X Marks the Scot - An on-line community of kilt wearers.
|
-
12th July 10, 02:54 PM
#12
 Originally Posted by Bugbear
Once again, the kilt is not described as tartan. The hose are, in this and the other quote, specifically described as tartan. The "plaid" is also described as tartan etc, but not the kilt. Why would the kilt not be described as tartan if all these other items are described as tartan, unless the kilt were not tartan? Just saying...
I also note the long hair tied back. 
Might it be that the kilt was a tweed (as suggested earlier). When patterned fabric needs repairs, they show pretty readily.
If I was wearing something out in the bracken and it might be (probably WAS) my only one, I'd prefer it to be easily repaired (or at least, to hide the repairs made).
The tartan items might be their 'finery' with the real work-horse made in a more plain material.
I don't have a ton of historical expertise in Highland wear, but it makes sense to me. ith:
BTW: This is a fascinating discussion, thanks again for posting this
-
Similar Threads
-
By WClarkB in forum Miscellaneous Forum
Replies: 29
Last Post: 29th November 09, 09:30 PM
-
By davidlpope in forum Miscellaneous Forum
Replies: 27
Last Post: 10th March 09, 08:41 PM
-
By apack in forum Professional Kiltmakers Hints and Tips
Replies: 1
Last Post: 12th August 07, 11:05 PM
-
By Will in forum Comments and Suggestions
Replies: 12
Last Post: 17th December 04, 10:45 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks