What would the Victorians think?

[BoldHighlander]

Jock, I would say with very minor modifications you'd fit into the era well

Like Phil said a hat of some sort & the hairy sporran being the two major items missing, otherwise you wear it well my friend

p.s. -- I'll add some photos I have for comparison later in the day.
For some reason photobucket seems to be down right now

[Paul]

Jock, I would say with very minor modifications you'd fit into the era well

Like Phil said a hat of some sort & the hairy sporran being the two major items missing, otherwise you wear it well my friend

p.s. -- I'll add some photos I have for comparison later in the day.
For some reason photobucket seems to be down right now

try tinypic.com or imageshack.us

[BoldHighlander]

try tinypic.com or imageshack.us

Thanks but I don't want to go hunting thru my files to upload to yet another host (I already had to go thru that)

[BoldHighlander]

p.s. -- I'll add some photos I have for comparison later in the day.
For some reason photobucket seems to be down right now

[davidlpope]

[/QUOTE]

Based on the way the pleats look to me, the gentleman on the left is wearing a box-pleat...

Cordially,

David

[Phil]

I think Jock's outfit is an excellent example of traditional daywear and shows how little the style has changed in over 100 years. There are, of course, differences - a more comfortable shirt collar, slightly different cut to the jacket and waistcoat and the most obvious one - no hat!
What is interesting from the pictures posted, however, is the sheer variety of the Victorians' dress which indicates that there was actually a great deal less conformity then than there is now. Where we see almost identical dress, such as in the photo at the fishing lodge, I am sure they are probably all the product of Saville Row tailors whose style has been repeated amongst them as a result. If we come to the present day and Prince Charles who is illustrated in another thread, we can see the same timeless form of dress (some would call it dated) which is still the trademark of Saville Row bespoke tailors.

[Old Hippie]

What is interesting from the pictures posted, however, is the sheer variety of the Victorians' dress which indicates that there was actually a great deal less conformity then than there is now.

One thing I like about photographic documentation versus painted portraiture when establishing "how it was done" is that with portraiture there is always a degree of uncertainty about how the artist translated what they were seeing into the picture.

Most of us can spot the differences between knife pleats, box pleats and Reverse Kingussie (for instance), but a portrait painter may or may not have portrayed it accurately.

More specifically to Phil's comment, that's very insightful! The farther we are -- geographically, in time, or culturally -- from "how it was done," the fewer examples we have to draw upon to determine what's "right." Seeing these old photographs (and the coloured cuts that were done by one familiar with the topic) definitely opens up a lot of interesting discussions about how it's done now.

:ootd:

[BoldHighlander]

One thing I like about photographic documentation versus painted portraiture when establishing "how it was done" is that with portraiture there is always a degree of uncertainty about how the artist translated what they were seeing into the picture.

Most of us can spot the differences between knife pleats, box pleats and Reverse Kingussie (for instance), but a portrait painter may or may not have portrayed it accurately.

More specifically to Phil's comment, that's very insightful! The farther we are -- geographically, in time, or culturally -- from "how it was done," the fewer examples we have to draw upon to determine what's "right." Seeing these old photographs (and the coloured cuts that were done by one familiar with the topic) definitely opens up a lot of interesting discussions about how it's done now.

:ootd:

I had written about the artist, Kenneth MacLeay in other posts before, but in short he was commissioned in 1869 by Queen Victoria to paint a series of 31 paintings of her Highland retainers at Balmoral. These men were selected by the Chiefs themselves. The works created quite a sensation in their own time, and were published in book form in 1870.

For more on the authenticity of said paintings, I'd direct you to this quote on the subject by Matt Newsome (found at: Kenneth MacLeay

First, the MacLeay prints should not be considered in the same category as the MacIan prints. (For those unfamiliar with the portraits painted by Kenneth MacLeay, click here. The MacIan prints are very famous, but if you are not familiar with them, either, you can see them here.)

Robert MacIan attempted to depict Highland dress from various different time periods and various walks of life. Generally, the further back in time from the 1840s when he made these portraits, the less accurate and more fanciful his depictions are. Not that they are not great pictures, but they simply cannot be relied upon for accurate information on Historic Highland Dress.

MacLeay, on the other hand, was commissioned to make his series of portraits in 1870 and depicts actual contemporary dress -- he was working with real models, and his attention to detail is fantastic. We have every reason to assume that he accurately depicted what his models were in fact wearing. So I would say his work is very useful for telling us what was worn in Highland Dress in 1870.

And looking at his work, one does find hair sporrans being worn both formally and casually.

Somewhere I have a wonderful print of William MacDuff (gameskeeper) in his everyday wear, as depicted by MacLeay, but cannot locate the scan at this time. So instead I'll direct you to this thread: William MacDuff

Enjoy!

[Phil]

Somewhere I have a wonderful print of William MacDuff (gameskeeper) in his everyday wear, as depicted by MacLeay, but cannot locate the scan at this time. So instead I'll direct you to this thread: William MacDuff

Enjoy!

One feature that comes through strongly is the abundance of facial hair. I see Willie MacDuff isn't wearing a sporran but from the looks of his jacket uses his pockets instead. No doubt full of all kinds of fishing lures!