Historic Quiz

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I just want to say that Robbie is 100% correct. The kilt did not evolve from the leine. It evolved, rather, from the mantle worn on top of the leine, which has, at various times, been called a plaid, or a brat.

Remember, the first form of the kilt was the feilidh-mhor, aka the "belted plaid." The plaid was a large woolen wrap that was worn as an outer layer over the shoulders, like an oversized shawl. It is this garment that changed, grew larger, and at the end of the sixteenth century began to be worn gathered up into folds and belted at the waist.

Remember, too, that "leine" is simply the Gaelic word for "shirt." The Scots who migrated from Ireland to Scotland wore the leine, it is true. But this just means they wore a shirt! The style of tunic they wore in the fifth and sixth centuries was greatly different from the style worn in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The sixteenth century style of leine, with full sleeves and, yes, sometimes a pleated skirt below the waist, represents only one style of leine. There is a temptation at times to assume this style was the onle one ever worn. The fact of the matter is that, despite certain similarities (pleating of the garment below the waist) the leine and the belted plaid are two different garments, having two different origins, and two different functions.

The liene evolved from a simple tunic, and was essentially a long shirt. The feilidh-mhor evolved from a simple wrap or mantle, and was essentially a long wrap that was belted around the waist. The fact that both are pleated is coincidental.

Aye,
Matt

[MACKAY]

Very interesting reading, not boring at all Robbie - remindes me of one of my favorite quotes:

"I have found a great part of the information I have was aquired by looking for something and finding something else on the way."

Thanks for all of the great info ...

Brian Mackay

[An t-Ileach]

Robbie,

The Welsh are not Gaelic. They come from the Brythonic branch of the Celtic peoples, along with the peoples of South West Scotland (Strathclyde), Southern England and Brittany.

Rob (A mostly Brythonic Celt)

In general this is right, however, to complicate matters considerably, there has been a long and constant settlement of Irish in parts of Wales.

The Llyn Peninsula and the neighbouring parts of Gwynedd and Meirionydd have a lot of Irish 'blood', as have parts of Pembrokeshire and also the Gower Peninsula and Swansea (these latter were settled at one time - before the coming of the Northmen from Limerick (hence Swansea - Svegnes Nes) - by an Irish clan called the Ui Leathain, who may have been some of the Deisi on the run). Also, there's quite a lot of Welsh (Brythonic?) settlement in the area of Cork.

This is also true of the Cornish Peninsula (which probably should include Devon and Somerset), and Brittany. There is also evidence of Irish settling in Galicia in historic time.

St Asaph and some other foundations nearby on the northern coast of Gwynedd were tributary houses associated with Saints Moluag and Mungo - in the latter case Lothian, and therefore Brythonic, but in the case of the former certainly Gaelic.

The north-west of England from the Welsh border to the Scottish border were Welsh speaking areas at the time of the coming of the Northmen - hence Cumbria, which once described the whole area - and, if we take what has happened in west and north-west Wales as an indication, almost certainly shared the cross-settlement with Ireland, Man, and Galloway (and thus Gaelic-ness).

So we should probably be cautious about drawing hard-and-fast conclusions about the Western Insular and Continental Celts. And given the patterns of cross-settlement and mixing of populations, it's going to be a fair bet that Welsh, Cornish, Bretons, and Gallegos would be able to put up a passable claim to sharing in the Irish/Scots heritage - and probably vice versa.

[highlander_Daz]

Im always cautious about history books and what can be gleaned off the internet, "facts" are often anything but, I dont think Robs too far off the mark, but I always take stuff off the net with a pinch o salt.

Like I say ive always been very cynical about "Tartans" especially modern ones designed to extract as much money as possible from tourists, anyone unlucky enough not to have a "family" Tartan can choose from a myriad of different "Regional" or heritage/flower of/heather of/ etc etc.

Im not denigrating regional Tartans so long as people are aware they are a fairly recent design, in fact I have a "flower of Scotland" 8 yard because I like the colours and I like the connection to our national anthem.

The more people know about Tartans and the origin of the designs then the more that people will apreciate how special they are , not because they are old but because of what they stand for.

[Luke MacGillie]

Just in case you're all wondering what made the kilt get longer...

Many people have the conception that it was worn mid-thigh, but paintings from that area seem to place it more at an inch above the knee, so not so mini-skirt-like. Anyway, Queen Victoria once ruled that it was uncouth to show knee in the kilt, so they were lengthened to cover the knee. Pretty simple. And Bob's Your Uncle.

You should check out both the Muller woodcuts of the 43d on campaign in the 1740s and also the images that accompany Grant's 1757 Highland Military Discipline (Available on ebay all the time). This was way before Victoria, and some(Grant's) are very important as they show the wear of the kilt by the only folks who could leagally wear Highland Dress (the military)