Brief, but interesting article

**TNScotsman** · 11th January 23, 10:14 AM

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/h...acular-fashion

**jhockin** · 11th January 23, 11:14 AM

“ , these kilts were 12-yard swaths of cloth that could be draped around the body”
I wonder what the writer’s source for that claim is, and how it was calculated? ( ex.: 2 - 6 yard lengths, sewn together along the length, and doubled, before draping on?)

**figheadair** · 11th January 23, 11:20 AM

And like so many of this ilk, it is full of errors.

Tartan was never banned, Highland Clothes for some men and boys was. The Act was in place for 32, not 35, years. The kilt was never "a symbol of Scottish dissent"; and the Act was not imposed by England but by the British Government.

Other than that, it's quite a good read.

**figheadair** · 11th January 23, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by jhockin

“ , these kilts were 12-yard swaths of cloth that could be draped around the body”
I wonder what the writer’s source for that claim is, and how it was calculated? ( ex.: 2 - 6 yard lengths, sewn together along the length, and doubled, before draping on?)

The author has clearly just cherry picked bits from various sources and merged nonsense together as fact.

**Damion** · 11th January 23, 02:19 PM

The writer is obviously unaware of George IV's role in the kilt revival. Without him bringing the kilt back into the circle of power it's possible it could have died out. It could have become associated with shepherds and cottars and the Highland Regiments may have opted to go for the regular British uniform over time.