Hemlines.....

[M. A. C. Newsome]

FurryCelt,

I don't think anyone has said that you should not wear a belt with a jacket -- what is often repeated is that you should not wear the belt with a vest. And the main reason for that is that the vest would tend to cover all or part of the top of the kilt where the belt would be worn, so you'd just see the bottom half of the belt poking out.

Unless, of course, you do like the guys in the picture Barb posted a link to and wear your kilts so low that you have a couple of inches of shirt showing between the top of the kilt and the bottom of the vest! Yikes!

What Barb said about the belt being worn with the PC Jacket specifically is also true. But then again the PC jacket really is made to be worn with a vest (or at least a cummerbund) or else it just looks "incomplete."

Now, regarding the length of the kilt, when I measure people I want them to both be within the limits of good fashion, and also personally comfortable. With that in mind, I advise them that "acceptible" length is generally considered anywhere from the mid-kneecap at the lowest, to one inch above the top of the kneecap at the highest. What this generally means is that I measure them to the top of the kneecap and then tell them they can add or subtract up to one inch per their own preference.

I also tell them that my personal preference is for no lower than the top of the kneecap. This is for a couple of reasons. First, I just think it looks better to see the whole knee. What is the point of wear the kilt if you can't show the lassies your knees!? Second, any lower than this and I find that as I walk I can feel the bottom of the kilt brushing against the back of my knees and I find this to be an annoyance. It is more comfortable, in my experience, for the kilt to completely clear the knee.

Most of my clients choose top of the knee or a bit higher, but I occasionally find someone who wants it lower. After explaining to him my reasons for perfering a shorter kilt, if he still wants it lower on the knee, then that's what I do. Ultimately it is his kilt and I'll make it exactly as long as he wants it.

One final observation before I close, and it is this. If you look at a lot of historical depictions of the kilt you'll note that the hose were typically worn shorter, meaning much more leg both below the knee was exposed. We'd probably today think someone bought his hose too small, but that shows you how fashions can change!


Aye,
Matt

[Martin S]

"If you look at a lot of historical depictions of the kilt you'll note that the hose were typically worn shorter,"

What puzzles me is to know how they kept their socks up, if they did not rise above the widest part of the calves.

Are our legs a different shape these days?

Martin

[freddie]

If you look at any Highland portrait before the 19th century you will notice tyhat all are wearing their kilts well above the knee. The longer mid knee length came in during Victorian times.