My first Kilt article.

[Father Bill]

About the clerical collar, I'd assumed (not knowing anything about it) that it was simply a vestige of wearing a white shirt or neckcloth under an ordinary stand collar (what nowadays we call a Nehru collar) on a black coat.

Precisely. Those who were literate extended their shirt through a neck-cloth similar to the ones that mount a jabot on the fancier versions. It was a sign of privilege and garnered a certain amount of respect in a generally illiterate society. The shirt itself would be either a buttoned one or a single piece pulled over the head as a blouse. The black notch that clergy wear was orginally a separate garment - either a cassock (which itself is a form of tunic) or more recently a vest with such a collar meant to mimic the cassock.

The idea of a shirt on backwards came because celluloid collars which were popular about a century ago could have been put on backwards to mimic clerical wear, although usually when it is mentioned it's just an old and worn out joke - about that century old.

In recent times it has morphed into something new that again mimics the more recent versions: a shirt buttoned up the front (although usually the buttons are concealed with a placket) with a sewn down collar that makes a tube opening on either side of the neck. Into that, a white nylon strip is inserted to the black cloth tube on either side, giving a visual appearance similar to the original concept of a white shirt with tied neckband under a cassock or vest. In fact, it's what I'm wearing right now as I prepare to celebrate this morning's mass.

As an interesting side-note, some cassocks are made with the tubes just inside the stand-up collar. In that way, clergy in very hot climates can wear a cassock with very little (or I suppose, nothing!) underneath it, if it is the practice in their area to wear the cassock as street-wear which, technically, it is and always has been (thus the black stand-up collar with the notch). If for example, one were to walk about in downtown Paris, one might still encounter priests wearing the cassock on the street as I did only a few years ago.

Another interesting observation on the notch - Monks and Friars in some traditions wear exactly the same white neckband protruding about an eighth of an inch above a black collar that goes all around... but with no notch.

[Mel1721L]

I don't know where you got that particular piece of nonsense, but a white band of cloth tied around the neck was originally an indication that the wearer was literate back when that was a rare event. The "mandarin style" notched collar had another provenance entirely, but the combined look as a whole is maintained today only by clergy.

As an interesting side note that the words "clergy," "cleric," and "clerk" are all actually variations and derivations from the same root, a "clerk" being someone who can read and write. Since "clark" is another version of that, I suspect that it is part of the origin of clergy wearing the same tartan as clan "Clark/Clarke".

I wish I could find the source, but it's something I've read in a couple of different books on Shamanism. The clerk or clerical link is logical though.

[Father Bill]

Well, be cautious. A lot of writing these days that claims to be ancient shamanism, wiccan, druidism, etc. is just stuff that folks have cooked up and tried to dress in ancient clothing. The vast majority of it is Internet style hooey.

[Mel1721L]

Well, be cautious. A lot of writing these days that claims to be ancient shamanism, wiccan, druidism, etc. is just stuff that folks have cooked up and tried to dress in ancient clothing. The vast majority of it is Internet style hooey.

Here is a link to the practice of one particular people who have the tradition of doing things backwards: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heyoka However I can't recall where I read it now, it was a long time ago. I don't want to get into a religious discussion here though, as I'll end up getting banned under S5.

[BCAC]

Here is a link to the practice of one particular people who have the tradition of doing things backwards: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heyoka However I can't recall where I read it now, it was a long time ago. I don't want to get into a religious discussion here though, as I'll end up getting banned under S5.

Don't forget that wikipedia is not a very sure source because absolutely anyone (you, or even me included) can edit the page and put in any old baloney that we would like to publish. Just because it's published doesn't make it right.

[Father Bill]

Don't forget that wikipedia is not a very sure source because absolutely anyone (you, or even me included) can edit the page and put in any old baloney that we would like to publish. Just because it's published doesn't make it right.

...which is exactly what I'm talking about when I refer to peer-reviewed articles published in respected journals. Anything less starts to open the door to nonsense.

[corbmonster]

I liked your article Graham. Very well thought out and logical.

[OC Richard]

...peer-reviewed articles published in respected journals. Anything less starts to open the door to nonsense.

And there's plenty of nonsense published in those journals, too!

In two different subjects I got in deep enough (though a layman) to find two major opposing viewpoints, each supported by at least one eminent scholar, each scholar having had surrounded himself with an army of yes-men sycophantic toadies, the scholars and toadies slinging mud at each other in the most respected scholarly journals in the field, the attacks often being ad hominem juvenile name-calling.

The modus operandi is to trumpet the evidence that supports your viewpoint, and try to marginalize evidence to the contrary by 1) twisting it to fit your pet theory 2) casting dispersions on the methodology used in acquiring it 3) slinging mud at the scholars who support it (all of this done in highfaluting pompous condescending sneering obfuscating language).

[Hawk]

I know you've heard it from the others that have commented on your article, but not from this ole long-haired traditional indigenous man.

Graham, congrats on your article. Well said, simple and to the point. I, along with Father Bill, were exasperated with the narrow mindedness of Mr Stewarts original article, and I for one am glad you addressed it as you did. Again - Well done....

Hawk

[Father Bill]

Gee, Richard; how do you really feel?