Posted by davey gunn on March 12, 2000 at 13:12:51:
In Reply to: Re: What's Worn Under A Scotsman's Kilt? posted by Billy R on March 12, 2000 at 12:21:39:
: : : : : : : : :
: : : : : : : : : : Hi!
: : : : : : : : : : I know, I know!! I'm way behind everyone else! This 'thread' is now 'yesterday's news' and if it were real paper, we'd be eating our 'chips' from it! Well, I just thought you might want the answer to that age old question.
: : : : : : : : : : Any Scotsman worth his 'claymore' will tell you if you ask 'what's worn beneath the kilt?' - 'nothing, it's all in perfect working order!' :0)
: : : : : : : : : : Best wishes,
: : : : : : : : : : Kate.
: : : : : : : : : Bravo, Kate! That's my lass!
: : : : : : : : : Gayle
: : : : : : : :
: : : : : : : : Dearest Lasses......
: : : : : : : : ......i'll tell yee all what i wear under me kilt........me buckle shoes, diced hose, and a wee bit of blue ribbon......and if yee lasses doubt me word, tis no boast......i'll take yer hand, and show yee fer certain.......fer i is a man of few words....and evryone be'in the truth.......
: : : : : : : : 'nuff said
: : : : : : : : davey gunn, pvt 77th Reg
: : : : : : : : Montgomerey's Highlanders
: : : : : : Aye, 'tis true what me brother Davey Gunn writes of!! We are a "regimental" lot and we are as "true" as they come. For no Scotsman with any respect for hisself or his heritage would wear even a wee patch under the kilt. We Scotsman are not ashamed of what we have that we would hide it nor cover it!! So, there ye have it!! Pax Aye!!
: : : : : : Cpl. Malcolm Angus MacWilliam, Clan Gunn of the far northern regions of Scotia, Caithness and the Orkney Isles, descendant of the great and terrible Chief Gunni, scourage of the Keiths!
: : : :
: : : : : O Yee of Scottish "pride",
: : : : : Well, if that is all true, then I would NOT want to be the one who has to WASH your dang kilts! Yuck. There IS a REASON for undergarments ya know.....and given that at the times there was no Mr. Whipple the Charmin man around, nor anything but rough leaves.....well you get the ugly picture.
: : : : : And they wonder why we English often refused to shake the hand of a Scotsman. Ha!
: : : : : A little fractured history....the Scots didn't win their battles by force of arms. Oh no. It was their custom to moon the enemy before battle, and whenever they did that little thing, the enemy fell over into a deathlike swoon from the stench!!!
: : : : : Billy who is NOT Scotch/Irish but English/Irish (with a lot of German thrown in)
: : : :
: : : : Billy me bucko.......
: : : : I don't mean to be corrective, or disrespectful of anyone with the way i wear me kilt........but, based on the time we be a talkin' 'bout.....there was no such thing as "underwear".....see'in as that didn't get invented 'til early in the nineteenth century.......so, even your ancestral kin were devoid of BVDs.....so to speak!!
: : : : 'nuff said
: : : : davey gunn
: : :
: : : Well........I don't claim to be an expert, but I am sure SOME kind of undergarment was worn, else why would everybody be wondering at what or what NOT was worn under the kilt? I mean,
: : : if NOBODY had some sorta covering between the family pride and the outer garment, WHY would everybody wonder? They would KNOW, that EVERYBODY be nekkid under the trousers, kilt, bodkin, etc etc.
: : : but let's ask an expert on such things....Doc Mary would know, as she has administered to just about everybody in every time. Now, if there ever was an expert on what mankind wore, or didnt wear, SHE would certainly know in her great vast experience in such things.
: : : Billy R
: : Billy R--
: : You'd best listen to Davey Gunn...he's probably peeked under more kilts than anyone I know! As for how undergarments became commonplace, I kinna say, but I can say this...Billy lad, why do you think we woodsmen wear such long-tailed shirts? It's to wrap around certain places when we are forced to wear britches,and feels mighty good, especially when the britches is wool (!) and a loin cloth, or breech clout, serves the purpose when we ain't. (Could it be that this is the practice which started you English thinking of another garment to hide your puny little...selves, eh?)That way we get the support we need without restricting access for other nescessary...or pleasurable,... functions. When a man carries a heavy pack, so to speak, don't he use an extra strap to help support the load? Hmmm? The prudent fellow must also keep his weapon, whether it be knife OR club, ready for immediate use should the opportunity arise...ahemmm!.... Besides, 'tis the modern-time mind which is wonderin'...not us.....such things don't bother those of us who are ensconced in "our time."
: : 'nuff said. PAX AYE!
: : Seamus MacWilliam
: Okay, let's assume you are right (though I wish some of these femmes with period tailoring expertise would chime in on this issue).....if we assume you are right, and take it to it's ugly conclusion....I am having a REAL hard time accepting that everybody, male and female, walked around with "tracks" on the back of their shirt tails!!! Yech! Gag.
: Bill R
Billy me lad.......
If'n ye be a doubt'n our word on this important subject, ya best be'a researchin' this puzzlement a little further on yer own! We know o' what we speak......it's the way it is( and more important, the way it were).....doubt or no.....the "invention" o' underdrawers was brought on by a "civilized society" in the early 1800s......we Scots don't hold that claim....and we be a proud lot because o' it. Any kilt clad lad wi' the notion of wearin' somethin' neath it is doin' the garment an injustice........tis meant to be worn as our ancesral kin intended it....as they did.....as all lads (and lasses) did, as they only knew how. There are a lot more articles of clothing that went through an evolution from the time of Adam and Eve until today.......check it out......educate yourself to the fun parts of our history......you'll be amazed!
'nuff said
davey gunn