White Hose

[Chas]

I only have two thoughts concerning white hose:

White shows the dirt. Mud, wet grass, a bit of undergrowth, dust, smuts, ash, sand all show up.

White is very limiting. There is a world of colour out there, why not grab a bit of it?

Regards

Chas

[Tobus]

May I suggest that if you go back far enough in history not only the hose would not have had any vivid colors or fancy diamond patterns knitted into them but the wool they were made from would have been the natural colors of the sheep they raised. IE white, gray, browns and black. the dying of these garments came much later

Well, uh, if we're talking about Highland history (as opposed to general European dress), then I don't think this is correct. Or at least it's not supported by the evidence.

Most Highlanders simply went without socks/hose or went entirely barefoot in earlier centuries. Then transitioned to simple, crude footwear known as currans (worn sans stockings). Even well into the 18th century and up to Proscription, the average Highlander did not wear anything but a very simple shoe, without hose of any kind. Those who did wear stockings generally made them out of tartan material (known as "bag hose").

I'm sure our forum historians will correct me if I'm wrong on this point, but it seems that the earliest Highland "kilt hose", if we want to call them that, were actually patterned. They were made of tartan material, not a plain colored material.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

May I suggest that if you go back far enough in history not only the hose would not have had any vivid colors or fancy diamond patterns knitted into them but the wool they were made from would have been the natural colors of the sheep they raised. IE white, gray, browns and black. the dying of these garments came much later The basic dress would not have been the tartans we see today but rather blanket like robes that were used as protection from the elements. I would doubt the kilt sprang into the Highlands, the Lowlands or the borders of England as this area changed control many times over the centuries. I would also suggest that the clan tartans did not come into full use before the 17th to 18th centuries. Sir Walter Scott did a lot to popularize the tartans and assigned tartans from areas to the common names in a given area. Before this time Plaids were more indicative of an areas rather than clan names.
The kilt has evolved from a very early time and even the Scots word "kilt" derives from the Old Norse kjalta, from Norse settlers who wore a similar, pleated garment.
There is no correct or wrong way to wear a kilt and no colors you are forbidden to wear with it. There are no laws stating that the kilt can not be worn in any country that I know of. No laws saying a kilt must have a certain weight or the material a kilt has to be made from wool and nothing else. Some tartans are protected but they are very few.
Would I wear a thousand dollar kilt if I were fishing, camping or hunting in the wilds of British Columbia.. not very likely but I would wear a utility kilt or a less expensive kilt made from some of the newer fabrics. I would defy anyone who told me I was not dressed correctly, even with boots and work socks around my ankles. The kilt kilts has evolved over many centuries and will continue to evolve for many more.
The color of your hose is a personal choice and no one can tell you differently. No country "owns" the kilt!
So enjoy your kilt and wear it as you will.
Let the criticism begin.

You seem to indicate that you know full well that your post would invite criticism. All I have to say is that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Some of your historical details are a bit off. For example, I don't think the evidence justifies the naming of clan tartans all at the feet of Sir Walter Scott.

But specifically having to do with hose, as this is what the thread is about, your argument may seem logical, but it's actually not what happened historically. Knit hose are a bit of a late comer to Highland attire. Prior to the nineteenth century, the hose were made from woven cloth, cut and sewn to shape. This cloth was almost always tartan or at least a simple check pattern, cut on the bias for elasticity.

When knit hose did come on the scene, they were knit in a pattern to mimic the look of the cloth hose (cadadh) which were the style. This is where our knit diced and argyle hose come from.

Yes, self-color (solid) knit hose were also made, but in a variety of color. Remember, this is the nineteenth century, not in some primitive time before people figured out how to dye yarn.

And assuming undyed yarn was used, that would give shades ranging from very dark brown (almost black) all the way to a light cream color. However, to achieve an actual white color would involve bleaching of some kind.

Lastly, you are correct that there are no laws stipulating what color hose you can wear with your kilt, or what weight of cloth, or what material your kilt should be made from. Who is suggesting there is?

