not wearing a Kilt

[Jack Daw]

Hello Rabble,

I recently had the most fantastic Kilted weekend on the nothern bell British Pullman and in The Royal Enclosure at my beloved Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo. My lovely Wife Was More than happy for me to be kilted, questioned and photographed. However on the train journey back from Edinburgh in which the dress Code remained smart daywear (lounge suits for Gentlemen) she said she would prefer me not to Kilt. I agreed reluctantly. I normally pride myself on wearing my Kilt wuselt and not innapropriately But I thought It would have been appropriate here. Antike else have similar issues?

Well, you must have looked rather silly running around with a kilt jacket and tie, without a kilt on! I hope the shirt-tail was long enough. Not done, ol' man; simply not done.

[plaid preacher]

I wandered away from this thread for a week or so and have just returned to it, and a thought has come to me reading Jock's post that perhaps gets lost in translation. I think many of us need to remember that our heritage and experience in North America - or wherever - is quite different than that of our Scottish and English neighbours. Indeed many of us are where we are because our ancestors were attempting to escape that very experience. Jock - I think - rightly points out that there are undertones to kiltwearing in Scotland and in England that are very political and therefore are handled with great care and sensitivity. And I'm afraid we just don't get it! Its like a comment posted here a while ago that Jock would just never wear a double Windsor knot in his tie, or would anyone in the UK - it's just not done. That one puzzled me, as that was the knot my father wore every day of his working life, and is probably the most popular knot here in North America. (Jock if I am wrong on this please correct me ....) But I did a little research and I think the strong reaction in the UK to the Windsor knot has to do with its strong association to the Duke of Windsor. That was what I was able to come up with at any rate.

I guess the truth is while we are all here because we love the kilt, and wear it with pride, there are subtleties to it, and its history, that many of us will miss. I hope Jock and perhaps other of our Scottish brethren will forgive us when we overlook the broader historical context.

[O'Callaghan]

I wandered away from this thread for a week or so and have just returned to it, and a thought has come to me reading Jock's post that perhaps gets lost in translation. I think many of us need to remember that our heritage and experience in North America - or wherever - is quite different than that of our Scottish and English neighbours. Indeed many of us are where we are because our ancestors were attempting to escape that very experience. Jock - I think - rightly points out that there are undertones to kiltwearing in Scotland and in England that are very political and therefore are handled with great care and sensitivity. And I'm afraid we just don't get it! Its like a comment posted here a while ago that Jock would just never wear a double Windsor knot in his tie, or would anyone in the UK - it's just not done. That one puzzled me, as that was the knot my father wore every day of his working life, and is probably the most popular knot here in North America. (Jock if I am wrong on this please correct me ....) But I did a little research and I think the strong reaction in the UK to the Windsor knot has to do with its strong association to the Duke of Windsor. That was what I was able to come up with at any rate.

I guess the truth is while we are all here because we love the kilt, and wear it with pride, there are subtleties to it, and its history, that many of us will miss. I hope Jock and perhaps other of our Scottish brethren will forgive us when we overlook the broader historical context.

Well, I'm English and have always worn my tie in a double Windsor knot. I'm not sure I know how to tie it any different. It's what my father taught me to do. If anyone objects to that, then they've certainly never told me. Of course, it may be that the higher social classes object to it, but I wouldn't know much about that.

[Jock Scot]

I wandered away from this thread for a week or so and have just returned to it, and a thought has come to me reading Jock's post that perhaps gets lost in translation. I think many of us need to remember that our heritage and experience in North America - or wherever - is quite different than that of our Scottish and English neighbours. Indeed many of us are where we are because our ancestors were attempting to escape that very experience. Jock - I think - rightly points out that there are undertones to kiltwearing in Scotland and in England that are very political and therefore are handled with great care and sensitivity. And I'm afraid we just don't get it! Its like a comment posted here a while ago that Jock would just never wear a double Windsor knot in his tie, or would anyone in the UK - it's just not done. That one puzzled me, as that was the knot my father wore every day of his working life, and is probably the most popular knot here in North America. (Jock if I am wrong on this please correct me ....) But I did a little research and I think the strong reaction in the UK to the Windsor knot has to do with its strong association to the Duke of Windsor. That was what I was able to come up with at any rate.

I guess the truth is while we are all here because we love the kilt, and wear it with pride, there are subtleties to it, and its history, that many of us will miss. I hope Jock and perhaps other of our Scottish brethren will forgive us when we overlook the broader historical context.

Yes! You have got it! Although, I don't think anyone in the UK would say that clothing----including kilt conventions---- and behavioural conventions have ever been a totally general thing here. Mainly caused, I think, through lack of opportunity and probably lack of inclination too. Anyway, for those where these things mattered it was--still is--- a combination of subtle social, subtle historical, subtle educational, family and peer pressures that these rather confusing dress conventions are formed around those that do still exist here within the UK. Although, believe it or not, much watered down these days. Take the windsor knot as an example, these days its still not a common sight in the UK, but not rare-----although I have yet to see a BBC news caster wearing one!-----but you are right, the late Duke of Windsor was viewed with distaste by many of the older generation for putting personal considerations above duty. That distaste brushed off onto many of my generation and the next, but as we are inevitably becoming a shrinking influence as time moves on, the windsor knot may gather popularity as understandable ignorance of minor aspects of British history will cause it to inevitably fade in importance and personal choice will prevail. Who knows?

Interestingly, I spent much of last week in the company of a group of high flying members of the "London financial crowd", I don't suppose any were above the age of forty and were terrifyingly intelligent, sharp, confident and very good company. Anyway one morning due to low cloud our journey to the moor was delayed for an hour or so, so more coffee was drunk, more toast and Marmite consumed and time was taken to watch the news on TV. One of the items to come up was "dress sense in the City" (meaning London). The point being made was that dress sense and attached conventions were/are still important, the correct suit, the correct tie and knot, the correct shirt, the correct shoes, still matter and matter a lot. I was interested to hear the comments made by "the audience". The consensus was that in their business world AND social world all these things still do very much matter if you want to succeed. They may be watered down in historical terms, but they do still exist and they do still matter --------to some.

[Jock Scot]

Alan H and Father Bill. Thank you.

---------------------although --------------not too sure about that---------that ----------" stodgy" bit!

[The Q]

Jock,
Were those city types on TV, wearing Brown shoes with their suits and getting told to change because it wasn't a Friday?

[Jock Scot]

Jock,
Were those city types on TV, wearing Brown shoes with their suits and getting told to change because it wasn't a Friday?

I don't know, as I did not see all the feature, sorry. I did catch the comment of " brown shoes are acceptable with tweed suits" though, which received nods of approval from the audience that I was with. The thought did briefly cross my mind that black shoes would go with some of the grey tweeds rather better than brown, but I was a tad busy with rather more important things at the time.

[FinnKilt]

I am English, or nowadays Anglo-Finnish, and don't these days wear a tie very often, but the double windsor is certainly my default knot. Actually I'd never associated it with the late Duke of Windsor, who was indeed Bad News in many different ways. Occasionally I find that the fabric of a tie requires a different approach to knotting it.

And I did see a recent headline about how brown shoes are Bad News with a (non-brown) suit in the City – and while I have little time for dress codes in the City of London (or for that matter other aspects of behaviour thereabouts) I have to say that black shoes definitely look better with black or charcoal-grey clothing.

I usually wear ankle-high boots or sandals – brown with brown-range coloured kilts and black with black or olive green.

[tpa]

Back to kilts and what is or is not done, I acknowledge that dress is and probably always has been an important influence in business. However,although I have no great historical knowledge to back it up, I would imagine that in days gone by Scots who wore kilts whilst going about their daily business, wore them whether they were working their local land or carrying out a cattle raid in the southern counties or even across the border. I would not expect the majority even possessed an alternative, let alone contemplated changing it depending on where they were going to nick cattle from next.

[The Q]

Since Kilts were the dress of the Highlander not the Lowlanders, It is highly unlikely kilts were seen in the borders cattle raiding in Southern Scotland or England, though the Highlanders quite happily had interclan raids in the highlands when they would have worn their everyday dress, the great kilt.
When Peaceful cattle droving from the highlands the furthest south most would have gone was to the trysts (cattle markets) at Reddingmuir or Stenhousemuir near Falkirk.
It's a further 110 Miles to the border and the only highlanders that would have got that far would have been in Armies, such as Bonnie Prince Charlies' in 1745.

The cattle raiding in and around the Borders was carried out by trousered families ( not clans) such as Elliot, Armstrong, Burns, Young, Pringle, Hodgeson etc many had branches both sides of the border and exploited it to escape the Lords of the Marches (from both sides) who were supposed to police it.
Most of these families date from when the Kingdoms of Northumbria or Bernicia stretched up the middle and eastern of the UK to the River Forth or the Welsh kingdoms of Rheged and Strathclyde that stretched up the west. The families didn't really recognise the modern construction of Scotland or England except when convenient.