Actually, the "definition" of a kilt is something that people have been struggling with of late. Reference what I said in the "casual kilt" thread about the flux of cheap Pakistani kilts flooding into the UK market lately.

Folks in Scotland, like the STA, have been stuggling with an attempted definition of just what is and isn't a kilt.

Now most people in the world of Highland Dress, either as producers, consumers, scholars, what have you, know what a kilt is and can easily tell the difference between kilt and a skirt, or another cheap imitation.

The problem is in attempting to put a definition into words. How do you define it, as to exclude imitators?

You can't go by yardage. Some of the earliest tailored military kilts contained barely 3.5 yards of cloth, for goodness sake! Are you going to say that the Highland Regiments of 1794 were wearing skirts? Of course not!

You can't go by the style of pleating. Again, the very first kilts were box pleated. Modern kilts are knife pleated. And you also had styles in the nineteenth century that combined the two.

You can't go by whether or not is made of tartan, for people have worn solid colored kilts since at least the seventeenth century. Tweed kilts were popular in the nineteenth century.

You can't go by the country of origin. I know hand weavers of tartan cloth in the US that do just as good a job as anyone in the UK. And likewise, there are kiltmakers here who are expert, and no one doubts that the products they make are not true kilts because of the location they were made.

So how do you "define" a kilt??? If you come up with something, let me know!

Aye,
Matt