
Originally Posted by
TheOfficialBren
I wonder if that the man in the top photo is a very short man hiking his government issued kilt farther up to compensate for his short stature and wear the bottom at his unit's regulation height? I'm using his sporran as a frame of reference.
I think that's exactly what it is. I get the impression- I could be wrong- that at least in some regiments they issued all the kilts the same length regardless of the man's stature, so on short men the thing came up nearly to the armpits!
Trouble is, very few 19th century/early 20th century photos show Army kilts being worn without jackets. Here's one which likewise shows extremely high kilts

Note why these Army kilts need that 3rd buckle, and why modern kilts don't: the 3rd buckle is at more or less the same location as the top buckles on a low-waisted modern civilian kilt.
Last edited by OC Richard; 4th July 13 at 04:38 AM.
Proud Mountaineer from the Highlands of West Virginia; son of the Revolution and Civil War; first Europeans on the Guyandotte
Bookmarks