A Definition of the Term, T R A D I T I O N A L

[thescot]

I, too, like this forum for obvious reasons. As to the "definition" of traditional, I find that I am the final arbiter on the matter.

I would like to quote Justice Potter Stewart in regards to what I consider non-traditional attire:

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so.
But I know it when I see it, and the [style] involved in this case is not that."

Stewart was, of course, speaking of pronography in a film, and I merely replaced motion picture with the word, style.

For me, a good visual reference would be the photos from the early 1900s compared to Jock Scot's photo of himself asking about Victorian sensibilites. Note that there is almost no discernable difference other than shade of color in the kilt. (OK, maybe the fixed collar, but in the photo even that's hard to see.)

As Matt pointed out, it's the overall ensemble that counts. So, if you want to know if it's traditional, just ask me, and I'll tell you.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I would conjecture that these woman may be required by profession or position to be elegant during the week and they may want to be a little racy on the weekend.

If everyone were a Lord or Lady who would fetch the Food and drinks?

Different strokes different folks.

I find it inconceivable that there could be that many wannabe tartan scullery maids, given the huge number of Victoria's Secret stores versus the relative scarcity of "Scullery Drudge R Us" shops.

[Nighthawk]

One question I have- did Victorian Highlanders working the field in their one and only kilt do it in formalwear? If not... then why is casual wear not acceptable as "traditional"? I can't see Angus MacFarmer wearing his Arylle when he was slaughtering his sheep- or am I mistaken that the Highlanders were so poor that they couldn't afford Victorian fineries to use as day to day wear? I've been reading this thread trying to see where the day to day wear of the traditional Highlander comes in, but it hasn't been mentioned. One thing we sometimes forget- and this is also from the perspective of someone involved in historical reenactment- is that the paintings and books and guidlines we go by for these things are all of people of higher society. Mr MacFarmer wouldn't have had his portrait painted, but that doesn't mean his more casual style didn't exist or is a less valid srtyle.

On the other hand, I do insist on dressing as the circumstances require- I will dress as others define tradition for things like weddings and Burns Suppers and such, so I do appreciate this forum and the information presented here- it will be very useful for those higher social occasions.

[Dall_Piobaire]

Just my two cents on this; it's not discussed because the topic of discussion is the kilted attire. Although I have read accounts of men working in forges, in kilts, and that is how the present day traditional kilt came to be, I am sure there were all sorts of attire, just as there is today.

These days we may wear a suit to a wedding, funeral, gathering and such, I am sure the same can be said of that time. I have also read tht the whole stylized "ideal" was a tradition started by the well to do, because of the Queen's fancy for all things Scottish.

My other quandry is and concerns all the portraits, and sketches. Sitting for a portrait in those days was a huge deal! wouldn't one trot out every bit of the finest stuff he had, to immortalize himself as a grand fop? Wouldn't sketches, and such, romantize and idealize, the "ideal" highland look. Like a fashion model today? But, who really dresses like that!

Brian's pics are excellent examples of reality, in a historical sense anyway!

[bear]

This may surprise a lot of you buy I think this is a wonderful area! It should cut down on the style disruptions in other threads and honestly, there SHOULD be a section for traditional kilts.
I'm not against traditional kilts. I love 'em! I'm just against ONLY traditionally worn kilts.
That said, let's get down to traditional kilts.
I'm making an 8 yard MacDonald tartan kilt for myself, (between the customer's kilts), so I'll have something to wear with my Argyll jacket. (Another surprise ... I only have a few kilts I wear and they're all higher waisted.)
It has 33 pleats about 5/8" wide and several inches deep. I just did the steeking and lining the other day and put it aside for a while to get back to other's kilts.
My kilt has 2 fringed edges on the outer apron and is poly viscose. In the eyes of a traditionalist, does this disqualify it from being a traditional kilt?

[macwilkin]

One question I have- did Victorian Highlanders working the field in their one and only kilt do it in formalwear? If not... then why is casual wear not acceptable as "traditional"? I can't see Angus MacFarmer wearing his Arylle when he was slaughtering his sheep- or am I mistaken that the Highlanders were so poor that they couldn't afford Victorian fineries to use as day to day wear? I've been reading this thread trying to see where the day to day wear of the traditional Highlander comes in, but it hasn't been mentioned. One thing we sometimes forget- and this is also from the perspective of someone involved in historical reenactment- is that the paintings and books and guidlines we go by for these things are all of people of higher society. Mr MacFarmer wouldn't have had his portrait painted, but that doesn't mean his more casual style didn't exist or is a less valid srtyle.

On the other hand, I do insist on dressing as the circumstances require- I will dress as others define tradition for things like weddings and Burns Suppers and such, so I do appreciate this forum and the information presented here- it will be very useful for those higher social occasions.

Matt has a fantastic article on his blog illustrating "working kilts" in the 19th century, but I can't find at the moment.

T.

[dfmacliam]

That's the point many have made in this thread... There is no one way to define tradition.. It was different through the different classes.. but the essentials was basically the same, the quality of the items were different for obvious reasons.. A farmer may not have worn a horsehair sporran, but he might have a quality leather one..

