"Traditional" is not an easy term to define and is as if highland dress had perhaps reached a state of perfection beyond which no further change was either possible or acceptable. To have said such a thing in 1850 or perhaps 1950 would have rendered how we dress nowadays quite unthinkable given how styles have changed considerably even during my time on this earth. Anyone as old as me who remembers the TV shows of the 1960's (White Heather Club etc.) will recall that it was generally a Montrose that was worn by the likes of Kenneth McKellar and others. Until fairly recently the Montrose has been a rarity in favour of the PC but should we brand the PC as non-"Tradional" as a result? Should we regard the modern short kilt as un-"traditional" in favour of the great kilt? Where do we draw the line? Then again, we see here many examples posted of idiosyncratic styles adopted by individuals which are theirs and theirs alone, but are we also to accept that these are examples of "tradition" which we all should follow simply because they are Chief this or Lord that and must be correct as a result? Finally, who exactly are we going to accept to be the "Chief Arbiter of Tradition"? There are plenty here who have expressed strongly held views in the past on what can and what cannot ever be worn but we have never been party to what qualification they have to propound their views in this way. Do you have to be Scottish perhaps with an unblemished Highland pedigree, man and boy? Or should it be an individual intent on imposing his/her views on others even if, as usually happens, to challenge such views elicits a hostile and combative response? Many questions and it will be interesting to see how such a forum evolves. Let us hope that it is one of gentle advice rather than opinions set in stone, for opinions are what they are, no more and no less.