Wrapping the Braveheart kilt

[The Wizard of BC]

A point of clrafication -

The "points" you can see along the edge of a Hudson's Bay Point Blanket denote the overall finished size and weight of the blanket. The Official Hudson's Bay Site de-bunks the myth that they denote the number of pelts needed to buy it.

http://www.hbcheritage.ca/hbcheritag...anket/history/

For my public demonstrations I use an original Scarlet Red HBC 4 point blanket. (4 points denote a standard today's double bed size or 70" X 90")
Like many people I wrap up in a blanket on chilly evenings. When I found information on Matchcoats I began to experiment. Using just a belt I found, after just one try, that it works eminently well. If you add a pin even more so.

It just makes no sense to me that someone would think it more practical to use more yardage of modern kilt fabric when a single blanket works so well.

The example we have of two lengths of single width fabric joined together are fairly recent. Even Peter who wrote the articles says that they are products of the post proscription revival era.

So if you don't mind I am going to continue to promote the matchcoat as the most practical and most historically documented example. At least until someone finds documentable proof of what a Great Kilt really was.

[Benning Boy]

There was at least one other early trade blanket maker who also used the point system to denote size, a company called Eatons or Eastons, as I recall, out of England. They supplied traders not a part of the HBC system. There may be information obtainable through The Mueum of the Fur Trade site.

In my mind, to do all it is said that if could do, the great kilt would have to actually be blanket weight material, not light kilt cloth, not even regimental weight.

[MacLowlife]

Aye, Benning,

One wonders just how finely spun that Highland wool was. I am inclined to think it was heavy indeed.

I am not looking to start an argument, but the price of gold has not been as consistent as we might think. Granted, today's price matches nicely and it did when they first made Colt SAAs, but there have been wide ranging variations of the price of gold, even times when gold was positively cheap compared to, say Tartan or various forms of hardware. But I expect you could find some other item that has been more constant, say beer, or fuel.

I appreciate your warning about The Whole Nine Yards, which might or might not refer to anything at all. I am sure you are right about the expression having no connection to the great kilt. Charles Thompson says 4 1/2-6 yards. When I fooled around with a 9 or 10 oz version ( admittedly, to wear, not to keep warm) I found 3 or 4 yards was plenty, once you learned to work the ends...

[Calgacus]

Aye, Benning,

One wonders just how finely spun that Highland wool was. I am inclined to think it was heavy indeed.

I am not looking to start an argument, but the price of gold has not been as consistent as we might think. Granted, today's price matches nicely and it did when they first made Colt SAAs, but there have been wide ranging variations of the price of gold, even times when gold was positively cheap compared to, say Tartan or various forms of hardware. But I expect you could find some other item that has been more constant, say beer, or fuel.

I appreciate your warning about The Whole Nine Yards, which might or might not refer to anything at all. I am sure you are right about the expression having no connection to the great kilt. Charles Thompson says 4 1/2-6 yards. When I fooled around with a 9 or 10 oz version ( admittedly, to wear, not to keep warm) I found 3 or 4 yards was plenty, once you learned to work the ends...

As the links I posted show quite clearly, the cloth that was woven during the period in question and woven into cloth for wearing was very similar to the cloth used for tartan today. Certainly closer to that than to fuzzy blanket material.

Also, all this talk of cost and extrapolating the modern cost of tartan cloth over 250 years is pointless. The wool was produced, dyed, and woven locally. The only monetary costs involved were the import of some of the dyes (cochineal & indigo). Not everyone wove their own cloth, local weavers probably dyed and wove the wool supplied by the local people. Some areas were very much cattle country and probably bought or bartered for their woolen goods.

It's likely that clothing was a relatively major 'expense', either in cash terms or in terms of time & effort to produce when compared to today, but it is only in very recent times that clothing has become cheap and disposable. The average highlander probably had to save up for the dying and weaving of his wool, or the outright purchase of his feileadh mòr and it would have had to last him a good few years. When it was finally worn out it would have been cut up and used for various other things, which in turn would have been recycled until they were rags.

[Calgacus]

It just makes no sense to me that someone would think it more practical to use more yardage of modern kilt fabric when a single blanket works so well.

The example we have of two lengths of single width fabric joined together are fairly recent. Even Peter who wrote the articles says that they are products of the post proscription revival era.

So if you don't mind I am going to continue to promote the matchcoat as the most practical and most historically documented example. At least until someone finds documentable proof of what a Great Kilt really was.

Promote what you like, but the evidence suggests otherwise. The Dunollie plaid dates from c.1730 which is Jacobite, not revival. It was originally 6 yards long, and made from two single widths stitched together. It is made from cloth akin to modern kilt material, not 'blanket' type cloth. The Nethybridge plaid, to quote Peter, "would probably have been approximately 4 yards in length x55 inches wide", and is again made of hard tartan akin to modern kilt material. It dates from 1730-1770, so Jacobite or just after proscription ended, but pre-revival however you look at it.

Matchcoats may work just great and may be far more sensible than a 6 yard feileadh mòr, but there's solid evidence for the latter and zero for the former in 18th century Scotland.