Are You Ready to Enlist?

[creagdhubh]

Well, this thread is bordering on rule-breaking, but I think that was very well stated, Jock.

Virtually every political/military/social entity in history has something to be ashamed of. Even here in America, those who proudly wear the uniform shouldn't be expected to carry the burden of past wrongs (say, for example, the wholesale murder and relocation of Native Americans conducted by the US military, which was in many ways similar to the Highland Clearances but much more brutal). If one tries to put past deeds onto present members, it becomes a no-win situation for everybody. And it serves absolutely no purpose. It is indeed best if people remember the past for what it is and stop trying to put the burdens of those actions committed by people hundreds of years ago onto modern folks. There's no point in it. We live in today, not the past. Let's remember history, striving not to repeat it, but attempting to make our world better for having learned those lessons.

That said, I love seeing photos like these! Especially the great examples of mixing 'ancient' or 'weathered' scheme plaids with modern colour kilts.

Now, for a specific question to those who know: it looks like most of those kilts are pleated with so-called military box pleats, judging by the tight grouping of red lines. But the photo of the sword dance looks kinda like one of the kilts (the one swishing) may be knife pleated. I can't really tell. But I do notice that some of the kilts, like in the first photo, show more of the horizontal stripe pattern in the pleats, while others show only the red vertical stripes. So are all these kilts pleated the same, or are some different? Unfortunately, there aren't many photos where the pleats are visible from the rear.

Well said, Tobus and thank you for your contribution. As far as your question regarding the pleating style of the kilts in which the Atholl Highlanders wear, I agree with you. It appears that most of them are pleated in the so-called military box pleat fashion (which is understandable), yet I do see what you are referring to in regards to the lads dancing. Their kilts do appear to be knife pleated, yet it's difficult for me to tell as well. Perhaps one of our kilt-makers will chime in. I'll see if I have any more photos of the Atholl men in their kilts...specifically rear shots of their kilts.

Cheers,

[Nathan]

This is certainly not the case with my paternal Macpherson lineage, of which I hold very dear and have done so from quite a young age. Your statement may indeed apply to other Highland clans and families that were more severely affected by the Highland Clearances, but I don't necessarily think it applies towards the Clan Macpherson. Clan Macpherson chiefs have consistently stood by and with their clansmen and clanswomen throughout the centuries and even in the modern era - well after the collapse of the Highland Clan system.

Besides the notable 18th chief, Ewen Macpherson of Cluny, or "Cluny of the '45," this especially rings true with the present chief, Sir William Alan Macpherson of Cluny and Blairgowrie, TD. Cluny (as he is affectionately referred to by his clan) has always considered himself as "a first among equals," a very humble approach to modern clan (association) chiefship if you ask me, and furthermore, according to documented evidence (of which I can provide) there is a good track record of this being the case throughout Clan Macpherson history. Perhaps this sort of mentality is what prevented Macpherson families in Badenoch from being cleared in order to make way for sheep. In all actuality, many Macphersons to include my great-grandfather, left Badenoch due to other hardships (mostly to do with labor issues) in the immediate area and not as a direct result of a particular Macpherson chief or landowner kicking them off the estate.

By no means am I trying to say the Clan Macpherson is exclusive of all negative happenings in the past, because they are certainly not and their history can definitely support that. Nor am I trying to say that the Macphersons are "better" than other Highland clans - I would never do so. What I am saying is that there has been a long-standing, consistently strong bond between the chiefs and chieftains of the Clan Macpherson, its cadet branches and its clansmen and clanswomen. Even after the whole idea of the Highland clan system and clanship was ultimately destroyed in post-Culloden Scotland, then brought somewhat anew again as more of a collective pageantry of Scottish romanticism during the Victorian era, the Macphersons have continually stuck to their own unique traditions and culture in the face of adversity, and a very important (if not the most important) aspect of these traditions is the relationship between the chief and his kith, kin and clan.

