Interesting email from an Irish fellow about Irish kilts.

[O'Callaghan]

I wonder if the individual who wrote the original email moved back or has a relative with similar views?

By way of explanation, the other day I received my semi-annual copy of the "The Ulster-Scot", a publication of the Ulster-Scots Agency and some amadán wrote in the following letter:

ULSTER-SCOTS AND THE KILT

Dear Sir,
While contributors to your paper are at pain to emphasise that Ulster-Scots folk are of non-Gaelic Anglo-Saxon decent, [?!] why do such contributors, and present generation Ulster-Scots in general, here and in the wider colonial diaspora, transvesticise themselves by adopting the 19th century Victorian parody of Gaelic highland dress at Ulster-Scots functions.
Whereas tartan fetishism has become the stylised national dress in Scotland where there is no longer any distinction between Lowlander and Highlander, Scot and Gael, it is incongruous and hypocritical for Ulster-Scots to flaunt it as a symbol to differentiate themselves from the Gaelic, Norse, Norman, English, etc.. etc populations of Ulster and Ireland.
The wearing of formalised highland dress by diaspora Scots should only be valid for those whose ancestors emigrated from Scotland after the date when such dress was invented in the Victorian era.
If today's Ulster-Scots need an identifying form of "national" dress it should be the garb worn by their early 17th century lowland Scots ancestors.

D. Golden, A Scot in Ulster
Strabane

All I can say is "WOW!"
I don't even know where to begin with this one, and I think I'll leave it to others to dissect. However let me say that for the past 4 or 5 years I've been reading this paper, and during that time I have never seen any contributors take pains to emphasise that Ulster-Scots folk are of non-Gaelic Anglo-Saxon decent. Rather I've seen them emphasis both the Lowland & Highland roots of the Ulster-Scots.
As for his thoughts on wearing the kilt....whew!!
I don't understand people sometimes.
Like I said, he's either the first fool, moved back to North Ireland, or fell out of the same tree!!

Lowland Scots are largely Anglo-Saxon, and Ulster Scots (which Americans call Scotch Irish, although more properly that should be Scots Irish) are mostly the descendants of Lowland Scots, hence yes, mostly Anglo-Saxon. Notice I do say mostly, not entirely. It also has to be admitted that the Ulster Scots settled in Northern Ireland before the Lowland Scots adopted the kilt from the Highlanders. All that is true.

That said, if they want to wear tartan kilts to emphasize their Scottish roots, it's churlish to be so pedantic as to say they shouldn't. Only reenactors should have to concern themselves with avoiding anachronisms, nobody else should worry about it.

However, if they are doing it to distinguish themselves from Irish people who aren't Ulster Scots, such as those who are Gaels, then they should consider that the Irish kilt is hardly any more recent than the lowlanders adoption of the kilt. Not five minutes ago in another thread I read a comment that "the Irish never wore kilts". Never is a long time. If you accepted that as true, which I don't, then you would also have to accept that the Lowland Scots never wore kilts. Neither statement is quite true, although the kilt certainly originated in the Highlands, and the wearing of kilts by Lowland Scots and Irish Gaels, let alone Ulster Scots, doesn't go back to time immemorial.

IOW, I don't see why they shouldn't do it, but I don't think it marks the difference that they intend by it, or that they even have a much greater claim to the kilt than the "other side".