A Definition of the Term, T R A D I T I O N A L

[Heming]

This is very interesteing indeed, and "traditional" is indeed difficult to define. My interpretation is that "historical" is something that WAS common, but is an extinct practice, whereas "traditional" WAS AND IS common, i.e. has been practice for a long time and is still considered appropriate today. The real nut to crack is to define how long something must have been common practice to deserve being called traditional.

I have a tradition for a nine course black tie supper on Hogmanay with a certain group of friends. We've been doing that for ten years. But I've also worn t-shirts to work for ten years. Is that traditional?

Clothing styles and fashion vary over both short and long periods. For instance, the male, western business suit has been more or less the same for the last 100 years or so, keeping in mind that different button arrangements and cuts are considered relatively minor changes (whereas changing from mostly kilts to mostly trousers would be a major change). In contrast, street fashion varies quite distinctively from season to season within the same year. Setting a standard for what is traditional becomes very difficult.

In my country there's a government body (!) that regulates (among other things) the education of makers of traditional and historical (national) dress. This body defines "traditional dress" as "clothing commonly worn since at least 1850 and uninterrupted up to today" and "historical dress" as "clothing commonly worn prior to 1850 over a lengthy period, which is no longer in common use"

I find their definitions quite useful, but when it comes to highland dress one might consider using a different year than 1850 - I suppose one should pick a time when the "modern" tailored kilt was more or less standardised in form. I'm sure others here are much more knowledgeable than me in that respect.

But I do suggest that "traditional" should imply WAS AND IS common, and that "WAS" should imply at least two or three generations back in time. Old is not necessarily traditional, in my opinion. Following this line, the oldest variety is not necessarily the most traditional, and thus a box-pleated kilt would in my mind be more historically correct, yet less traditional than a knife-pleated 8-yarder. As I am interested in both history and tradition, I would want to own both, and would use them both, but in different settings.

But I beleive Mr. Newsome is quite correct in his conclusion: Different people have different concepts of just what is meant by the term "traditional". Maybe the mod squad could make up a set of definitions that are valid for this forum, so that everyone knows what to expect?