Cluny and I.


Cheers,

I'm glad to hear that the MacPhersons didn't sell out their clansmen after proscription and like I said, it's a bit of a dilema. I met Clanranald and he is a fine enough gentleman indeed. I carried his colours for him when he visited Ottawa and performed Cape Breton music for him and his entourage at the dinner.

I am also getting very involved in Clan Donald Canada because it really needs some revitalized energy in the part of Ontario in which I now reside.

I did notice, however, that the man spoke English with a posh southern accent and did not or could not respond to the basic Gàidhlig greeting I paid him in our clan's historic language. I don't blame him for how he was educated or how history progressed, but I found it tragic that the heads of the great Gàidhlig clan have lost touch with their ancestral culture.

What has replaced it is something entirely different. Your points are all well-taken but as one of the remnants of what our culture truly is/was, I think it's my duty to be mindful that Highland and Island culture and Gaidhlig civilization is and was about far more than wardrobe and pipe bands.

To Tobus' point, I don't want to risk violating any rules but I also have a little vinagar in my wine when it comes to the worship of the oppulence of the Lairds.

I am a proud MacDonald of Clanranald but to me the clan is about all of us and not just the rich guy who's crest we wear. I like the idea of "first among equals" or the "head of the family" but there are some things I wouldn't do and joining the Atholls or the Argyll and Sutherlands for historic reasons are among those things.

Anyway, my Gàidhlig laments aside, I now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion of the pretty tartans and uniforms. All apologies for the tangent.

[creagdhubh]

What has replaced it is something entirely different. Your points are all well-taken but as one of the remnants of what our culture truly is/was, I think it's my duty to be mindful that Highland and Island culture and Gaidhlig civilization is and was about far more than wardrobe and pipe bands.

Precisely! I couldn't agree more, Nathan. It's the unique culture of the Highlands and Islands that has always struck a chord with me and has pulled at my heartstrings - not necessarily the wearing of Highland dress and pipe bands. Though I do think that pipe music, whether its canntaireachd or piobaireachd, serves as a vital importance in Highland, Island and ultimately Gàidhlig culture.

I'd like to compare it to the following metaphor:

As a former competative distance runner, training hard and long was vital to setting personal records and to winning races. In order to do so, I had to train, train, and train! This meant achieving a deep-down, enduring physical fitness and not a superficial, surface oriented, hey I look good on the outside kind of "fitness." No, I had to train smart and was ultimately forced to really listen to my body in order to be fully aware of its limits and capabilities as they apply to competative distance running.

This mentality applies to how I feel about my Scottish Highland heritage. There are deep-down feelings of Highland and Gàidhlig culture that I have within me, because of how meaningful, genuine and enduring they are, regardless of clan affiliation or lineage. They're a part of me. A part of my father, my mother, my sisters, etc. A part of my family and its history and genealogy. The wearing of traditional Scottish Highland dress is indeed a rather recognisble aspect of Highland culture, but not a defining one. I certainly respect and have an immense appreciation for the kilt and all of its accessories; however, I can quite easily leave the tartan and tweed at home and still possess the same deep-down, powerful, evocative and passionate feelings I have for the Highland traditions and culture of the place (Badenoch and Strathspey) my ancestors came and where many descendents still remain.

Cheers,

[MacGumerait]

I'm glad to hear that the MacPhersons didn't sell out their clansmen after proscription and like I said, it's a bit of a dilema. I met Clanranald and he is a fine enough gentleman indeed. I carried his colours for him when he visited Ottawa and performed Cape Breton music for him and his entourage at the dinner.

I am also getting very involved in Clan Donald Canada because it really needs some revitalized energy in the part of Ontario in which I now reside.

I did notice, however, that the man spoke English with a posh southern accent and did not or could not respond to the basic Gàidhlig greeting I paid him in our clan's historic language. I don't blame him for how he was educated or how history progressed, but I found it tragic that the heads of the great Gàidhlig clan have lost touch with their ancestral culture.

