Talk:Thomas Rawlinson (industrialist)

COMPLAINT

The page is entitled "Thomas Rawlinson" but the vast majority of the content is not about him ! Can people please remedy this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.225.0.205 (talk) 22:32, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Origins

Two Rawlinson families are getting confused here. Fell states that the Thomas Rawlinson of Glengarry furnace was from Greythwaite, with the evidence that other shareholders in the venture were members of the Backbarrow Co. I can't comment on the origins of the kilt other than that Fell repeats the story (though not as fact) quoting the Edinburgh magazine 1785. It is possible that Fell is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterrivington (talk • contribs) 22:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

accuracy

Your external link is at odds with the article, thusly:

"One story commonly repeated is that an Englishman named Thomas Rawlinson opened an iron-smelting factory in the Highlands around the year 1730. His workers all dressed in the belted plaids, which proved too hot and cumbersome for close work in his factory. He solved the problem by cutting the garment in half. The lower part could now be worn separately and the upper part discarded when coming indoors. This is considered proof that an Englishman invented the Scottish national dress. The problem with this story is that we know of numerous illustrations of Highlanders wearing the only the bottom part of the belted plaid that date long before Rawlinson ever set foot in Scotland. Remember that the belted plaid consisted of two widths of material stitched together. If one neglects to stitch the two together, and only the bottom 4 yards are worn, pleated and belted around the waist, the resulting garment is called the feilidh-beag (little wrap). The word is often spelled in English “phillabeg.” I will not go into detailed evidence of the wearing of the phillabeg here, but I will say that there is some suggestion of its use in the late 17th century, and it was definitely being worn in the early 18th century. It most likely came about as a natural evolution of the belted plaid and Rawlinson probably observed its and quickly deduced its usefulness in his situation and introduced it among his workers. "

You may want to change the article to reflect this. --Aim Here 00:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy (redux)

The Reconstructing History web site (one of the two sources cited in the external links section) states:

"Recent scholarship has, to the great delight of Highlanders everywhere, disproven that Rawlinson "invented" the feileadh beag."

The Early History of the Kilt article states:

". . . we know of numerous illustrations of Highlanders wearing only the bottom part of the belted plaid that date long before Rawlinson ever set foot in Scotland.

Thus, the basic thesis of this entire article is contradicted by both sources cited in the external links section. No source is cited for the story which is recounted in the article itslef.

JFPerry 20:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The lead sentence (prior to my last edit) read: "Thomas Rawlinson was an 18th century English industrialist who is widely known today as the popularizer of the modern kilt."

At the conclusion of the article, in the section headed Enduring legacy, we read: "Though knowledge of Thomas Rawlinson's contribution to Scottish dress was forgotten for the better part of two centuries, . . ."

I don't know how he could be the popularizer of the kilt if his "contribution" was forgotten for "the better part of two centuries". In fact, his alleged contribution (as the inventor) was first asserted in a letter published in an Edinburgh journal in 1785! The popularization of the kilt is multi-faceted, with contributiions made thereto by the Highland regiments, by Walter Scott and the visit of King Geo. IV to Edinburgh in 1822, by John Sobieski Stuart and the Vestiarium Scoticum and by Queen Victoria's patronage of the Balmoral Gathering in ca. 1848. I don't know of any hard evidence that Rawlinson made any significant contribution to the popularization of the kilt and he is certainly not widely known as "the popularizer of the kilt" today..

The (first) removal of the accuracy tag was unjustified. The basis for such removal was the alteratiion from an unsupported assertion of invention to an equally unsupported assertion of popularization. But the entire artilce is about the alleged invention of the kilt by Rawlinson, as is clearly evidenced by the first main header where the world invention is used. There is no source cited for the story therein recounted which goes in its details far beyond the Edinburgh letter of 1785.

JFPerry 21:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you'll notice, under the Enduring Legacy section, it says, in full, "Though knowledge of Thomas Rawlinson's contribution to Scottish dress was forgotten for the better part of two centuries, his version of the kilt is still worn today . . ." His version of the kilt. He didn't invent the kilt; he simply popularized its modern version. There were different versions before his time. Remember, he didn't invent the kilt, he simply popularized a new version of it. Don't pick and choose quotes, please. Thank you.

