford no sanction whatever for the design. The Editor is not aware on what authority the portraits are classed as Rob Roy. He has seen seven paintings, including the three above referred to, in which the figure is identical, all known as Rob Roy, and in each a separate pattern appears, none of them showing the simple red and black check. The tartan is accepted by sound authorities as the old Macgregor clan pattern. There are fine examples of it in a collection of tartans made by the Highland Society of London in 1816-17, labelled and sealed “The MacGregor Tartan for undress ordinary clothing. The Seal of Arms of Sir John MacGregor Murray of MacGregor, Baronet. [Signed] John M. Murray.”

Back to Index Next