Can this kilt be lengthened ...?

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 10:26 AM

IMG_3246 copy.jpg

A few months ago, I purchased my first kilt via Ebay from Kilts4Less. Having now read extensively on this site, I'm sure this is one of their Pakistani-made kilts. It was only available in the standard length of 24", but when I wear the kilt at my natural waist, it's a bit too short (I've ordered a second kilt from USA Kilts at 25"). For THIS kilt, I'm wondering whether the hem can be let down to make it a bit longer.

I've read numerous threads here that good kilts have selvedge edges with no need for a hem. From my close inspection it looks like my kilt MIGHT have a selvedge edge (see photo), so the hem could be let down without risk of unraveling. But, having never seen a selvedge edge in person ... and being a bit confused by the threading for the hem itself ... I can't be sure.

So ... I'm wondering if any of the rabble with more experienced eyes than mine can offer an opinion about whether I should risk the removal of the hem or leave well enough alone and just wear the kilt a bit lower than I would prefer until I can replace it.

Many thanks!

**Tobus** · 3rd February 21, 11:27 AM

I can't really tell from the small size of the photo. Do you see raw yarn ends there, or do the yarns loop back on themselves? Is this hem just a single fold, or is it doubled (where the actual edge of the fabric is hidden inside the hem)?

Colquhoun tartan, aye?

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by Tobus

I can't really tell from the small size of the photo. Do you see raw yarn ends there, or do the yarns loop back on themselves? Is this hem just a single fold, or is it doubled (where the actual edge of the fabric is hidden inside the hem)?

Colquhoun tartan, aye?

Yes, indeed. Colquhoun Ancient. Although I now am dreaming of a Colquhoun Reproduction kilt after having seen the spectacular pictures of yours. Something for me to dream about and plan for!

In the meantime, back to the kilt I already HAVE!

I'm attaching another photo that offers a closer view ...

IMG_3256.jpg

It appears to have a single fold for the hem. And it looks like there are three lines of black thread running parallel to the fold and another thread that wraps around the edge of the fabric. What I can't tell is whether all of these threads are part of the hem ... or whether the thread that wraps around the edge of the fabric is a separate thread or not. And even if so, I don't know whether the fabric itself is selvedged although it does look like the threads might be folded in on themselves at the end. Based on what I've read here about Pakistani-made kilts from Kilts4Less, I'm inclined to think it does NOT have a selvedge, but like I said ... this is all new to me.

I supposed I might just have to use a seam ripper to undo some of the threading to see what's up ...

Kevin

**tripleblessed** · 3rd February 21, 12:48 PM

Are you sure you need go to that much trouble? If it reaches the top of the kneecap it's fine. Many today wear to the center of knee, but there is no real basis or
need to adhere to that. Visually, I prefer the top, and that feels better to me. But that's me, and I'm certainly not in charge.

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by tripleblessed

Are you sure you need go to that much trouble? If it reaches the top of the kneecap it's fine. Many today wear to the center of knee, but there is no real basis or
need to adhere to that. Visually, I prefer the top, and that feels better to me. But that's me, and I'm certainly not in charge.

That's a judgment call I'll have to make, yes. Just want to make sure I cover all my bases before making that decision.

And you're right, plenty of people wear their kilts at or above the knee. I prefer to be as close to the middle of my knee as possible.

Thanks,
Kevin

**Tobus** · 3rd February 21, 02:08 PM

Don't take my word as gospel here (hopefully some real experts will chime in), but your enlarged photo looks to me like it does have a selvedge of some sort under that black stitching. I see what looks like a white thread there, which is sometimes done on looms as a guide thread at the selvedge. I posted a few months ago about a similar white thread on some RRS tartan I purchased, and this looks similar.

There are many different types of selvedges, and they will be a function of the type of loom used to weave the fabric. But they all serve the same purpose: to provide some sort of finished edge that won't unravel or require mechanical fixing (like serging, etc.). If it were me in your shoes, I would probably take a seam ripper or similar tool and start cutting some of the black over-stitching away for an inch or two in an inconspicuous place like the under-apron. Just do a long enough portion to be able to turn the hemmed portion and inspect the edge. It can always be stitched back if you're handy with a needle and thread. But if it does have a serviceable selvedge, proceed with taking it all off and pressing out the fold.

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tobus

Don't take my word as gospel here (hopefully some real experts will chime in), but your enlarged photo looks to me like it does have a selvedge of some sort under that black stitching. I see what looks like a white thread there, which is sometimes done on looms as a guide thread at the selvedge. I posted a few months ago about a similar white thread on some RRS tartan I purchased, and this looks similar.

There are many different types of selvedges, and they will be a function of the type of loom used to weave the fabric. But they all serve the same purpose: to provide some sort of finished edge that won't unravel or require mechanical fixing (like serging, etc.). If it were me in your shoes, I would probably take a seam ripper or similar tool and start cutting some of the black over-stitching away for an inch or two in an inconspicuous place like the under-apron. Just do a long enough portion to be able to turn the hemmed portion and inspect the edge. It can always be stitched back if you're handy with a needle and thread. But if it does have a serviceable selvedge, proceed with taking it all off and pressing out the fold.

Thanks, Tobus. I will undoubtedly do as you suggest ... although I'll wait a bit to see if any others weigh in with words of caution or confirmation of your assumption.

Hope you're having a great day,
Kevin

**Tobus** · 3rd February 21, 02:19 PM

The other thing that caught my eye is that the order of colours at the hem seems wrong. The Colquhoun sett should not have green touching black. There should be a narrow white "guard" between the black and green. All I'm seeing is close-ups of the hemmed area and not a larger view of the kilt. In your first photo, where the fold for the hem is made, I see the blue field, then white, then black. It's like they accidentally put the white stripe on the wrong side of the black when the warped the loom. Does this only occur at the very bottom of the kilt, or is this something you see elsewhere? Could you post a photo of more of the kilt, like perhaps the entire front apron from top to bottom?

The reason I bring this up is because some weavers will do a non-standard alteration of the sett near the selvedge in order to achieve a particular colour stripe at the selvedge. I think figheadair has mentioned this on historical cloth examples, but I forget what he called this technique. At any rate, I might wonder if that's what this particular weaver did (which might seem odd for an Asian mill, but you never know). If indeed that sett variation only occurs at the hemmed area, it might indicate that it is indeed a selvedge and not just a cut edge.

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Tobus

The other thing that caught my eye is that the order of colours at the hem seems wrong. The Colquhoun sett should not have green touching black. There should be a narrow white "guard" between the black and green. All I'm seeing is close-ups of the hemmed area and not a larger view of the kilt. In your first photo, where the fold for the hem is made, I see the blue field, then white, then black. It's like they accidentally put the white stripe on the wrong side of the black when the warped the loom. Does this only occur at the very bottom of the kilt, or is this something you see elsewhere? Could you post a photo of more of the kilt, like perhaps the entire front apron from top to bottom?

The reason I bring this up is because some weavers will do a non-standard alteration of the sett near the selvedge in order to achieve a particular colour stripe at the selvedge. I think figheadair has mentioned this on historical cloth examples, but I forget what he called this technique. At any rate, I might wonder if that's what this particular weaver did (which might seem odd for an Asian mill, but you never know). If indeed that sett variation only occurs at the hemmed area, it might indicate that it is indeed a selvedge and not just a cut edge.

Attaching a picture of the full apron here ...

IMG_3259.jpg

The colors in the pictures might be a bit off since I had to play around with brightness, shadows and contrast to try to make them as clear as possible ...

Does this sett look right ...?

**ktk1961** · 3rd February 21, 03:40 PM

And now the mystery thickens ... prompted by your last post, Tobus, I looked carefully at the difference in the fabric on the turned-under single hem and the front of the apron ...

Here's what I noticed ... on the portion of the fabric that would be the bottom of the kilt if the hem were removed ... the black "stripe" in the set that goes horizontally across the sett is about 1/2" wide ....
IMG_3260.jpg

But on the remainder of the kilt as shown below ... this same horizontal black stripe in other corresponding places on the sett is almost 1" wide.
IMG_3261.jpg

So ... it does appear that some alteration of the sett has been done at the bottom edge of the kilt, which is now the turned-under hem. Does that confirm your instinct that the sett might have been altered on the loom to create the selvedge ...?