18th century hunting?

[ThistleDown]

Just so we are all clear, Brian: "So, I don't quite get this seeming insistance from some quarters that kilts/plaids were never worn for anything in the pre-Proscription highlands! Period images and documents tell us otherwise...." I've not heard anybody on this forum say "never worn for anything", but I admit I may have missed it. Most of those of us brought up wearing Highland dress -- in the Highlands -- doubt its universality in the 17th and 18th centuries because that's what we have been taught all our lives. Not its existence, just its universality.

We all know about Edmund Burt's claims, but we also know he was a fabricator of truths. He despised us, and those two things do certainly tinge our opinion of his veracity. He speaks of the nasty smell emanating from us whilst no-doubt failing to bathe his own body; at least I can't find the place in his "Letters..." where he describes his bath. He did refer to powders and scents and snuff and he must haave worn a wig that no doubt jumped about on his head. Live with your cattle you will smell as your cattle, but live with your own smell and you can't smell it.

Martin Martin is a more credible source because he was a gael living among gaels, at least before he moved away to the Low Countries and on to London. He does describe the belted plaid as it was worn on Skye; Burt describes it as it was worn west of Inverness. Two locations do not a country make, however, and we know that the belted plaid was not worn in the coastal fishing villages from Aberdeenshire to Caithness. Or in the fertile plain between Beauly and Nairn.

I'll not speak for the western Highlands and the Inner isles, but those of us in the central part really have no idea what our folk wore day-to-day 300 and more years ago. We love to pass things down generation to generation and some of us have lived in the same place that long and some even much longer, but we don't seem to have kept big blankets or baggy trousers in a chest in the house all that time. And if had we might not quite fit into a definition of "common man"

I'll not debate what Highland Scots wore after they arrived in America with you, Brian. You have far greater knowledge of your country and of its dress than I have or could possibly acquire at a distance.

[Woodsheal]

As a serious reenactor and "living-history" hobbyist, I've researched highland dress for years (and well beyond the two sources I mentioned), but I'll accept your diplomatically stated point that as a non-highlander foreigner I'm not qualified to hold forth on the subject....

[georgeetta]

Never Assume.
Few years ago all said it as a ll great plaid in 1700's then English mill owner made the kilt ..now you hear kilts being ..sorry phila begs (kilts) being worn all the time in many units in many situations mid 1700's up ."There's a Proscitive ban on highland attire" -well I am trying to get done reading the Appn Murder book ..and in the investigation about 1753 near Ft William I think it states folks are apprehended wearing ..plaids or kilts or tartan ..what they had ..they may have been reminded but they weren't guillotined either ! Do not speak in absolutes no matter how many books you read ..anybody outside the highlands would have been bigoted or trying to sound upper sorts, I am just seeing Buchanan notes on a book about 1823 ..I took American History from an Ivy Leaguer ..all info is suspect ..anything written was somehitng you wouldn't get thrown in jail for saying ..ask Shakespeare . Especially in GB my Grandfather's time they were scared stiff of anybody socially or economically above them even when I was a kid, you expect perfectly preserved info from a background like that ? fyi the book describes the boys going out shooting ducks I think and swapping the clothes they had with Allan Breck who wore what these folks were sleeping en masse in barns ..a "reader" might think only living in a cottage they read about .

READ THIS:
there's a dvd in library how ALL archeaologists had an idea on Indian Nat. Americans coming to N.A. ..with the computer and tchnology some wiz loaded the coords in to a data base and noticed they hit a elevatin contour ..conclusion is ..seas lakes etc were higher by 150-200 ft than today ..adn your could see the "camps" were not hauling catches kills up hill to eat ..they were eating by the water edge near the boats etc ! Sent the entire arch community back another 5-10,000 years . Also on my favorite littel sidetrip back of Scotia -no kidding NY ..there's a sign about ice age hunters and being at edge of the lake ..where the dioramas for NYS Mueum were thought up of ..probably 75 years between the dvd and the ealier monumeneted arctic liek camp site .

[longhuntr74]

georgeeta,

I would like to answer your question as directly and as straight forward as possible. The decision of what is suitable for topics and discussion on this forum have nothing to do personalities, personal morals or, has been suggested, personal sensibilities being bruised. It is only about staying within a simple set of published rules.

One of the guiding principals of this forum is:

""We understand that as a kilt specific forum our chosen subject of discussion is not the complete spectrum of life." Over the years we have found certain subjects always seem to result in discord. Therefore, we respectfully ask our members to remember that this is a kilt forum and to leave their Politics, Religion and Weapons at the door.

