A question on lightweight kilts......

[beerbecue]

I have been pondering the homespun Ulster, but it won't make the same sort of kilt as a worsted fabric.

I think they are busy updating/inventory or somesuch, as my first email was answered promptly, but my second hasn't. Linda did mention something about updating the site......

[Blu (Ontario)]

Thanks everyone for all the great feedback!

I called the store today about upgrading my order and found out to my surprise that the kilt I ordered saturday is already in the works. As it turns out, they faxed the order to Scotland saturday night and the cloth was cut and set in the queue by monday morning. I should have the finished kilt back from Scotland in 6 to 7 weeks. (Perhaps just in time for Phil's pub night?)

I'm more optimistic now than I was. As it turns out, the cloth is more 12oz than 11. They had a sample kilt in the store and it was definitely a bit lighter than I'm used to but nicely made. I also had a look at some 4yard lightweights they had in the store... they were very light with very shallow pleats... one would be far better off going with poly-vis methinks.

Cheers,

blu

[Mike n NC]

Blu, I have pictures of a light wool kilt in Confederate Memorial Tartan in my gallery. Pictures aren't that great but the kilt sure is.
Rocky at USAK made it up for me and I love it. Living in the south it shoud make a great year round kilt, for you it may be a 3 season kilt but I really think you will like it once you wear it.

Oh, the pleats really are straight, that is my wife's hands spreading it that caused it to look that way on the hanger.

Mike

[Riverkilt]

I bought my Kathy's Kilt Macdonald of the Isles tank in 11 oz because its friggin' HOT in Arizona. It came in beautiful. Hangs well, isn't too light. I really like it. Haven't had it for the Arizona summer yet.

Kathy was trained in Scotland so wasn't worried even with it being an 11oz deal

Ron

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Here is my two pence.

A light weight cloth (10 to 11 oz worsted wool) makes a fine looking 8 yard kilt, if properly tailored. Nothing wrong with it, per se.

But my personal preference, and the preference of most all regular kilt wearers I know, is for a heavier weight kilt.

If the tartan you want is only available in the light weight, or the light weight is all you can afford, go for it. But if your chosen tartan is also available in a medium or heavy weight, and you can afford it, it is well worth the money to go up.

That being said, I would not recommend anyone get a four yard kilt in a light weight cloth. With the shallower pleats, it really looses a lot. Makes for a fine women's skirt, but a lousy looking man's kilt.

Aye,
Matt

PS - We have the Maple Leaf tartan available in 10 oz, 11 oz, 13 oz, and 16 oz. So no limitations there. See http://www.district-tartans.com

[Thistle Stop]

I've oft admired both Stewart black and Braveheart Warrior tartans but I don't seem to be able to find information on them. Are either of them considered "open"? Perhaps my concerns are unfounded. Any and all advice here is much appreciated.

Cheers!

blu

Hi Blu,

Even by purists and tartan snobs, the Royal Stewart tartan and its variations (including the Stewart Black) are considered generic tartans anyone may wear.

Braveheart Warrior was designed by Michael King of Philip King Tailoring Ltd, Aberdeen, Scotland. It was originally designed for Ronnie Watt, an 8th Dan in martial arts representing Scotland, whose ring title was Braveheart Warrior. It has been adopted as the official tartan of the Scottish Shotokan Centre and as the Watt tartan. The design has no direct connection with the Braveheart film. As far as I know, there's no copyright or other kind of restriction on the tartan, so I'd say it's also up for grabs by anyone who likes it.

Really, you should feel free to wear any tartan you like, unless it was registered with a restriction, in which case the weaving mills will not produce it for you anyway (unless it's a proprietary sett the mill owns the rights to, that is).

I admire your desire to know all you can about tartan. It's an endlessly fascinating subject -- to me, at least!

Cheers,

Cyndi

[Thistle Stop]

Blu, I've had my eye on the Braveheart tartan too, I know our sponsor The Celtic Croft sells them, but I've not had a reply yet to my emails about the tartan.

Graham, Blu, and anyone -- Be aware that 'Braveheart' and 'Braveheart Warrior' are different tartans. The Braveheart tartan was woven for the Mel Gibson film by Gordon Cavell of Islay Woollen Mill. As I said in a previous post, Braveheart Warrior was designed by Michael King of Philip King Tailoring Ltd, Aberdeen. It was originally designed for Ronnie Watt, a martial artist whose ring title was Braveheart Warrior. It has been adopted as the official tartan of the Scottish Shotokan Centre and as the Watt tartan, and has no direct connection with the Braveheart film. The two tartans look different and are unrelated to one another. Michael King also designed Braveheart Hunting and Braveheart Dress setts, but these have never been in production.

Cheers,

Cyndi

[Blu (Ontario)]

... Even by purists and tartan snobs, the Royal Stewart tartan and its variations (including the Stewart Black) are considered generic tartans anyone may wear. Cyndi

Thanx, Cyndi...

Your insight is appreciated. You know... If I had lots of money, I have a kilt made in every tartan. But I'm not rich so I must select with a bit of forthought. Just as Jimmy, Tod, and others have professed for some time now, I agree it's important to know a bit about the tartan you might wear. Each tidbit adds to the knowledge database. Thanks for the info.

blu

[macwilkin]

Even by purists and tartan snobs, the Royal Stewart tartan and its variations (including the Stewart Black) are considered generic tartans anyone may wear.

Point of Clarification: The Royal Stuart tartan is an de facto "open" or "generic" tartan. Technically, the Royal Stuart is a "Royal" tartan, and is worn with the permission of the monarch by pipers in several Scottish regiments, including the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, the King's Own Scottish Borderers, the Royal Scots and the Royal Highland Regiment (The Black Watch).

From the RSDG's web site:

The late King George VI took a great interest in the Pipes and Drums, granting them the privilege of wearing the Royal Stuart tartan

From the MOD's Royal Scots web site:

The Regimental tartan is Hunting Stuart (left, and stylised in the page margin) which is worn by all ranks except Pipers who wear the Sovereign's personal tartan, Royal Stuart (right); an honour granted by King George V to mark the tercentenary of the Regiment in 1933.

Finally, from the STA's web site:

Tradition has it that those who have no tartan of their own can wear the Black Watch (The Universal or Government Tartan) or the Hunting Stewart, but not the Royal Stewart without the express authority of the Queen. However, commercialisation in recent times has rather blurred this. The one tartan which cannot be worn by anyone unless the Queen's permission has been granted is the Balmoral.

Now, before I upset anyone who wears Royal Stuart, I am, by no means advocating that it be a "restricted" tartan and can no longer be worn by anyone -- on the contrary. But, following the mantra of "Know your tartan", I felt that it should be explained that at one time, it was not an "open" tartan, just as the Government sett (the official name of the Black Watch) was not open either. Times have changed, and tartan evolves, just like the kilt has. But, one must know where they have come from to know where they are going, or as the Lakota say, "A people without history is like the wind in the Buffalo grass."

Being a reference librarian, I just I had to supply some background information on the Royal Stuart. :mrgreen:

Slainte!

Todd

[Thistle Stop]

Todd, you're absolutely right. Thanks for bringing all the sources into the discussion!

Cheers,

Cyndi