My first Kilt article.

[Mel1721L]

It would be referred to as a tunic - at least that is, what we assume he wore, since we have no proof. We are told that it was unique, inasmuch as it was seamless and therefore pretty special.

The point is, male dress wasn't always trousers. Incidently the clerical collar derives from shamans wearing clothing back to front to confuse dark spirits, some cross dressed for the same reason.

[Father Bill]

The point is, male dress wasn't always trousers. Incidently the clerical collar derives from shamans wearing clothing back to front to confuse dark spirits, some cross dressed for the same reason.

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".

[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.

[OC Richard]

The point is, male dress wasn't always trousers.

Exactly! That Stewart guy was implying that the only doctrinally acceptable clothing is the stuff HE happens to wear!

Blue jeans and slacks as we wear today haven't been around very long, but Stewart implies that anything else is forbidden.

Men have worn togas and robes for thousands of years, and all the men in Biblical times would have done. (Or maybe Stewart imagines that all those guys wore blue jeans?)

The only bifurcated things in Judea might have been trews-like things that the Roman military copied from the Germans/Celts (but only worn in cold weather) or actual trews worn by Germanic/Celtic slaves (there's a painting of a Celtic slave wearing patterned trews in a Roman site in North Africa).

(I say "Germanic/Celtic" because the Roman writers often confused the two groups, and just which group the Romans were referring to in a particular reference is often open to debate. It gets really sticky because Deutsche is a cognate with Tuath which both mean "fellow countrymen".)

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.

[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.

[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