We are not discussing laws here. We are discussing tradition and fashion. People are free to give their opinions and make their arguments as to whether something is traditional or not, and whether something makes good fashion sense or not. But no one is talking "laws." I find that when someone asserts that "there are no laws about wearing the kilt" it tends to just stymie the conversation.

[creagdhubh]

You seem to indicate that you know full well that your post would invite criticism. All I have to say is that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Some of your historical details are a bit off. For example, I don't think the evidence justifies the naming of clan tartans all at the feet of Sir Walter Scott.

But specifically having to do with hose, as this is what the thread is about, your argument may seem logical, but it's actually not what happened historically. Knit hose are a bit of a late comer to Highland attire. Prior to the nineteenth century, the hose were made from woven cloth, cut and sewn to shape. This cloth was almost always tartan or at least a simple check pattern, cut on the bias for elasticity.

When knit hose did come on the scene, they were knit in a pattern to mimic the look of the cloth hose (cadadh) which were the style. This is where our knit diced and argyle hose come from.

Yes, self-color (solid) knit hose were also made, but in a variety of color. Remember, this is the nineteenth century, not in some primitive time before people figured out how to dye yarn.

And assuming undyed yarn was used, that would give shades ranging from very dark brown (almost black) all the way to a light cream color. However, to achieve an actual white color would involve bleaching of some kind.

Lastly, you are correct that there are no laws stipulating what color hose you can wear with your kilt, or what weight of cloth, or what material your kilt should be made from. Who is suggesting there is?

We are not discussing laws here. We are discussing tradition and fashion. People are free to give their opinions and make their arguments as to whether something is traditional or not, and whether something makes good fashion sense or not. But no one is talking "laws." I find that when someone asserts that "there are no laws about wearing the kilt" it tends to just stymie the conversation.

Well said, Matt!

[creagdhubh]

I only have two thoughts concerning white hose:

White shows the dirt. Mud, wet grass, a bit of undergrowth, dust, smuts, ash, sand all show up.

White is very limiting. There is a world of colour out there, why not grab a bit of it?

Regards

Chas

Right! White is boring in my opinion. Why settle for white hose, when there are so many attractive colours available?!

[KWD]

I first came in the Kilt scene wearing white hose, I have since evolved to a much broader range of colors thanks to the wise and colorful members of this forum. I do however still wear OFF White hand knit hose because i really like the cabling and the way my multicolor garter flashes stand out. I won't ever tell someone you shouldn't wear white hose, but as for me, I most likely will never wear bleach white hose again.

my next pair will be tartan hose to match my kilt very excited about getting those.

[sevenoaks]

I stand corrected and apologize for the rant.

[Woodsheal]

Just to illustrate how pervasive the "white hose = dress up" mindset is, here's a pic from a Burns Supper I attended this past winter:



The three X-Marks members are NOT wearing white/cream: Steven (black), Seumas (back row, blue), myself (diced). The five or six additional kilties who didn't make it into the pic all had white hose on, as well.

I must say, the cream/off-white shade looks much better than the stark, blinding white...!

[ForresterModern]

... There are no laws stating that the kilt can not be worn in any country that I know of....

Just don't try wearing one on a specific "royal" golf course on the coast in Ayrshire, Scotland, regardless of the color of your hose.

We now return to your regular programming.

[Peter Crowe]

Just to illustrate how pervasive the "white hose = dress up" mindset is, here's a pic from a Burns Supper I attended this past winter:



The three X-Marks members are NOT wearing white/cream: Steven (black), Seumas (back row, blue), myself (diced). The five or six additional kilties who didn't make it into the pic all had white hose on, as well.

I must say, the cream/off-white shade looks much better than the stark, blinding white...!

I agree about the blinding white! I have often wondered though why there is an expectation we wear the Kilt for a Burns Night or Burns Supper (something I do myself) when the Bard himself never wore a kilt in his life. BTW, I know he wore a shepherd's shoulder plaid in fillemot and shepherd tartan check.