Regimental Sporrans

[Troglodyte]

My understanding is that sporrans with long horse hair tassels are associated with highland regiments. Seems questionable to wear one when I have no military experience. Any comment?

There is an association, to be sure. And with pipe-bands, too.

But that is not to say that hair sporrans are out-of-bounds to civilians in any way.

The 19th century saw many a civilian kiltie sporting a hair sporran, and the photographic evidence suggests that the strict day/evening or formal/informal classifications we now go by, were unknown back then.

This picture has been shown on this forum before, but it serves the purpose again - even if there is a suspicion that it has been staged. Said to be a smith in Pitlochry, our fine fellow is sporting both a hair sporran and tartan hose.

images.jpg

There is an abundance of same era photos of ghillies and other equally down-to-earth professionals who are shown kilted with hair sporrans, going about their rough-and-ready activities.

The white hair and dark tassel sporrans have a distinct 'dressy' look to them, but the dark hair versions - especially those with a leather cantle, such as the London Scottish use - lend themselves very well to informal daywear.

If you fancy using one, why not..?

[User]

...

images.jpg

...

It seems to be universally accepted that a kilt should end somewhere between the top and the middle of the knee. But that kilt appears to end at the bottom of the knee, and it looks mighty fine in my opinion. I'm tempted to try a bottom-of-the-knee kilt. I do a lot of sitting, and a little extra length doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

I know there are two schools of thought: If it's not traditional, it's wrong. Or do whatever you want, there are no rules. But at times I find myself torn between them. I don't want to look like I don't know what I'm doing. But sometimes I know what I'm doing, I'm just choosing to ignore convention.

[figheadair]

It seems to be universally accepted that a kilt should end somewhere between the top and the middle of the knee. But that kilt appears to end at the bottom of the knee, and it looks mighty fine in my opinion. I'm tempted to try a bottom-of-the-knee kilt. I do a lot of sitting, and a little extra length doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

I know there are two schools of thought: If it's not traditional, it's wrong. Or do whatever you want, there are no rules. But at times I find myself torn between them. I don't want to look like I don't know what I'm doing. But sometimes I know what I'm doing, I'm just choosing to ignore convention.

I would lay money on that kilt being a hand-me-down and not made for him. The length is therefore not an historically reliable guide.

Oh and there are very definitely some rules, pleats at the front for example.

[User]

I would lay money on that kilt being a hand-me-down and not made for him. The length is therefore not an historically reliable guide.

Bah, you're probably right. Still looks good to me. But after additional thought, maybe I should reconsider a long kilt. The average person doesn't really know what a kilt is, so I may be one of the few examples they'll see in person. As such, it may be better to give people a more proper example.
Or maybe I'm overthinking this and should go for it. I can always hem it after realizing it's a mistake.

Oh and there are very definitely some rules, pleats at the front for example.

Heh, touche.

[figheadair]

Bah, you're probably right. Still looks good to me. But after additional thought, maybe I should reconsider a long kilt. The average person doesn't really know what a kilt is, so I may be one of the few examples they'll see in person. As such, it may be better to give people a more proper example.
Or maybe I'm overthinking this and should go for it. I can always hem it after realizing it's a mistake.

A hem was often put on a child's kilt to allow for growth, I've even seen the odd adult on done that way but it is invariably done when using poor quality cloth. A good quality cloth with a descent selvedge or, heaven forbid a tuck edge, does not need to be hemmed and doing so will affect the the movement of the cloth, and not in a good way.

[OC Richard]

My understanding is that sporrans with long horsehair tassels are associated with highland regiments.

Setting aside for the moment the topic of tassels, the long horsehair sporrans still worn today by The Royal Regiment of Scotland emerged in more or less their present form by around 1840.

Sporrans went from being fairly basic leather pouches c1700 to being fur with hinged metal tops by c1800. Then from c1800 to c1840 the fur kept getting longer, first goathair, then when even more length was needed horsehair extensions were laid over the goathair.

These long goathair/horsehair sporrans were worn by military and civilian alike throughout the Victorian period.

By c1910 civilians switched from long hair sporrans to small leather sporrans, and small animal mask sporrans (pine marten etc) for Day Dress with tweed, though civilians continued to wear long hair sporrans for Evening Dress.

Then c1930 small seal sporrans with silver tops were gaining favour over long hair sporrans for civilian Evening Dress, though to this day many civilians continue to favour long hair sporrans for Evening.

So it's never been accurate to think of long hair sporrans as being specific to the military.

However, civilians haven't generally worn them for Day Dress since the late 19th century.

[OC Richard]

Now about the tassels, it might surprise some to find out that all Victorian-era Highland regimental sporrans originally had either five, or six, short tassels.

After 1809 there were only five kilted Highland regiments, here they are:



In the 1850s the 79th changed to two long tassels, followed by the 78th in the 1870s and the 92nd in the 1880s.

[OC Richard]

A hem was often put on a child's kilt to allow for growth, I've even seen the odd adult on done that way but it is invariably done when using poor quality cloth. A good quality cloth with a descent selvedge or, heaven forbid a tuck edge, does not need to be hemmed and doing so will affect the the movement of the cloth, and not in a good way.

Sadly in the Pipe Band world, where a "band set" of kilts might be worn for a half-century or longer, kilts are unceremoniously altered as needed to fit current band members.

Even though they're quality hand-stitched heavyweight wool kilts they get hemmed and un-hemmed repeatedly, have the straps and buckles moved and replaced, and even the horror of having a new hole cut in the kilt for the strap on the under-apron to pass through.

As the band's kilt-fixer I've un-done all sorts of things.

What can't be readily fixed are the holes in the upper-apron which invariably occur with bands who wear kilt pins.

[kingandrew]

I've always hankered after a horsehair sporran, with a roomy bag, to upgrade from the white bunny fur model I currently wear with my Prince Charlie for formal events. I love the traditional look of the hairy sporrans, and I think it would look dashing on the dance floor as well.

For day wear, I have a couple of nice leather bags. One is a very roomy Rob Roy style, the other a fairly roomy black rectangular job with leather tassles across the front.

Andrew

[figheadair]

I've always hankered after a horsehair sporran, with a roomy bag, to upgrade from the white bunny fur model I currently wear with my Prince Charlie for formal events. I love the traditional look of the hairy sporrans, and I think it would look dashing on the dance floor as well.

For day wear, I have a couple of nice leather bags. One is a very roomy Rob Roy style, the other a fairly roomy black rectangular job with leather tassles across the front.

Andrew

I don't think I've ever seen a horsehair sporran with a roomy bag. They are designed for show, not practicality.