R.R. MacIan prints

[davidlpope]

I am very sorry old chap but the "common everyday runnin in the woods Scots" were doing their "runnin" clad mostly in rags and looked nothing like those pictures of those posing for an astute and gifted artist who provided "eye candy" for Queen Victoria. These damn pictures ought to come with a health warning!

I think there might be some confusion between the McIan prints and "Highlanders of Scotland" watercolors by MacLeay. Both depict idealized views of Highlanders wearing the kilt. MacLeay's were prepared for Queen Victoria and are from a distinct time period. McIan's were more fanciful and attempt to depict a wide range of time periods.

See this post:
http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...30/#post886548

[Jock Scot]

I think there might be some confusion between the McIan prints and "Highlanders of Scotland" watercolors by MacLeay. Both depict idealized views of Highlanders wearing the kilt. MacLeay's were prepared for Queen Victoria and are from a distinct time period. McIan's were more fanciful and attempt to depict a wide range of time periods.

See this post:
http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...30/#post886548

Indeed you are quite correct I have attributed the wrong set of pictures to MacIan. However the same applies to both artists and sets of pictures---- they are"eye candy" for romantics and both should come with health warnings!

[NorCalPiper]

I, for one, have taken great influence from these prints, and have created a certain "look" around them for myself (At least when I'm not wearing just flip-flops and a t-shirt with my kilts).
There is much to be said that there is a certain fantastical quality about these prints, but I draw the inspiration from the overall look than the historical significance. One thing I know for FACT-I'll repeat that-FACT. Highlanders wore diced hose and hair sporrans well before "day" sporrans and cream colored solid hose became vogue. My inspiration is drawn two fold. 1-Diced hose turn an unambiguous part of the ensemble into a viable, almost decorative counterpart to the kilt. It just enhances the overall presentation which is part of the pride I get wearing the kilt. It is NOT inappropriate to wear diced hose for any occasion, period. Rules and jurisprudence came into being after the Highland renaissance and with military associations. The bottom line is that diced hose and caddagh were the nor for crofter and laird alike. Thats my overall justification. Wearing other decorative kilt hose such as Argyll, or Triced, etc. are all fair game to me as well, but I tend to wear these kinds more to their appointed etiquette (But I will sport them should I feel like it). To me, its all about looking great with your kilt. The kilt is the overall work of art that is adored, but by adding these kind of hose, you just take it up a notch and it just looks damn good!

As for hair sporran, there are TONS of prints from the 1700's to the late 1800's of the populace wearing them. Again, crofter and laird alike. They bring a certain amount of panache to one's kit, and wearing it (to me at least) is just as much an authentic celebration of my ancestral culture as are diced hose. Why should I not wear them both for any occasion?

The bare truth everyone is that 99% of the populace have no clue as to what is appropriate, or not. My goal is to present my ancestral dress in a way that is pleasing, stimulating, and fun. This invites curiosity, admiration, and respect all of which are the point for me wearing the kilt and its accessories. If the 1% have beef with my being inappropriate, or misdressed, then so be it. I just hope that the other 99% that see me will take a mental note when and if they decide to buy a kilt, hose , or sporran.

[tripleblessed]

Josh, I don't THINK anyone is trying to beat you up on this. Language usage and thought progressions are interesting, and often unintentionally ambiguous (see Who's on first?) while being factually accurate. I'll take a shot here, and maybe get yelled at myself.

I think what's being said is that the MacLeay images were painted from life, but people in their Sunday best. What they wore in these images was commonly seen by all, and similar to much worn by most. Many, however, did not have much of this to wear. and made do with what could be found. "Noble" families, tacksmen and their families, retired military, many merchant families, and at least some farmers would have been so attired at least some of the time. By the time most of the McIan images were done, he and his wife were settled in London, and it seems to me people are saying these images were out of his imagination, though constructed from his memory of Highland life and related imagining of same over a broader span of history, and with some romanticizing in evidence.

