|
-
5th September 12, 07:16 AM
#1
At least with tartan drawers if you flashed anyone it would not be clear if you were regimental or they just got the sight of the kilt.
-
-
5th September 12, 08:39 AM
#2
The braces/suspenders issue is confusing me too. I think all men wore them at that time, but on your underpants???!!!!!
The Kilt is my delight !
-
-
5th September 12, 10:07 AM
#3
We are making some assumptions that might not hold true.
The Duke of Windsor's underwear used to button into his trousers. He put the two on together and regardless of how strenuous the exercise he undertook, his underpants would never ride up.
It might very well be possible that the same goes for these kilt drawers. It was also quite standard at one time for men to tuck their T shirts or singlets into their underpants.
It wasn't that long ago when most clothing was individually tailored, so it is possible that these drawers were made to fit a particular set of braces (suspenders).
As it is the waist sizes are quite different, so I don't think that they originally went together.
Regards
Chas
-
-
5th September 12, 12:46 PM
#4
 Originally Posted by freddie
The braces/suspenders issue is confusing me too. I think all men wore them at that time, but on your underpants???!!!!!
Pardon me for a minute, comparing this to saxon wear. Historically underdrawers with trousers had loops or holes to catch into the braces/suspenders and thereby hold them up along with the trousers. The shirt remember was knee lenght and considered underwear. It would be tucked up between the legs and held there by the trousers. Obviously the shirt had to go under the underdrawers. Oftimes habits continue long after the reason for them is moot. Sorry if this is revealing too much.
Elf
There is no bad weather; only inappropriate clothing.
-atr: New Zealand proverb
-
-
6th September 12, 04:33 AM
#5
Personally, I find it quite bizare myself, but maybe the gent cycled in his kilt and didn't want to offend?
Martin.
AKA - The Scouter in a Kilt.
Proud, but homesick, son of Skye.
Member of the Clan MacLeod Society (Scotland)
-
-
6th September 12, 05:36 AM
#6
I find it odd that some people claim these were "common", yet no one can explain how they work or how they're worn!
And when I try to work it out in my own head, I can't help but think it's like a tartan version of this:

-
-
18th September 12, 03:55 AM
#7
Tartan undertrews were not just common, they were almost universal, two pairs being automatically supplied by kiltmakers prior to the Second War. Of course, they were not comfortable but people didn't expect clothing to be all that comfortable in those days. They originated in the army.
-
-
18th September 12, 04:12 AM
#8
i might even think the trews under the kilt was a very common thing even in the early days of the kilt. many of the descriptions giving of the 16th century scots do mention trews and there long cloak witch could be neatly tucked up in belt for travel. or simply says the simplest of covering for there lower then goes on to describe shirt and cloak/brat/kilt.
for a while i have thought that going regimental was a rather new thing.
but im sure there is better historians here who can say more.
-
-
18th September 12, 08:42 AM
#9
 Originally Posted by neloon
Tartan undertrews were not just common, they were almost universal, two pairs being automatically supplied by kiltmakers prior to the Second War. Of course, they were not comfortable but people didn't expect clothing to be all that comfortable in those days. They originated in the army.
I thought the army required the kilt to be worn 'regimental' style? I guess I don't understand how tartan undergarments would have originated in the army if they weren't allowed to be worn. Or is the whole military 'regimental' requirement just a myth?
I could see them being used for formal affairs like military balls where ladies might be present, though, so that could explain it...
-
-
18th September 12, 07:56 PM
#10
 Originally Posted by Tobus
I find it odd that some people claim these were "common", yet no one can explain how they work or how they're worn!
And when I try to work it out in my own head, I can't help but think it's like a tartan version of this:

As a youngster my "wee trews" were held up with a pair of narrow white braces that were worn over my t-shirt and under my dress shirt. This provided a bit of bulk around my hips and helped keep my kilt cinched in place. My younger cousin had bodice that buttoned up the front attached to his wee trews; this was worn under his shirt instead of a t-shirt. When my Mother's uncle passed away I had to sort through his things, amongst which was a kilt in McBain tartan with matching trews lined with chamois to guard against chaffing.
I suspect "wee trews" are a mystery to most North Americans of Scottish ancestry because they have come to kilt wearing rather recently-- since the 1960s at any rate-- and their local kilt shops probably didn't bother to supply their customers with any sort of tartan underpinnings.
[SIZE=1]and at EH6 7HW[/SIZE]
-
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks