Why is a kilt today 8 yards

**PrestonFM** · 25th January 12, 05:58 PM

I've been trying to figure out why a kilt is 8 yards. From what I can tell, soldiers in the 1800's had kilts that were 3.5 to 4 yards. Somewhere from then to now we've turned it into 8 yards.

I can't help but wonder if it's some plot by the mills. Seriously though, the only idea I can come up with is pleating to the set required a longer length because of the numerous deep pleats.

**xman** · 25th January 12, 06:35 PM

Yardage was added throughout the nineteenth century and standardised, likely because it looked better on parade. You hypothesis about pleating to sett is wrong because that happened later.

**sydnie7** · 25th January 12, 06:46 PM

You'd do well to read Matt Newsome's series of articles, here, on "Evolution of the Kilt." Saves time and guesswork.

**pugcasso** · 25th January 12, 07:06 PM

Mine's 8 yards (not wool thought) and I recently tried on a 5 yard modern kilt (with pockets) and felt disappointed in the lack of weight especially in the back and it lacked that swingy feel in the back ... guess I prefer the 8 yard kilt to be honest.

So maybe it's mostly for feel and swoosh-ness

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 25th January 12, 07:09 PM

I also have a pretty good summary here, that does specifically talk a bit about the yardage issue:
http://www.newhousehighland.com/history.html

Preston, you are correct that in the early 1800s, most kilts (civilian and military) were made with a nominal 4 yards of cloth. Over the course of the nineteenth century that gradually increased. It was not a jump from 4 to 8, but rather a gradual change in fashion that increased the yardage used over a period of several decades.

Even when you get to the year 1900 you still see regimental kilts made with 6 yards of cloth. Even today, I, personally, don't use any more than 6 yards in any kilt (unless required for a larger man).

Pleating to sett or stripe really has minimal impact on the amount of cloth used, so that is not the issue. Nor is it some conspiracy by the woolen mills to sell more cloth. :-)

In the early 1800s when the kilt was made with an average of 4 yards of cloth, the kilt was being worn more often as a daily garment by the Highland male. A 4 yard kilt is more economical and more comfortable. Fast forward 100 years and the kilt is being worn mostly for ceremonial wear. This tends to cause a garment to become more stylized and exaggerated, and this is what we see happening to the kilt, today made from 8 yards of cloth.

A well made 8 yard kilt is a thing of beauty, to be sure. But certainly not all kilts are required to be made from 8 yards. All kilts I make contain between 4 and 6 yards, no more, and I find them much more convenient for regular wear.

**cryerelizabeth** · 25th January 12, 08:07 PM

The kilt I made for myself is 8 yards of a kind of PV material. It definately has that "swoosh" that I don't think a 4 or 5 harder would have. I also think it looks better

. But I guess it depends on what someone wants in a kilt

**azwildcat96** · 25th January 12, 11:03 PM

So what of the saying "the whole nine yards"? Isn't this related to a great kilt being made of 9 yards of tartan, or something like that?

**KenB** · 26th January 12, 03:21 AM

Check this for the "whole nine yards" thing. http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/t...ine-yards.html

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 26th January 12, 05:07 AM

Originally Posted by KenB

Check this for the "whole nine yards" thing. http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/t...ine-yards.html

I think it is telling that of all the possibilities suggested for the origins of this phrase mentioned in the article, the amount of material in a kilt is not even on the list.

Perhaps this is because, except for larger gentleman, nine yards has never been the standard length of material used in a kilt.

**OC Richard** · 26th January 12, 05:08 AM

Isn't the rise in yardage in Army kilts as the 19th century progressed in part due to the increasing sett size?

Napoleonic era kilts had rather small sett sizes, but by the late 19th century Army sett sizes were enormous. Given the same waist and number of pleats and pleated to the same line in the tartan, wouldn't a doubling of the sett size would mean that twice as much tartan is used up in the pleats?

Here is a kilt evidently made from the military huge sett MacKenzie Seaforth tartan (the Army kilts are pleated to the white stripe)

Now here's the same tartan in a much smaller sett size, a modern civilian kilt. But early 19th century Army kilts were similar to this

Pleat both kilts to the white stripe, and see what a difference there is in tartan usage.