X Marks the Scot - An on-line community of kilt wearers.

   X Marks Partners - (Go to the Partners Dedicated Forums )
USA Kilts website Celtic Croft website Celtic Corner website Houston Kiltmakers

User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 38

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    25th March 08
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    2,165
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by OC Richard View Post
    I also wore a Black Watch kilt because it didn't stand out as much as brighter tartans. Many gigging pipers today are wearing black-on-dark grey tartans and even all-black kilts for wedding and funeral use.
    Yes, and I've never understood why.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    5th September 05
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,144
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess that I'll always think that the Prince Charley looks a little too "military" for my personal taste...and the Montrose, Sheriffmuir, et al look even more "military". Again, it's personal taste but if it's up to me, I try to tone it down and "civilianize" the look as much as I can.

    But how much of these outfits that are considered traditional are actually firmly based on authentic traditions and how much of them are based on those sort of compromises that have been made to make it easier on clothing manufacturers and formalwear rental agencies? I ask this question with all candor here and am interested in hearing from the experts. I base the question on a previous discussion where it was postulated that the custom of wearing of white or ivory kilt hose with formal attire was introduced by rental companies so that they only had to stock one color of hose thereby cutting their investment in inventory down.

    As an example: epaulets. I understand that epaulets are based on a feature of earlier military uniforms that protected the shoulders from blows. An incoming sabre attack to the shoulders at a Burns Supper is probably pretty unlikely, though and probably has been fairly unlikely for the past hundred years or so. Why retain the epaulet? I can understand including it as part of a military uniform to pay homage to the history of the service but when did it get adopted as part of the outfit for civilians? Was there some point in history where it was fashionable for civilians to adopt aspects of military dress into their wardrobes and it just managed to stick and is kept because "that's the way it always was"?

    I'm certainly not arguing with anybody's taste in clothing or sense of maintaining tradition but I'm just curious about how what I would see as the distinction between military and civilian clothing got blurred over the years.

    Best

    AA

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.0