Skrooball 02:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire section on the "Modern Invention" is POV violation as it does not present significant alternative points of view. Absolutely no sources are cited for the story, not even the Baillie letter which contains none of the embellishments mentioned in the article. Your removal of the accuracy tag after the minor, trivial change in the lead sentence was an insult. You say he didn't "invent" the kilt, but the entire story in the "modern invention" section says otherwise. There is no evidence whatsoever that he popularized the kilt. You have not addressed anyuthing which was brought up elsewhere on this talk page. JFPerry 13:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two sources cited which suggest the philibeg or walking kilt was in use before Rawlinson's invention are a text on the website for a Scottish Tartans Museum in North Carolina and, apparently, a website for people who dress up to re-enact historical events or periods, also in the US. I say apparently because the link to what was presumably a section on highland dress is dead. The Scottish Tartans Museum (STM) text was written in 2000 by Matthew Newsome. Googling that name reveals that he is a commercial kilt manufacturer and former director of the STM. He is not an academic author or professional historian associated with any institution such as a university, municipal or national museum with a history of academic research such as the National Museum of Scotland, or any peer-reviewed academic publication, although he is a member of the "Guild of Tartan Scholars" which is associated with the Scottish Tartans Authority, an organisation concerned with the history of tartan and the keeping of a register of tartans. His text on the STM website has no bibliography, footnotes, or attributions of any kind, let alone recognised sources such as encyclopedias, textbooks or academic publications. A citation request was put on the statement in this article that 'numerous reputable authors' have disputed the 'Baillie version of events' (that Rawlinson invented the forerunner of the modern kilt) three years ago. Can anyone cite a recognised, properly accountable source for evidence that the philibeg or walking kilt was in use before the 1720s? Also, even if the lower half of the belted plaid was worn on its own before the 1720s, as the STM website suggests, the relevant section in Hobsbawm & Ranger (the only source actually cited in this article) states that Rawlinson's kilt had sewn-in pleats, which the lower half of the belted plaid worn earlier according to the STM website, did not. That would make Rawlinson's kilt the forerunner of the modern kilt even if the STM website's claims are correct.Robocon1 (talk) 09:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Rawlinson genealogy

I can find no records giving Thomas Rawlinson's birth and death years. There is a web page which lists the "Baptisms at the Church of St. Laurence in the Parish of Chorley in the County of Lancashire, 1709-1768": http://lan-opc.org.uk/Chorley/stlaurence/baptisms_1709-1768.html

The following baptisms are recorded:

Baptism: 22 Feb 1718/9 St Laurence, Chorley, Lancashire, England Thomas Rawlinson - Son of Thomas Rawlinson Register: Baptisms 1709 - 1768, Page 9, Entry 34 Source: LDS Film 93703

Baptism: 15 Jul 1722 St Laurence, Chorley, Lancashire, England Ellen Rawlinson - Daughter of Thomas Rawlinson & Ann Occupation: Bricklayer Register: Baptisms 1709 - 1768, Page 15, Entry 11 Source: LDS Film 93703

Baptism: 13 Dec 1724 St Laurence, Chorley, Lancashire, England Ann Rawlinson - Daughter of Thomas Rawlinson & Ann Occupation: Bricklayer Register: Baptisms 1709 - 1768, Page 17, Entry 22 Source: LDS Film 93703

Thereafter, the name Rawlinson seems to disappear from the Lancashire records. The father of these infants is likely the Thomas Rawlinson who is the subject of this article. Said Thomas Rawlinson died prior to 1768 which is the year in which the famous letter, published in 1785 in the Edinburgh press, was actually written as that letter (reproduced in Dunbar's History of Highland Dress) refers to him in the past tense.

The article on Thomas Rawlinson is actually not about TR, but almost exclusively about the legend of the invention of the kilt.

JFPerry 15:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wealthy?

In the article, it is asserted:

"Through this new version of an old garment, Rawlinson attained wealth and certain prosperity . . ."

I find this statement to be highly improbable at the least. How is one to make money off such an "invention" if indeed he be the inventor (more to the point, are clothing or fashion styles of this nature ever really invented at all - are they not rather adopted and adapted?). Since the "invention" could not be patented, he could not have charged a licensing fee for the manufacture or production of such a garment. So the only way money could have possibly been made was in the sale of yard goods or finished products, perhaps by supplying them to the Highland Regiments after the '45. But to the extent that such large-scale manufacture was undertaken it was by Wilson's and not by Rawlinson. Elsewise, the garments would have been produced by home handicraft industry. JFPerry 13:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV version

The present version (#74032153) of this article presents the story, based on the Baillie letter, of Thomas Rawlinson's alleged "invention" (this is the word that Baillie uses,and the word which appered in the main header to the story in the original version of the present article) of the kilt, though without the unsourced embellishments and without presenting it as established fact. It also presents the contrary points of view together with references, again presenting them as opinion and not established fact. The reader is thus left, with proper sourcing, to read the original documents and make up his/her own mind.

The last two sections ("Growing popularity" and "Enduring legacy") could well be removed as they concern the history of the kilt, and not Thomas Rawlinson, about whom precious little is known.

Jim Perry

Lord Mayor

The articles for his father Thomas Rawlinson and son Richard Rawlinson mention he was Lord Mayor - but nothing here. Jackiespeel (talk) 19:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... and the two Lord Mayors- 1708 and 1753 - should be differentiated. Jackiespeel (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing here because they are not related to this Thomas Rawlinson. Robocon1 (talk) 15:36, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thomas Rawlinson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060819145637/http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/scottish/18thckilt.html to http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/scottish/18thckilt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Thomas Rawlinson (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rawlinson kilt disputation

FYI

– Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Talk:Kilt#Thomas Rawlinson for a discussion that should be centralized at one place, as it affects three articles. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 05:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source for characterisation of Baillie

What's the source for "a known promoter of political union with England and to be anti-Highland", as a description of Ivan Baillie? If it's correct, it's quite significant, but this could just be some editor's personal opinion. Needs a reliable source. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 09:31, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]