Ancient and Archaeology聽 permalink
The ancient Kilts?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.聽
Posted by RyanO (U8918008) on Sunday, 1st March 2009
Ireland bet England and that of course is the important thing.
But one thing that caught my attention was the drummers and in particular their kilts. Now it was all about optics and things 鈥榳hich bring us (Irish nationalists and unionists) together鈥, and that鈥檚 all very well and good. No point in letting reality get in the way of a good idea, but the reality is that the kilt has about as much relevance to Ireland as the Indian elephant, both good yokes in their own way but irrelevant.
The kilt was invented by a Scottish laird in the 18th century, its history is best set out in McClintocks 鈥榦ld Irish and highland dress鈥. Anywho, it was adopted by the British army for its 鈥榮cottish鈥 regiments and because of the ancient links between Ireland and Scotland, Irish regiments were also given a kilt. Even nationalists like Pearse accepted the kilt for no better reason than it was a good notion. Pipe bands of course followed suit and popularised this garment.
Now I hate to spoil the party etc but I think its apt to call time on the 鈥業rish kilt鈥 (I would also do away with the Scottish one, but that鈥檚 another story). There was no Irish kilt and there is no reason to invent one now.
Now what the drummers should have worn instead is鈥r煤is, the garment worn in Scotland and Ireland and the word which gave rise to the modern term 鈥榯rousers鈥. There are examples in the national museum, of which I particularly like the tartan example.
Tr煤is are authentic, ancient and not half as draughty
-
Message 2
Posted by LavenderBlueSky (U13842100) on Sunday, 1st March 2009
Thanks for the laugh. Irish Kilts, indeed!
But would you believe that some Welsh sites are selling Welsh kilts? Whatever next! -
Message 3
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
They probably caught on because they were seen as being wild and suitably celtic and wearing them gave people the excuse to play the bag pipes.
Given the weather we get in this part of the world their a damn silly idea, I'd have thought it would have been a better idea to select the national costume from anything made of Gortex that provides 100% coverage from the rain. -
Message 4
Posted by RyanO (U8918008) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
鈥榩robably caught on because they were seen as being wild and suitably celtic and wearing them gave people the excuse to play the bag pipes鈥
Ah well now lets not confuse the issue here, bagpipes are as valid a tradition in Ireland as they are in Scotland. In fact they are a European wide instrument. -
Message 5
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
Now I hate to spoil the party etc but I think its apt to call time on the 鈥業rish kilt鈥 (I would also do away with the Scottish one, but that鈥檚 another story). There was no Irish kilt and there is no reason to invent one now. 聽
As an occasional kilt-wearer I'd be disappointed by the loss of the Scottish kilt. -
Message 6
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:09 GMT, in reply to cloudyj in message 5
As an occasional kilt-wearer I'd be disappointed by the loss of the Scottish kilt.聽
Especially if it happened in public!
-
Message 7
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
Funnily enough, i've just been looking through a book on the developments of swords one of the illustrations was an elizabeathen? print of a group of irish mercenaries. they seem to be wearing a sort of knee length tunic?
May be its the same sort of thing as the scottish kilt developing from the original plaid? The Irish kilt is a sort of vestigal remnant of the original.
As for bagpipes. They might well have a valid european wide tradition. I just dont like the sound of them. To me its like some one slowly skinning a tax man in the next room. -
Message 8
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:49 GMT, in reply to backtothedarkplace (dan)Free Sean! in message 7
To me its like some one slowly skinning a tax man in the next room聽
Are you a tax man, then, bttdp, because many people would consider that a pleasurable sound!
I like bagpipes, provided that they're played properly. I like the hurdy-gurdy, too, but no-one except re-enactors and music historians seem to play it any more. It's the national instrument of the Channel Islands, you know, but I only know of one Islander who plays it (not counting the automoton in the Maritime Museum). -
Message 9
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 2nd March 2009
Are you a tax man, then, bttdp, because many people would consider that a pleasurable sound!聽
God No!!
its jsut I cant find a single element in it that I like? I've tried. I can appreceate it takes years of devoted and constant training to acheive the level of skill. but I cant understand why they want to do it?
It drones. it whines, it whistles, it shreiks. Some times it seems to be doing all four at once. Thats just one of them. if you really want to experience true horror look for the words Massed Pipes, or Pipes and Drums. -
Message 10
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 3rd March 2009
But seriously.