So. Real, yes. Common, yes. Common attire of the common man? Less so. There. Clear as mud and in fewer words than "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".

[OC Richard]

I recently bought the book "The Clans of the Scottish Highlands" illistrated by R.R. MacIan. While looking at all the pictures, I noticed that almost every highlander is wearing a horse hair sporran. I know they all probably wore those because it was the fashion in that time period, but why dont more folks wear them now? Is it a fad that has passed?

That book was published between 1843 and 1849, long before our modern "day" and "evening" sporrans evolved.

The long hair sporrans of the 19th century (usually goat, not horse) had evolved from the short hair sporrans of the late 18th century and were the only sporrans worn at that time, save for animal mask sporrans and the occasional old antique 18th century sporran.

you could wear just about anything with kilt. All colors of hose, shirts, and garters. Though, I noticed most had red garters no matter the color of hose.

Highland Dress traditionally was never about matching things. In the 18th century, before the concept of clan tartans evolved, a man would wear a kilt of one tartan, plaid of a second, jacket of a third, waistcoat of a fourth, and hose of a fifth.

Could we wear a horse hair sporran everyday casually as they did?

Once again, those sporrans were goat, not horse.

And yes I wear a 19th century style goat sporran exclusively nowadays.

At a recent Highland Games here one of the few men in kilts who was actually born and raised in Scotland was wearing a long horsehair sporran with his tweed "Day" jacket.

About the McIan prints, as people have pointed out they are rather fanciful especially in their depiction of historic Highland Dress.

One further warning about McIan's drawings: the rendering of tartans is suspicious.

Donald C Stewart writes, in The Setts of the Scottish Tartans:

The Buchanan tartan is one of the most popular and quite the most irregular...
The first illustration showing the modern design appears in the McIan-Logan work... Logan's own thread-count of 1831 indicates a design containing the same elements but perfectly regular, and of markedly superior quality...

we find in McIan's drawing showing a Robertson tartan irregularities similar to those found in the Buchanan, though we do not have to suppose that his version of the Robertson was ever in production...

A study of the McIan plates will show that while the outline drawing is done with considerable care, the colouring is often slapdash and highly misleading... they are for the most part worthless as accurate records.

[OC Richard]

military-styled horsehair sporrans

There is nothing military whatsoever about the sporrans shown in McIan.

The notion that "horsehair sporrans = military" is modern.

The military began wearing long hair sporrans early in the 19th century at the same time that civilians did, and civilians wore them in all modes of Highland Dress from the plainest possible Day Dress to full Evening Dress throughout the 19th century and into the early years of the 20th.

[Joe Gondek]

It could also be that the artist just really liked that style sporran or that it was the type of sporran that he had available in his studio

[figheadair]

A study of the McIan plates will show that while the outline drawing is done with considerable care, the colouring is often slapdash and highly misleading... they are for the most part worthless as accurate records. [/I]

The other thing that must be borne in mind is that McIan did the artwork but sub-contracted the colouring to lesser artists. If one looks at a series of original McIan books/prints one will notice vatiations in the colour detail depending on the colourist.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Just to point out that not ALL of MacIan's figures are shown in hair sporrans.

There are plenty more like this...

[Guinness>water]

Thanks to everyone for contributing your knowledge to this idea.

OC Richard, I didnt know that they were goat hair. Where do you get one of those today? And thank you for giving us an example in modern wear of that style sporran

NorcalPiper, I think you and I are on the same track. You worded it much better than I am able to.
The kilt is a historic garment that has survived time. Hair sporrans and patterned (argyle/diced) hose are also historic but have been moved from the everybody(or at least some) and everyday, to the very formal and very seldom worn group. While wearing the kilt, I'd like to bring some of those traditional items back to everyday modern use.

As many of you have stated, those prints are "dressed up" and made to express the painters view and what others want to view. I acknowledge that and have taken those images with a grain of salt. There is some value to them though. In that time, some of the folks wore goat hair sporrans and some wore patterned hose in informal settings.

Still, why are these things being worn by so few today?

Thanks again