What has replaced it is something entirely different. Your points are all well-taken but as one of the remnants of what our culture truly is/was, I think it's my duty to be mindful that Highland and Island culture and Gaidhlig civilization is and was about far more than wardrobe and pipe bands.

To Tobus' point, I don't want to risk violating any rules but I also have a little vinagar in my wine when it comes to the worship of the oppulence of the Lairds.

I am a proud MacDonald of Clanranald but to me the clan is about all of us and not just the rich guy who's crest we wear. I like the idea of "first among equals" or the "head of the family" but there are some things I wouldn't do and joining the Atholls or the Argyll and Sutherlands for historic reasons are among those things.

Anyway, my Gàidhlig laments aside, I now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion of the pretty tartans and uniforms. All apologies for the tangent.

Nathan , I can appreciate your passion and zeal but I don't think anyone here or in today's world is worshipping the " opulence of the Lairds ". Also , most Lairds today are not living in opulence , there may be a handful but not many . Those days are gone for most .

The sins of the past are just that ( in the past ) and every nationality has them , it is the history of mankind . You are correct , it is important to know the history , remember it and not repeat the wrongs . However , as human history has taught us , this does not ever go away .

I very much understand your " vinegar in the wine " comment , although , one has to be careful about that thought process , or else one will find vinegar in all their wines .

Cheers , Mike

[KiltFitz]

More panic about 'rule-breaking'. It is clear that this forum needs some boundaries to stop posts from descending into tirades of mud-slinging and uncivilised behaviour and a limit to the extent of political commentary is germane to this type of control. That said, we can't all go around ooohing and aaahing at tartan and highlandwear without at some point evaluating the continuation of these traditions (much of which derives from military traditions with its concomitant historical and socio-political struggles). In order to do this, we will occasionally have to dip our toes in the murky waters of politics since it pervades everything.

I would like to think that forum members could stand a little debate in order to exchange views more freely and that anyone participating in a forum might accept that a decorum will go hand in hand with a little resiliance to opposing opinions. I can't imagine the Atholl Highlanders would want their volunteers to blindly enlist without being encouraged to gain personally a deeper interest into the history and culture that surrounds their regiment. Proud men and women are, in my experience, usually more than happy to engage in meaningful debate about that which they hold dear and a necessity for such debate is the right of challenge. If they can stand it, surely the members of this forum can too?

I think that asking people to converse and interact without freedom of expression is to ask them to be sheep. I don't want to be a sheep and if we take the clearances as an example, we observe that even sheep are not immune to politics.

[MacGumerait]

More panic about 'rule-breaking'. It is clear that this forum needs some boundaries to stop posts from descending into tirades of mud-slinging and uncivilised behaviour and a limit to the extent of political commentary is germane to this type of control. That said, we can't all go around ooohing and aaahing at tartan and highlandwear without at some point evaluating the continuation of these traditions (much of which derives from military traditions with its concomitant historical and socio-political struggles). In order to do this, we will occasionally have to dip our toes in the murky waters of politics since it pervades everything.

I would like to think that forum members could stand a little debate in order to exchange views more freely and that anyone participating in a forum might accept that a decorum will go hand in hand with a little resiliance to opposing opinions. I can't imagine the Atholl Highlanders would want their volunteers to blindly enlist without being encouraged to gain personally a deeper interest into the history and culture that surrounds their regiment. Proud men and women are, in my experience, usually more than happy to engage in meaningful debate about that which they hold dear and a necessity for such debate is the right of challenge. If they can stand it, surely the members of this forum can too?

I think that asking people to converse and interact without freedom of expression is to ask them to be sheep. I don't want to be a sheep and if we take the clearances as an example, we observe that even sheep are not immune to politics.