First of all I am not an expert on historical costume/clothing.
But after a bit of reasearch last night I'm pretty much of the opinion that the OP as that the Modern Irish kilt is a straight rip of of the Scottish kilt.
But having said that, there may be some basis for a kilt type garment in Ireland.
if you look at the modern scottish kilt its a cut down version of the Plaid, which was ten to fifteen foot of woollen cloth wrapped arround the body and acted as a sort of combined coat cum skirt cum tent. It was worn over a sort of shirt cum tunic.
Going on the stuff I was able to find last night the same sort of arrangenment was worn in ireland but with more emphasis on the tunic/shirt then the woollen wrapper.
I am ignoring patterns as they seem to have been invented in the 1830's.
Now, why the kilt. As was said earlier you'd have thought trousers whould have been a better idea and I agreed with it but i now think I was wrong, and it took me a little while to figure it out.
If your walking through rough country in the rain if your wearing trousers they quite quickly get wet and stay that way from the rain coming off the grass and heather. Even a short shower will see you wet and staying that way for most of the day. However, bare legs will dry quite quickly.
In Scotland the Plaid was worn pretty much only in the highlands by a people who spent most of their lives up on the hills chasing cows and sheep about. Bare legs might have been preferable to them? certainly it rains often enough in Scotland that permanatly wearing a garment that exposes your legs might be a good idea rather than changing your clothes with the weather.
From the little bit I know about early Irish history the same sort of circumstances apply its primarily agricultural with an emphasis towards live stock and the weather is pretty much the same.
In England and southern scotland the clothes seem to have been trousers and a shirt/tunic. could this be because the effects of arable farming on the landscape mean that the undergrowth is cut back to a level that wet legs are less likely? IMO it could be a factor. -
Message 11
Posted by MB (U177470) on Tuesday, 3rd March 2009
I would have thought many cultures wore wrapped around piece of cloth and many still do. The original kilt does not seem much different to what is worn in many different countries except that different materials are used depending on climate and availability.
The fashion of kilts with clan tartans is relatively recent and I think generally accepted as coming from the British army Highland regiments. -
Message 12
Posted by Jak (U1158529) on Wednesday, 4th March 2009
The kilt was invented by a Scottish laird in the 18th century ...聽
Er, not quite. The present-day short kilt was 'invented' by Thomas Rawlinson, a Quaker from Lancashire, who was in charge of the Backbarrow Company's ironworks at Invergarry, Inverness-shire, from 1727 until about 1735.
Having people working in a foundry while wearing 12 yards of baggy plaid - their entire bedding - must have seemed awkward and dangerous, so Rawlinson suggested cutting the top bulky bit off. Simple.
(I would also do away with the Scottish one, but that鈥檚 another story). There was no Irish kilt and there is no reason to invent one now.聽
RyanO - you can safely blame the English, again.
-
Message 13
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Wednesday, 4th March 2009
I did not know that all those clan-patterns were as recent as 19th century! I thought these were at least since 16th century or something!
Actually till late medieval times the kilt and its variations was possibly even more widespread than trousers. My opinion is that it was mainly due to the western Europeans taking it to the ships and seafaring that trousers prevailed as a fashion as power for Europeans stemmed then from the seas. However, earlier on, trousers were considered as a sign of lack of fashion and often of relative backwardness. Among other Europeans that continued to use the kilt, were the Balcanic people (in various forms) out of which the most well known is the Greek "tsolias", one variation of which tourists see in Athens outside the parliament guarding the monument of the uknown soldier. The truth is that these "tsoliades" (plural of tsolias) wear uniforms inspired by the "euzonoi" regiments that fought in WWI wearing these uniforms! It really sounds funny, and an English friend of mine had once asked me "how is it possible to dress your soldier so ridiculously - they must had been embarassed if sent to fight in that"... well in fact the "euzonoi" not only were embarassed but they actually had been the country's first real special forces, had huge success in WWI and their uniform was a matter of pride!
