Theory and practice.

[Jock Scot]

I am always interested in this subject. How we romanticize and talk about "traditional" dress when we are often looking at the garment as is was worn AFTER proscription. How the garment was worn once the ENGLISH "allowed" us to wear it once again. The more traditional would be either the great kilt or Philabeg but these are looked at as curiosities and even simply anachronistic. We would generally look at someone wearing bell-bottom jeans as odd but they were worn during a certain period.

As I often point out. The kilt was the daily, work wear of a poor people who had no need for PC jackets or Argyle hose. The Kilt is a common man's garment. We love to romanticize about the lovely royals who donned the garb, but I am a common, modern man. I see no problem with wearing a common, modern kilt. What's "proper?" Whatever you choose. I do aim to be more "traditional" in formal settings. (When in Rome.) As for daily wear... Whatever is fashionable and comfortable is fine for me.

I am afraid to say you cannot blame the English for proscription , or credit them for its repeal. That law was passed by the parliament( Scottish and English parliaments unified in 1707) of the United Kingdom(England,Wales, Ireland? and SCOTLAND) in other words the British Government. By that time the Crowns of Scotland and England had been united for nearly 150 years. England can be blamed for many things, but not this.