We also have two rules which could be applicable here. Here is our published Rule #11:

"Rule #11
- Whenever someone brings up the subject of weapons, the discussion has always gone downhill rapidly. Because of this, we must insist that there will be no discussion, posting or photos of, weapons.
(We define 'weapon' as anything that is used to inflict damage or harm to living beings. Weapons as components of traditional or historic kilt attire, or as components of a prescribed uniform, may be exempt as long as the discussion does not become about the weapon itself or its use.)"

The other is Rule #12.

"Rule #12
– The topic of discussion on this forum is the kilt. Discussions veering off the topic or discussions or photos which stress topics other than the kilt will be subject to removal."

I think you can see that our Guiding Principal states it very well. We know that the kilt is not the end-all, be-all of the world. But it is why our members come here.

If the staff are asked to make a determination on the suitability of a thread, post or topic under discussion, they are guided by these principals, policies and rules only. Frankly it would be an insult to the intelligence and dedication of the 7 members of our staff to even suggest that they would let one persons' personality or someone's bruised sensibilities to hold more weight or value than our published rules.

All we have ever asked of our members is to stay within the boundaries of our published rules. Pretty simple really.

Okay...but has someone complained about or reported this thread?? I think you're being a bit overbearing in enforcing a "pet peeve" rule.

Personally, I think Rule #12 is a crock of s@#$. I didn't see anybody giving warnings to the guy that posted the thread about buying a new motorcycle two weeks ago and a million other threads that I have read on here that have to do with things other than the kilt and highland attire. I understand the reason for it's existence...It's the fall back for any situation in which the moderators need to close a thread or ban a member when they can't make an offense fit something else...kinda like Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I don't have a problem with such off topic threads, as long as they don't start to overtake the purpose of the forum...which I have not perceived them to do. We're all friends and family here (well, mostly anyways) and we like to share things about our lives. It's not a big deal. Neither is the picture of a guy holding a firearm on a thread related to the traditional dress of highlanders while hunting...or shooting...whichever you call it. Just my tuppence!

[Jock Scot]

Okay...but has someone complained about or reported this thread?? I think you're being a bit overbearing in enforcing a "pet peeve" rule.

Personally, I think Rule #12 is a crock of s@#$. I didn't see anybody giving warnings to the guy that posted the thread about buying a new motorcycle two weeks ago and a million other threads that I have read on here that have to do with things other than the kilt and highland attire. I understand the reason for it's existence...It's the fall back for any situation in which the moderators need to close a thread or ban a member when they can't make an offense fit something else...kinda like Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I don't have a problem with such off topic threads, as long as they don't start to overtake the purpose of the forum...which I have not perceived them to do. We're all friends and family here (well, mostly anyways) and we like to share things about our lives. It's not a big deal. Neither is the picture of a guy holding a firearm on a thread related to the traditional dress of highlanders while hunting...or shooting...whichever you call it. Just my tuppence!

Well now, considering the author of this post is not known for voicing his opinions in such strong terms, perhaps some of those "above" might take notice of the strength off feeling voiced and consider those rules that they so often retreat behind. Just my tuppence too.

[Steve Ashton]

"Strength of feeling" is fine. Dissent is fine. No one is forcing anyone to agree with everything all the time.

Just as no one is forcing anyone to be a member here. No one is forcing someone who dislikes this forum to continue logging on.

The rules were here long before this thread was started. Right out there in the open for all to see.

All that has ever been asked of those who do log on is to stay within the bounderies of a simple set of published rules.

There is even a way to voice dissent within the rules.

"Strong feeling" is noted, with thanks.

[Woodsheal]

Oh, never mind....

[georgeetta]

it was a nice topic to kick around .

th
d

[georgeetta]

I'm sure we'd all like to thank Mr Ashton and the other moderators for a thankless job, and don't think we aren't grateful .
have a pleasant day .
th
d

[Steve Ashton]

I would like to thank everyone who has posted to, and who has followed this thread. It shows how great this forum and its members are. I originally posted a polite reminder of our published rules. Not because someone had necessarily violated them but as a "shot across the bow" due to two photos that were posted that could be violations.

Note that I said 'could'. The two photos in question have been removed. This thread has not been reported to the Moderators. There has been no deliberation among the moderators about charging anyone with a violation.

But I have to uphold the rules that are in place, at the time.

I think it is important to point out that no one has been taken to task. No one has had their membership revoked. And certainly no one has simply disappeared from our ranks simply because they voiced their dissent.

Throughout this thread everyone has stayed polite and respectful. Even when they disagree. That is the strength of this forum. We can disagree. The staff don't pretend to be all knowing or perfect. We look to our members to tell us if a rule needs to be changed or edited. And we, the staff, listen to the members. Our rules are always subject to the changes in our society and sometimes we make changes to clarify a point. It is an on-going process



And most importantly; Even though the OP has not returned to this thread since his original question I hope he has the answer he was looking for.