Interesting 1773 Description of Kilt

[Bugbear]

Just to play the Devil's advocate :

Maybe he didn't describe the kilt as being tartan because he felt the word "kilt", to his audience, would imply that it was made of tartan cloth?

Just a thought.

Well, I could point to his statements on the importance of small details, like shoe buckles, near the beginning of the work, but I'm not sure that would be a good defense. I don't think I can assume that the kilts are tartan by these descriptions.

[artificer]

Once again, the kilt is not described as tartan. The hose are, in this and the other quote, specifically described as tartan. The "plaid" is also described as tartan etc, but not the kilt. Why would the kilt not be described as tartan if all these other items are described as tartan, unless the kilt were not tartan? Just saying...

I also note the long hair tied back.

Might it be that the kilt was a tweed (as suggested earlier). When patterned fabric needs repairs, they show pretty readily.

If I was wearing something out in the bracken and it might be (probably WAS) my only one, I'd prefer it to be easily repaired (or at least, to hide the repairs made).

The tartan items might be their 'finery' with the real work-horse made in a more plain material.

I don't have a ton of historical expertise in Highland wear, but it makes sense to me.ith:

BTW: This is a fascinating discussion, thanks again for posting this

[Bugbear]

Might it be that the kilt was a tweed (as suggested earlier). When patterned fabric needs repairs, they show pretty readily.

If I was wearing something out in the bracken and it might be (probably WAS) my only one, I'd prefer it to be easily repaired (or at least, to hide the repairs made).

The tartan items might be their 'finery' with the real work-horse made in a more plain material.

I don't have a ton of historical expertise in Highland wear, but it makes sense to me.ith:

BTW: This is a fascinating discussion, thanks again for posting this

No problem, and you can download the two digital texts at those PG links I posted; though Samuel Johnson does not describe kilts or tartan in his text, as far as I can tell. I'm trying to focus on those types of things, but there are lots of other very interesting things being discussed and described throughout. I suggest reading Boswell's journal because he seemed to be aware that future generations might be interested in it.

I don't know if it's a tweed like fabric being described here, it just doesn't sound like tartan.

[Bugbear]

I looked over Matt Newsome's article, Pre-Culloden Tartans to get an idea of what all was going on with tartan at least in the ball park of 1773.

I also looked at his article, The Early History of the Kilt

The first instance we have of the pleats being sewn in to the phillabeg, creating a true tailored kilt, comes in 1792. This kilt is in possession of the Scottish Tartans Society and is currently on display at the Scottish Tartans Museum of Franklin, NC. It contains 4 yards of tartan, and has wide box pleats that are each sewn in. This is the first garment that can truly be called a kilt in the form we know it today. The tailoring and style are different from a modern kilt, but it is a kilt nonetheless, with its origins in the belted plaid of the late 16th century.

So the 1773 kilts would not have been tailored, and not at all like modern knife pleat kilts.

It also looks like this 1773 time period was within the Proscription time frame, though toward the end.

[figheadair]

The is no evidence that tweed existed until towards the middle of the C19th. It's much more likely that the overall hue of the cloth, plain or patterned, was being described.

Might it be that the kilt was a tweed (as suggested earlier). When patterned fabric needs repairs, they show pretty readily.

[Bugbear]

The is no evidence that tweed existed until towards the middle of the C19th. It's much more likely that the overall hue of the cloth, plain or patterned, was being described.

I would guess so, all of the references in the texts to tweed are discussing the river Tweed, and none describing fabric.

Thanks for pointing that out, figheadair.

[Bugbear]

I'm switching over to Project Gutenberg's eBook, Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland by Samuel Johnson, to copy this quote. Here is why I brought up Proscription and looked at Matt's articles. Johnson writes:

In the islands the plaid is rarely worn. The law by which the Highlanders have been obliged to change the form of their dress, has, in all the places that we have visited, been universally obeyed. I have seen only one gentleman completely clothed in the ancient habit, and by him it was worn only occasionally
and wantonly. The common people do not think themselves under any legal necessity of having coats; for they say that the law against plaids was made by Lord Hardwicke, and was in force only for his life: but the same poverty that made it then difficult for them to change their clothing, hinders them now from changing it again.

The fillibeg, or lower garment, is still very common, and the bonnet almost universal; but their attire is such as produces, in a sufficient degree, the effect intended by the law, of abolishing the dissimilitude of appearance between the Highlanders and the other inhabitants of Britain; and, if dress be supposed to have much influence, facilitates their coalition with their fellow-subjects.

What we have long used we naturally like, and therefore the Highlanders were unwilling to lay aside their plaid, which yet to an unprejudiced spectator must appear an incommodious and cumbersome dress; for hanging loose upon the body, it must flutter in a quick motion, or require one of the hands to keep it close. The Romans always laid aside the gown when they had anything to do. It was a dress so unsuitable to war, that the same word which signified a gown signified peace. The chief use of a plaid seems to be this, that they could commodiously wrap themselves in it, when they were obliged to sleep
without a better cover.

It's a little difficult for me to switch back and forth between the documents when they are both in the same book; the difference between Johnson's and Boswell's descriptions are very interesting, though...

[BoldHighlander]

Thanks for posting this Ted

I've read excerpts from these journals before (including this passage). I have always been of the belief (from what I've read, seen, & heard) that The Hebrides (inner & outer islands) were a world of their own, being separated by the water & all (and once being the realm of the Lordship of the Isles -- a kingdom within a kingdom), and thus a wee bit harder to enforce the laws of the land. Hence we read that "the fillibeg, or lower garment, is still very common", despite the Proscription Act.

Great stuff Ted, I really have been remiss in not reading the full journals. Something I intend to remedy. Thanks again!

[Bugbear]

Thanks for posting this Ted

I've read excerpts from these journals before (including this passage). I have always been of the belief (from what I've read, seen, & heard) that The Hebrides (inner & outer islands) were a world of their own, being separated by the water & all (and once being the realm of the Lordship of the Isles -- a kingdom within a kingdom), and thus a wee bit harder to enforce the laws of the land. Hence we read that "the fillibeg, or lower garment, is still very common", despite the Proscription Act.

Great stuff Ted, I really have been remiss in not reading the full journals. Something I intend to remedy. Thanks again!

Oh, you've got to read them both in full! There's just too much to go into on the differences between Johnson's account and Boswell's journal. I don't think Johnson describes Proscription correctly in that quote. I'm not a historian, though...

I like historical journal entries , letters, etc, and their written descriptions work out well for me... Sometimes it's kind of creepy to read them though.

[Nick the DSM]

I need to read this. I'm guessing you just found in google?