Well , if you were referring to my post , I wasn't worried about " rule breaking " . I was doing as exactly as you stated . I elected not to be a sheep . I was interacting with a freedom of expression ... I disagreed with someone . Some may agree with my view , some may disagree .

I was expressing my counterpoint and suggesting not to be too negative in life . As you suggested , I thought I was allowed to do that .

I am , however , a bit perplexed . Your post opens by calling for more boundaries/ rules and ends with calling for more freedom . Not sure what that means , one can't have both .

At any rate , no bad vibes here ! Best regards KiltFitz !

Cheers , Mike

[KiltFitz]

Mike, I wasn't specifically referring to your post and I support and reinforce your right of expression. In fact, my comment is designed to facilitate just that.

Perhaps a little misunderstanding however: In saying "It is clear that this forum needs some boundaries to stop posts from descending into tirades of mud-slinging and uncivilised behaviour and a limit to the extent of political commentary is germane to this type of control." I am not calling for more rules or boundaries but merely acknowledging the requirement for some.

It is my personal belief that strict rules of expression can serve to stifle or choke free comment and I am merely urging a relaxation of the rather stringent "no politics whatsoever" M.O.

To be clear, I am definitely in favour of more freedom of expression on this forum.

Kind regards

Fitz

[Chas]

Politics is what affects us today. History is what has affected our fathers and all their fathers.

The two are different.

[Jock Scot]

Mike, I wasn't specifically referring to your post and I support and reinforce your right of expression. In fact, my comment is designed to facilitate just that.

Perhaps a little misunderstanding however: In saying "It is clear that this forum needs some boundaries to stop posts from descending into tirades of mud-slinging and uncivilised behaviour and a limit to the extent of political commentary is germane to this type of control." I am not calling for more rules or boundaries but merely acknowledging the requirement for some.

It is my personal belief that strict rules of expression can serve to stifle or choke free comment and I am merely urging a relaxation of the rather stringent "no politics whatsoever" M.O.

To be clear, I am definitely in favour of more freedom of expression on this forum.

Kind regards

Fitz

I could not agree with you more--------in an ideal world. The problem (problems actually) that I have come across more than once here is that "our" English English is not the same as "North American" English--for example-- and not only that, how "we" might say(phrase) something that is quite acceptable over here, is not over there and vice versa. Then we have the problem that not everyone reads every post in a thread and can jump in on a particular post without understanding what context a particular post has been written, that is actually quite harmless within the context of the whole thread. When we add in genuine misunderstandings into the equation then on the whole I think we all do pretty well in the circumstances. Then we have differing histories, cultures, backgrounds, educations, etc., to consider------------

Much of the credit for the smooth running of this website must be given to the intellegent aplications of judgement of our moderators here who let conversations and some topics go further than perhaps they might, in an effort to continue an interesting thread. Also, I think credit should be given to all here, that we on the whole allow ourselves to dis-agree without being dis-agreeable. Perfect? No. Can we do better? I would like to think so, but considering everything it would be hard to.

[KiltFitz]

I don't accept such a clearly drawn division of politics and history and in many instances I simply view them as different tenses of the same chain of events. I have yet to meet a history scholar who felt they had gained any understanding of history without a obtaining a knowledge of politics in the same process. Write an essay for a history professor and they will be uninterested in your perfect recollection of dates but more about how you interpret the political situation that surrounded them.

Not everything that is discussed here in the context of colourful history remains fully buried in the past - loyalty to the traditions of the military, the nobility and the crown is a good example, as any citizen of Glasgow could tell you. Many of these events of the past have an ongoing effect today and in my opinion, that will inevitably lead to discussions of a "political" nature. That shouldn't mean, however, that we should not be able to express opinion on such subjects as long as we do it respectfully and politely.

As for the members of this forum, I think you're a great bunch of polite, articulate and intelligent people and I want to read more, not less, of what you have to say. I will also express my appreciation of the moderators and my faith in their discretion.