MacLeay's Highlanders' belts

[Troglodyte]

Those who are familiar with Kenneth MacLeay's portraits of Highlanders respresenting the different clans, will have noticed the style of waist-belt a good proportion of them are wearing.

The belts themelves are slightly broader than we like to consider standard these days, and the buckles tend to be vertical oblongs, rather than horizontal, with matching keeper and belt end-tip. There appears little diference between waist-belt and the across-the-body sword belts, apart from length.

My pictures are of one of these belts, which I have had in my collection (more an accumulation than a collection, really) which shows the detail of the buckle, as well as showing a hook-fastening buckle of a similar style and age but attached to a modern belt.

The lack of difference in size can be seen immediately.

The interesting thing about the old belt is that the 'tail' that passes through the buckle is a about quarter of an inch narrower either side than the rest of the belt - an element not obvious in the portraits. But the portraits give the impression of the buckles as being larger than they really are.

Other than on the likes of regimental pipe-majors in full-fig, I have never seen the MacLeay-style of belt beiing worn. Perhaps we should revive the fashion.

Or maybe not...

[OC Richard]

That's old Gordon Highlanders piper's crossbelt hardware.

Here it is in situ.

(You'll notice this piper's waistbelt plate is different, it's actually part of the No. 102 set.)



Here's that hardware still being worn c1960.



That hardware set was also often sold for civilian piper use. It was called "No. 90" which is odd because the Gordons were the 92nd.



This Dalman & Narborough catalogue from the 1990s shows all three of those patterns still in production, No 90 in this case is called 73.



About MacLeay, I just looked through and I didn't see anyone wearing that No 90 hardware.

Actually, most of the hardware in MacLeay isn't cast, but fabricated out of sheet metal, and either left plain, or engraved.

I did spot the left-hand gent in illustration No 26 wearing a cast waistbelt plate of the pattern called No. 102 in the black & white catalogue above. This is the same pattern of waistbelt plate long worn by Gordon Highlanders pipers.

[Troglodyte]

That's old Gordon Highlanders piper's crossbelt hardware.

Here it is in situ.

(You'll notice this piper's waistbelt plate is different, it's actually part of the No. 102 set.)



Here's that hardware still being worn c1960.



That hardware set was also often sold for civilian piper use. It was called "No. 90" which is odd because the Gordons were the 92nd.





This Dalman & Narborough catalogue from the 1990s shows all three of those patterns still in production, No 90 in this case is called 73.



About MacLeay, I just looked through and I didn't see anyone wearing that No 90 hardware.

Actually, most of the hardware in MacLeay isn't cast, but fabricated out of sheet metal, and either left plain, or engraved.

I did spot the left-hand gent in illustration No 26 wearing a cast waistbelt plate of the pattern called No. 102 in the black & white catalogue above. This is the same pattern of waistbelt plate long worn by Gordon Highlanders pipers.

Useful info'... Thanks.

I have never really given this belt and buckle much thought or scrutiny, as it lives in a box with other bits of dross at the bottom of a cupboard, although I have to admit to suspecting is was really intended for a cross-belt.

Closer inspection suggests (but there are no obvious marks) it may have ben cut down from a cross-belt to make a waist-belt of the MacLeay illustrated sort, as it is now only suitable for a 34"-38" waist. My guess is that the previous owner fancied himself as one of the MacLeay characters, and had it cut down - but done very neatly and competently.

This buckle-keeper-tip set is much higher quality than the others I uaully see - being thick and heavily cast, and not the pressed kind that show the 'repouse' hollow impression on the underside.

Perhaps I should hunt down a matching waist buckle and complete the set, but there is real danger it would still languish in the dross-box...

[OC Richard]

Yes your "No 90" set is of much higher quality than the ones made in the post-WWII era.

I acquired a used No 90 set around 1980 and it was a far cry from yours.

For example the "pineapples" on yours are 3D while on the modern set they were flat.

Yes we see in Victorian times the sword-belt & dirk-belt sets often using the same buckle, and sometimes keeper, for both the sword-belt and dirk-belt. But the dirk-belt rarely has the tip (chape). I don't know why.

There were also Victorian sets where the dirk-belt plate has the central cavity filled in (thus transforming it from a buckle to a plate). The final stage of evolution was the orientation of the dirk-belt plate changing from Portrait to Landscape.

Here we have two old catalogues showing sword-belt & dirk-belt hardware sets:

c1940 RG Lawrie (top)

c1950 Hugh MacPherson (bottom)

Note that only one dirk-belt plate has the old Portrait orientation, and that was soon changed.



BTW here's the earliest photo I have of 92nd Foot pipers wearing that same crossbelt hardware, 1861.

Note that this is before Glengarries had spread to all regimental pipers, and also before the 92nd adopted their now-familiar white sporrans with two long black tassels. All regiments had either five, or six, short tassels until the 79th adopted a two-tassel sporran for the officers undress uniform around 1850.



So from at least around 1860 up until 1994 the Gordons pipers wore that same crossbelt hardware, no?

No. There are photos like this showing Gordons pipers wearing the keeper and chape from their usual hardware, but with both the crossbelt and waistbelt buckles being from a different set, No 102 in the 1970s catalogue. This photo is from not long after the amalgamation with the 75th foot (after 1881 1/Gordons) and sometimes the pipers of the two battalions wore slightly different kit.

Also this might be the only photo I've seen of that particular sporran that the piper is wearing.

[Troglodyte]

Yes your "No 90" set is of much higher quality than the ones made in the post-WWII era.

I acquired a used No 90 set around 1980 and it was a far cry from yours.

For example the "pineapples" on yours are 3D while on the modern set they were flat.

Yes we see in Victorian times the sword-belt & dirk-belt sets often using the same buckle, and sometimes keeper, for both the sword-belt and dirk-belt. But the dirk-belt rarely has the tip (chape). I don't know why.

There were also Victorian sets where the dirk-belt plate has the central cavity filled in (thus transforming it from a buckle to a plate). The final stage of evolution was the orientation of the dirk-belt plate changing from Portrait to Landscape.

Here we have two old catalogues showing sword-belt & dirk-belt hardware sets:

c1940 RG Lawrie (top)

c1950 Hugh MacPherson (bottom)

Note that only one dirk-belt plate has the old Portrait orientation, and that was soon changed.



BTW here's the earliest photo I have of 92nd Foot pipers wearing that same crossbelt hardware, 1861.

Note that this is before Glengarries had spread to all regimental pipers, and also before the 92nd adopted their now-familiar white sporrans with two long black tassels. All regiments had either five, or six, short tassels until the 79th adopted a two-tassel sporran for the officers undress uniform around 1850.



So from at least around 1860 up until 1994 the Gordons pipers wore that same crossbelt hardware, no?

No. There are photos like this showing Gordons pipers wearing the keeper and chape from their usual hardware, but with both the crossbelt and waistbelt buckles being from a different set, No 102 in the 1970s catalogue. This photo is from not long after the amalgamation with the 75th foot (after 1881 1/Gordons) and sometimes the pipers of the two battalions wore slightly different kit.

Also this might be the only photo I've seen of that particular sporran that the piper is wearing.

You've saved me a huge amount of research time and trouble..!

Thanks..!

The Gordons' museum is only about half an hour's drive from me, so I might pay them a visit and see what they have on show for comparison.

From what I remember, the museum display is made up of donated items, and so their collection is far from complete in many ways. I have a couple of officer's sporrans that they have already said they would welcome any time, so that may be the destination for both the sporrans and the 'dross' I've accumulated.