In fact the euzonoi's 'foustanella" (kilt) was not the foustanella worn by Peloponesian "kleftes" (bandits) of 1821 which was considerably longer but actually was the one worn by Macedonian fighters who fought against the Bulgarian onslaught. The fact that any "zone" (i.e. frontier) had to be above Macedonia if Greece ever wanted to be justified in calling itself Greece, meant that the "euzonoi" - protectors of frontiers got their uniform inspired by the Macedonian heros. Thus this Greek kilt is not so ancient as people think, though the similarity with very ancient and medieval ones is there...at the end a kilt cannot be radically different from another kilt... -
Message 14
Posted by RyanO (U8918008) on Sunday, 8th March 2009
鈥榟aving said that, there may be some basis for a kilt type garment in Ireland. if you look at the modern scottish kilt its a cut down version of the Plaid, which was ten to fifteen foot of woollen cloth wrapped arround the body and acted as a sort of combined coat cum skirt cum tent. It was worn over a sort of shirt cum tunic鈥
Eh, there may have been lots of things we don鈥檛 know about but the reality is there is no evidence for Irish kilt.
鈥楪oing on the stuff I was able to find last night the same sort of arrangenment was worn in ireland but with more emphasis on the tunic/shirt then the woollen wrapper.鈥
Going on that evidence, there was no kilt and none of the above gives credence to an Irish kilt. We have to be clear about this, either you have evidence of a kilt or you have not: and you have not.
鈥業f your walking through rough country in the rain if your wearing trousers they quite quickly get wet and stay that way from the rain coming off the grass and heather. Even a short shower will see you wet and staying that way for most of the day. However, bare legs will dry quite quickly鈥
This is not evidence of any sort, it is conjecture. It is also evidence for not wearing any clothes in Scotland in case they get wet. Your conjecture is comical, I presume you intent it as such. Not all Scottish hills are covered in heather and farm animals need grasslands more so than heather. In any case Ireland is much less heather covered and much more grassland covered.
These were fashions born of both necessity and of style. Your conjecture is interesting but does nothing to further knowledge of whether an Irish kilt existed or not. There is no such evidence but there is ample evidence for tr煤is. -
Message 15
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Sunday, 8th March 2009
This is a picture of mercenaries at Stettin in 1631,might be the picture BTTDP mentions;
"In such garments the 800 Irishmen go around Stettin"
Sometimes referred to as Gaelic speaking Highlanders with Mckay's regiment,Osprey identify them as soldiers of Alexander Hamilton's mixed Irish /Scottish regiment which arrived in Stettin in August 1631 as part of the Marquis of Hamilton's expedition. -
Message 16
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 9th March 2009
HiTrike,
yep, similar to the figure on the far right. only the print I was looking at left no reqal doubt that the subject was irish and on this one I think theres a chance that he could be scottish. Very similar though but the one I found seemed to have less bulk in the actual kilt material. -
Message 17
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 9th March 2009
Hi RyanO
I did say that I thought the current modern Irish kilt was a copy of the modern Scottish one.
What I found out afterwards was though that there was a similarity in dress between parts of scotland and parts of ireland. and that while the modern irish kilt is a straight copy I couldnt rule out the fact that their might be a link back to an Irish garment which looked similar to the ancestor of the modern Scottish kilt and might have been taken as the starting point for the adoption of the kilt in ireland.
For a start it seems to me that adopting an item of national dress without there being even a faint link to Irish culture does seem to be a strange thing to do.
Walking in rough terrain in trousers.
Its not conjecture, its personal experience. In rough country, ie long grass and heather then, given that you havent got any water proof leggings or gaiters to put on. You really are are better off in shorts. You look fairly daft but in the long run your drier. -
Message 18
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Monday, 9th March 2009
Your print came from J. F. Campbell鈥檚 1890 work entitled 鈥楶opular Tales of the West Highlands (Vol. IV)鈥 and which is to be found on-line at: . In particular, the section of this work on 鈥楧ress鈥 is found at: .
Campbell clearly argues that the soldiers described in the print were Scottish and led by Scottish commanders. Even if they came from Ireland they would not have been native Irish but would have been from the Scots-Irish Ulster plantation class. This plantation began in 1607 and primarily represented an influx of Scots to Ireland bringing with them their native culture.
It is quite ridiculous to imagine that native Catholic Irish would have fought for the Protestant cause in northern Europe during the 30 Years War. So, your print of the 鈥樏峳ish鈥 soldiery at Stettin in 1631 is not proof that the kilt was native to Ireland. It does substantiate the notion that the kilt was native to the Scots. -
Message 19
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 9th March 2009
Took a while to find it but this is the one I was looking at. Ignore the two blokes on the left as they are scottish. The people I was refering to in the plaid style clothing are the ones on the right of the picture.