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

One question I have- did Victorian Highlanders working the field in their one and only kilt do it in formalwear? If not... then why is casual wear not acceptable as "traditional"? I can't see Angus MacFarmer wearing his Arylle when he was slaughtering his sheep- or am I mistaken that the Highlanders were so poor that they couldn't afford Victorian fineries to use as day to day wear? I've been reading this thread trying to see where the day to day wear of the traditional Highlander comes in, but it hasn't been mentioned. One thing we sometimes forget- and this is also from the perspective of someone involved in historical reenactment- is that the paintings and books and guidlines we go by for these things are all of people of higher society. Mr MacFarmer wouldn't have had his portrait painted, but that doesn't mean his more casual style didn't exist or is a less valid srtyle. (emphasis added by MoR)

On the other hand, I do insist on dressing as the circumstances require- I will dress as others define tradition for things like weddings and Burns Suppers and such, so I do appreciate this forum and the information presented here- it will be very useful for those higher social occasions.

Certainly in the case of Scottish painting and portraiture there are any number of examples of "the common folk" very accurately depicted. "A Highland Wedding" which is on view in the Historical Attire forum being one, of many examples. Certainly, beginning in the 1830s and with the introduction of photography, the mode of dress of the working class Highlanders was captured for posterity.

"How they dressed at labour" is an interesting question-- and the answer depends on several things. What were they doing, and when were they doing it? In other words, what is the historical context? An Argyll-shire plowman in 1740 or a Highland shoe maker in 1825? Work clothes would, and did, vary enormously from job to job and from place to place. By the very nature of their being both utilitarian and transient in nature work clothes never became traditional in the same way that a style of jacket or hat, both widely worn, would come to be regarded as traditional Highland attire.

What your question fails to take into consideration is that society used to be far more formal than it is today. Even the most humble farmer would have had his "Sunday best", and would have worn it when not engaged in labouring in the field. Casual, as we define it today (tee shirt, baseball cap, kilt) didn't exist until quite recently, and the very concept of "casual" -- as you might define it-- would have probably offended Mr. MacFarmer's sense of dignity. He might be a plowman, but he saw himself as being as much of a gentleman as the Laird whose land he tilled.

Since "casual" didn't exist until recently, I suppose that's why traditionalists tend to focus on the "Sunday best" aspect of Highland attire.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

This may surprise a lot of you buy I think this is a wonderful area! It should cut down on the style disruptions in other threads and honestly, there SHOULD be a section for traditional kilts.
I'm not against traditional kilts. I love 'em! I'm just against ONLY traditionally worn kilts.
That said, let's get down to traditional kilts.
I'm making an 8 yard MacDonald tartan kilt for myself, (between the customer's kilts), so I'll have something to wear with my Argyll jacket. (Another surprise ... I only have a few kilts I wear and they're all higher waisted.)
It has 33 pleats about 5/8" wide and several inches deep. I just did the steeking and lining the other day and put it aside for a while to get back to other's kilts.
My kilt has 2 fringed edges on the outer apron and is poly viscose. In the eyes of a traditionalist, does this disqualify it from being a traditional kilt?

Sounds pretty traditional to me... I'm not a fan of man-made fabrics, but unless you were making the kilt out of Naugahyde, I'd probably give it the Auld Crabbit seal of approval. When I was a young man living in Edinburgh my kiltmaker, Mr. Lannon, used to double fringe the right hand edge of the top apron on of all the kilts he made. Sadly these became hand-me-downs as I out grew them, but I always liked the look of the double fringe.

[thescot]

. . .Even the most humble farmer would have had his "Sunday best", and would have worn it when not engaged in labouring in the field. Casual, as we define it today (tee shirt, baseball cap, kilt) didn't exist until quite recently, and the very concept of "casual" -- as you might define it-- would have probably offended Mr. MacFarmer's sense of dignity. He might be a plowman, but he saw himself as being as much of a gentleman as the Laird whose land he tilled.

Since "casual" didn't exist until recently, I suppose that's why traditionalists tend to focus on the "Sunday best" aspect of Highland attire.

Good point--as usual, MacMillan. My grandfather was a railroad engineer from the days of shovelling coal into the firebox, and you can imagine that it was not "clean" work. Blue collars were worn for a reason.

But on Sunday, in his Hickey Freeman or Hart Schafner & Marx suit, he was indistinguishable from the local bankers and lawyers. In fact, "casual" was not even a consideration since, until very recently, there was little time for anything but work, sleep, and church. As a boy, when I went to town with my grandfather, we always donned suits and ties and wore fedoras! (Yes, I had my own fedora at age 6 from a haberdashery.) And we wouldn't have even considered getting onto a train or plane without dressing up until the 1970s. I recall watching a farmer see his son off--probably to Viet Nam--in the 1960s wearing his best starched pair of overalls with a starched dress shirt and tie. Propriety in dress!

I doubt seriously that many--if any--workmen of the 1800s wore kilts at all since it was probably only King George IV's visit that rekindled any desire to wear one, and that desire was restricted to the monied classes. At least no one in the lowlands would have been wearing kilts I think.

But then, I was a very little boy in the 1800s and my memory is not that good, so don't quote me!