New kilt

[Father Bill]

Pick one.

[Crazy Dave]

When I wear a waistcoat, I like to wear suspenders under. It eliminates the problem of the kilt (or pants) slipping down.

Dave

[MikeC]

When I wear a waistcoat, I like to wear suspenders under. It eliminates the problem of the kilt (or pants) slipping down.

Dave

If you kilt is properly sized, you shouldnt need a belt or suspenders. I wear my kilt out almost every weekend, and i cant remember the last time i put a belt on.

[Father Bill]

If you kilt is properly sized, you shouldnt need a belt or suspenders. I wear my kilt out almost every weekend, and i cant remember the last time i put a belt on.

Mike, that assumes a certain anatomy. My true waist, hips, and everything in between are very similar in size. If I take a deep breath and my stomach pulls in, my kilt may suddenly be down around my ankles. Suspenders do help some of us more than others.

[OC Richard]

My true waist, hips, and everything in between are very similar in size.

Me too, I'm like a big cylinder, with waist and hips the same.

Yet, I wear neither belt nor suspenders and have no troubles, and I'm a piper! Taking big breaths is what we do

I regularly wear my kilt all day at Highland Games including marching around piping etc and never once have to pull it up. My kilt fits well and stays in place.

The talk of needing a belt or suspenders is simply alien to me.

Ditto the discussion a while back about people pinning their shoe-laces onto their kilt hose. I was dumbfounded.

[OC Richard]

I like to wear suspenders... It eliminates the problem of the kilt (or pants) slipping down.

That's the crux of the issue, perhaps. Pants are designed to be held up by a belt or braces, while traditionally made kilts are designed to stay up on their own.

If one has their kilts made to fit like pants, it follows that such kilts will need to be held up like pants.

[OC Richard]

I'm interested to know your thoughts on whether to wear a waistcoat or not if wearing a belt.

For sure wearing a waistbelt under a waistcoat has recently become common.

Go back over the history of Highland Dress throughout the 19th century and up through most of the 20th century and you'll see that it's a quite recent phenomenon.

People usually blame the enormous Kilt Hire industry in Scotland, where belts solved the problems caused by ill-fitting kilts. I also blame the Highland Outfitters, who often show their models wearing belts under waistcoats in order to sell more kit.

In modern and historical Traditional Highland Dress it isn't done.

Actually, up through the 1930s the belt was called a "dirk belt" and was worn to support a dirk but rarely otherwise (form follows function).

In Victorian times the dirk belt was generally worn over the jacket, or sometimes over the waistcoat, but not under.

This began changing in the 1930s with the introduction of new styles of Evening Dress Highland jackets, the Montrose and Kenmore, which were specifically designed to be worn with a dirk belt. Being that this coincided with the wearing of dirks going out of fashion, the Montrose and Kenmore ended up being worn with dirkless dirk belts, now simply called "belts" or "waistbelts".

Here's the typical Victorian/early 20th century wearing of a dirk belt over the jacket to support a dirk



Going back into Victorian times, here's a dirk belt worn over the waistcoat supporting a dirk



Here's an interesting Victorian photo showing the dirk suspended by hidden means. Is it a dirk belt worn under the waistcoat? Or some other method? (In the Highland regiments, even today, dirks are worn in at least one Order Of Dress without a belt, suspended by a hidden strap.)



c1930 the new Montrose jacket intended to be worn with a dirkless belt, the beginning of the disassociation of the waistbelt with the dirk



I myself usually wear neither a waistcoat or a belt

[Dr Bee]

Waistcoat and belt - kilt and suspenders or belt to hold it in place sounds like two separate issues to me.

Firstly, if your kilt doesn't stay in place on its own then I'd say it doesn't fit you. Then again if you really must wear a kilt which tends to slip down I suppose some form of support might be required - I guess you'd have to sort that out for yourself.

Secondly, it has to be waistcoat or belt. Nothing will spoil your sartorial splendour quite as quickly as a dirk-belt's buckle poking out from under your waistcoat. Dirk-belts on your kilt can look good under an Argyll or Crail jacket when worn without a waistcoat. A dirk-belt can also look good on your kilt when you are wearing a shirt but no jacket. A dirk-belts real purpose is to be worn over a Montrose, Kenmore or Balmoral doublet in which case it may serve to support your dirk. Therefore no dirk-belt and no shiny buckle is ever seen with Prince Charlie coatees, Regulation doublets or Sheriffmuir doublets.

[Father Bill]

Well, you're obviously a different cylinder than I.

Me too, I'm like a big cylinder, with waist and hips the same.

Yet, I wear neither belt nor suspenders and have no troubles, and I'm a piper! Taking big breaths is what we do

I regularly wear my kilt all day at Highland Games including marching around piping etc and never once have to pull it up. My kilt fits well and stays in place.

The talk of needing a belt or suspenders is simply alien to me.

Ditto the discussion a while back about people pinning their shoe-laces onto their kilt hose. I was dumbfounded.

[OC Richard]

Well, you're obviously a different cylinder than I.

The other possibility is that we have differently-made kilts, but how different can kilts be?

I have two kilts made for me, plus a band-issued kilt, and all stay up fine. They're all traditional fairly high-waisted kilts.

For sure the people who wear low hip-hugging kilts will have different fit experiences than I do. We have a local band that wears kilts that are too short and too low, the whole band. The one guy who has a properly made kilt is planning to have it shortened so he matches the other people

(I have been trying to talk him out of it, but I'm fighting against peer pressure.)