Theres some more on this one as well www.heraldry.ws/info/article03.html
but apparantly the site itself belongs to as bloke who decided to reinvent his family tree and cant be trusted past the pictures. -
Message 20
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 9th March 2009
Correction the last site should be kosher. its this one thats hookey
-
Message 21
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Monday, 9th March 2009
www.answers.com/topi...
Took a while to find it but this is the one I was looking at. Ignore the two blokes on the left as they are scottish. The people I was refering to in the plaid style clothing are the ones on the right of the picture.聽
Firstly, these are pictures of galloglass, i.e. Scots mercenaries employed by Irish chiefs. If you knew Irish you would probably have known that galloglass is an Anglicisation of the native Irish name for these soldiers which was 鈥楪all 贸glaigh鈥, literally meaning 鈥榝oreign soldiers鈥, i.e. foreign as from Scotland. Once again, not a proof that the kilt was Irish as their dress code would have been brought with them from Scotland.
Secondly, it is arguable as to what they are wearing. It could be a long dress-like garment. One thing is clear from the drawings, the garment is not all of one piece. They are wearing either a jacket type upper body garment or a cloak over what could be either a short skirt-like garment or a long dress-like garment. Also, there is a clear absence of any plaid design in the clothes. So, once again these sketches do not provide evidence of a native Irish kilt. -
Message 22
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Monday, 9th March 2009
It is quite ridiculous to imagine that native Catholic Irish would have fought for the Protestant cause in northern Europe during the 30 Years War聽 .
Not necessarily. I've found references to Irish soldiers being shipped to Sweden in 1609. Admittedly seven companies deserted to the Poles at the first opportunity,but it does set a precedent.One of the leading Scottish officers in the Swedish Army at Breitenfeld, Sir John Hepburn, was himself a Catholic,as was Count Mansfeld commander of the Protestant German Army.
A thorough examination of the Swedish Army muster rolls is needed to clear up who was in which regiment. Osprey MAA 235, The Army of Gustavus Adolphus:Infantry, does mention men with Irish names like Huigh O'Doherty and Farrel O'Galihor in Hamilton's muster rolls.
The supply of volunteers was beginning to dry up in the late 1620s, previous levys had even resorted to kidnapping to fill their quotas,students at Edinburgh University being among the victims, and recruiting officers would fill the ranks from any source available. -
Message 23
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 9th March 2009
Hi Mic-mac.
The etching is the same but on the original sight i found it on it listed the two figures on the left as Gallowglass, and the three on the right as Kern, cern? the sight then waxed on about the difference between the typically irish kern and the scottish gallowglass. I am refering to the garemnt as a plaid from the simple reason I cant remember what the garment the Scots wore before the kilt was called and not because of any pattern
I take it the original site was wrong?
I can probably find it if I keep looking but to be honest I get the feeling that I'm treading on peoples sensibilities with it a bit? I am not that struck with the topic that I need to upset anyone over it. -
Message 24
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
This is a history board. History is what it is. For me it is not an issue about sensibilities or feelings! It鈥檚 about history. I am merely applying standard historical methodology to critique your 鈥榚vidence鈥 that there was a traditional Irish kilt. So far you have not presented anything that is irrefutable or even credible and both etchings come with strong Scottish influences.
If I wanted to establish that the Irish traditionally wore a kilt I would look to the numerous contemporary writings of those who commented on Irish social and cultural affairs 鈥 and there was no shortage of them. I am not aware that any of them referred to an Irish kilt.
You simply have not proved your case. Have you? -
Message 25
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Hi Mic-mac
If what your saying is the case, and I have no reason to doubt that it is'nt. I am not an expert on historical costume and all I have ever said on this is that to me the engraving shows a garment that could have been used as a historical basis for selecting the modern kilt. in the same sort of way that in Scotland was provided by the original plaid (have to figure the proper name for that out one day) if i am wrong then I'm wrong.
But, it then just seems very odd to pick an item of clothing with no historical link or connection to Ireland as a national garment?
They might as well have picked Lederhosen?
If they were introduced through the pre independance military then surely use of it would have been dropped as soon as the last British soldier left?
But going on what Ryan O in the original post, has said its use has continued way after any British envolvement, in fact right down to the present. Which to me sort of implies that its a Irish choice even if its not one thats popular with everyone.
So why pick it in the first place and why do some still wear it even if its foreign to Ireland? -
Message 26
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:34 GMT, in reply to backtothedarkplace (dan)Free Sean! in message 25
But, it then just seems very odd to pick an item of clothing with no historical link or connection to Ireland as a national garment?聽
Might there be some connection to the popular if historically dubious notion of a shared 'Celtic' heritage?
I suppose one could argue that the plaid was an 'Irish' import into what became Scotland - after all, the Scotii were invaders from Hibernia - but I'm not convinced. Just chucking ideas around. Personally I feel the evidence for a traditional Irish kilt is very weak, at best. -
Message 27
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
These links don't seem to want to go active but if you cut and paste them they should work fine.
(1) For an Article on the fallacy of the Irish kilt see:
(2) For a Directory of Links to other relevant articles see the Section under 鈥業rish鈥 at the following:
(3) For An L茅ine Crioch -- The Irish L茅ine in the 16th century see:
I am not an experrt on this area either. -
Message 28
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Mick_mac,
you put an "s" after your http : //
As I have such a backlog on these boards, the rest you have to do yourself.
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 29
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Paul,
Thank you for that observation. I hadn't noticed the 's' after the 'http' which seems to have something to do with security at those sites. So here are the 'live' links:
(1) For an Article on the fallacy of the Irish kilt see:
(2) For a Directory of Links to other relevant articles see the Section under 鈥業rish鈥 at the following:
(3) For An L茅ine Crioch -- The Irish L茅ine in the 16th century see:
-
Message 30
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Hi Mic-mac.
Thanks for the links they pretty much explained everything. For any one else wanting to see what the answer is select the second link go for the heading Irish, first link in that block pretty much covers the whole business.
Poor old Patrick Pearse, I hope his poetry was better than his fashion sense. -
Message 31
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Bttdp,
Thanks to Paul. And I too learned something about Irish dress. Not a subject I've really looked into before.
Poor old Patrick Pearse, I hope his poetry was better than his fashion sense.聽
'Fraid not. -
Message 32
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 11th March 2009
Hi Mic-mac T
That bad, ehh.
Still, I suppose the good news is he never made it to Austria and cast his eyes on Lederhosen.
God knows what a dogs dinner I'd have made of that?
I've learend something inthe end so thanks to all involved. -
Message 33
Posted by RyanO (U8918008) on Saturday, 14th March 2009
'It is quite ridiculous to imagine that native Catholic Irish would have fought for the Protestant cause '
Tirceratops is right, many Irish also fought with english protestant armies. They were mercenaries and fought for a living like the swiss and everyone else. -
Message 34
Posted by RyanO (U8918008) on Saturday, 14th March 2009
'print came from J. F. Campbell鈥檚 1890 work entitled 鈥楶opular Tales of the West Highlands (Vol. IV)鈥 and which is to be found on-line at: www.sacred-texts.com.... In particular, the section of this work on 鈥楧ress鈥 is found at: www.sacred-texts.com....鈥
I don鈥檛 think these geneology, or mythology sites can be trusted as evidence. Some of these people are well meaning promoters of things like kilts for emotive or or other reasons but they don鈥檛 stand up to scrutiny.
The Kilt wearer in the supposed 1560 print is particularly dubious IMO. It is copied we are told from a rough carving. What is shown is a beautifully kilted 18th century type figure; how one gets such an image from a rough carving is more by dint of creative thinking than an actual historically based deduction.
The print of the Swedish mercenaries was the one I was talking of. They are sited as definitely Scottish in McClintocks and I tend to agree. Scots gaelic was often referred to as 鈥業rish鈥 (basically the same language) even in England so understandable that the Germans would mix the two. Even in this print the existence of tr煤is is evident, as the first and last seem to be wearing tr煤is rather than socks which would end at the knee.
What is evident also is how the idea of the kilt developed from the tartan cloak or brat/mantel.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 聽to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
主播大秀 iD
主播大秀 navigation
主播大秀 links
主播大秀 漏 2014 The 主播大秀 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.