Irish Saffron Kilt

[figheadair]

The OP's image of Colonel Niall O Neill, a Jacobite veteran of the Battle of the Boyne reminded me of this portrait of Captain Thomas Lee. However, unlike the OP's post dated 1680, Lee's portrait was done in 1594, when he was 43 years-old, by the Flemish artist Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger. It was probably commissioned by his cousin, Henry Lee of Ditchley. The subject is shown in the regalia of a captain of the Queen's Kern (a hybrid combination of English & Irish dress), posing with legs and feet bare, and armed with shield, spear and pistol. Lee served in Ireland continuosly from 1575 to 1599.

Nice picture but I'm sorry, that is rediculous dress. It looks like he rushed out and forgot whatever was supposed to be on the bottom. That shirt looks top fine and detailed to have been intended for use on its own

[BoldHighlander]

Nice picture but I'm sorry, that is rediculous dress. It looks like he rushed out and forgot whatever was supposed to be on the bottom. That shirt looks top fine and detailed to have been intended for use on its own

There's no accounting for taste, eh?

I agree....I only post it because its of a historic personage who actually lived in the era depicted, not like the 1680 portrait.

[MacSpadger]

Really? hmmmm....

Oh yes, John Derricke most definitely wrote the poem, but it's often stated he did the engravings, without any substantial evidence. Derricke was a customs officer and in the employ of Sir Henry Sidney, who led the campaign against the Irish Woodkerne. Derricke, as you can read, was very derogatory to the Irish, and praises Percy, even dedicting the book to him.

He took the book to John Daye for publication. Daye was, by modern day standards, a religious propagandist. He had previously been imprisoned for producing Protestant literature when all other Protestant printers had fled to the Continent. Come the Reformation, he was released, and started producing large volumes of Protestant literature. If you were going to produce a work of anti-Catholic bias, such as Images of Ireland, Daye would be a likely printer.

Day worked within the Dutch Protestant community in London, who had supported him prior to the Reformation, mainly through the Duchess of Suffolk, who was active in this group. The Duchess was a founder of the Dutch Stranger Church and Daye employed his Dutch engravers through this connection.

There are 20th century sources out there that say that John Derricke was the engraver, but at no contemporary point can I find Derricke listed as such. Some sources say this can be gathered because 2 of the Plates are initialled I.D. but this does not take into account that John Daye used an I to spell his name, Iohn Daye, as you can see here, bottom left. 4 of the other plates are clearly initialled F.D, so neither John Derricke nor Iohn Daye can be attributed as artist of these. It's more likely to have been an employee of Daye's, even one of his 26 children , some of whom went on to work for him.

The plates are also professionially made, very high quality for their time, they are not the work of an amateur. Derricke was a customs officer by trade, not an engraver/printer. Also, if you look at John Daye's other works, such as The Cosmographical Glasse, as well as looking like the work of the same engraver of Images of Ireland, a lot of the engravings have the exact same I.D initials as the Images of Ireland artists' signature. This has led me to believe that the plates marked I.D were probably engraved by John Daye, not John Derricke.

[BoldHighlander]

Oh yes, John Derricke most definitely wrote the poem, but it's often stated he did the engravings, without any substantial evidence. Derricke was a customs officer and in the employ of Sir Henry Sidney, who led the campaign against the Irish Woodkerne. Derricke, as you can read, was very derogatory to the Irish, and praises Percy, even dedicting the book to him.

He took the book to John Daye for publication. Daye was, by modern day standards, a religious propagandist. He had previously been imprisoned for producing Protestant literature when all other Protestant printers had fled to the Continent. Come the Reformation, he was released, and started producing large volumes of Protestant literature. If you were going to produce a work of anti-Catholic bias, such as Images of Ireland, Daye would be a likely printer.

Day worked within the Dutch Protestant community in London, who had supported him prior to the Reformation, mainly through the Duchess of Suffolk, who was active in this group. The Duchess was a founder of the Dutch Stranger Church and Daye employed his Dutch engravers through this connection.

There are 20th century sources out there that say that John Derricke was the engraver, but at no contemporary point can I find Derricke listed as such. Some sources say this can be gathered because 2 of the Plates are initialled I.D. but this does not take into account that John Daye used an I to spell his name, Iohn Daye, as you can see here, bottom left. 4 of the other plates are clearly initialled F.D, so neither John Derricke nor Iohn Daye can be attributed as artist of these. It's more likely to have been an employee of Daye's, even one of his 26 children , some of whom went on to work for him.

The plates are also professionially made, very high quality for their time, they are not the work of an amateur. Derricke was a customs officer by trade, not an engraver/printer. Also, if you look at John Daye's other works, such as The Cosmographical Glasse, as well as looking like the work of the same engraver of Images of Ireland, a lot of the engravings have the exact same I.D initials as the Images of Ireland artists' signature. This has led me to believe that the plates marked I.D were probably engraved by John Daye, not John Derricke.

Interesting.....and the historians will no doubt continue to debate these illustrations

You know, actually reading what you wrote reminds me of an academic argument I read about 4 or 5 years ago on these woodcuts, that they were based off sketches that Derricke made (sorry I can't recall where I read that, if I run across it I would be happy to share the source). It makes sense I suppose, take sketches & written descriptions and let the professionals create the print edition for public consumption.

I fear we may never know for certain. Well, as I said earlier, the historians will no doubt continue to debate them.

Thanks for the info on Daye.



Edit:
Allow me to add that if I had definitive evidence that Derricke had absolutely no involvement in the development of the woodcuts, then I'd be the first to say so!

[MacSpadger]

I fear we may never know for certain. Well, as I said earlier, the historians will no doubt continue to debate them.

I'm all for healthy debate, I just think it let's history down when people say things as fact, (in this case regarding Derricke) when the evidence is scarce, or even pointing the other way.

When it comes to kilts, personally, as a Scotsman, I don't really think of myself wearing much further back than what the Victorians wore, if we are talking about the pleated, presssed and stitched garment. I don't really look back into the hoary mists of time often, but when I do I find an awfy' lot o' breeks.

I know from other forums that the topic of the history of Irish kilts is a hot one, especially in the US. Factually, we know that the kilt was promoted for use by members of the Gaelic League from 1900 onwards. That should be enough justification for anyone of Irish blood who wants to wear one to go and happily put one on, I would have thought. You can find Patrick Pearse/Pádraig Pearse's thoughts on the matter online easy enough.

[BoldHighlander]

I'm all for healthy debate, I just think it let's history down when people say things as fact, (in this case regarding Derricke) when the evidence is scarce, or even pointing the other way.

I'm not sure I agree with you that anything points the other way regarding Derricke's woodcuts. They were posted (in my case -- I can't speak for the OP) as a better example of Irish dress of the period, from a period source (rather than the fanciful 1680 portrait that was posted), NOT as an argument for an Irish kilt.

As for what I posted about Derricke being fact, it is fact as far as what I've read historians write on the subject (of his woodcuts) thus far. Your conjecture on Daye is interesting, and could even be true, however I haven't seen it proven as fact either....as I said, the debate will no doubt continue, just as it has within academic circles.

I fear that until it can be satisfactorily proven 100% either way, (regarding the origin of the woodcuts), that any further debate on the subject is beating the proverbial dead horse...

I know from other forums that the topic of the history of Irish kilts is a hot one, especially in the US. Factually, we know that the kilt was promoted for use by members of the Gaelic League from 1900 onwards. That should be enough justification for anyone of Irish blood who wants to wear one to go and happily put one on, I would have thought. You can find Patrick Pearse/Pádraig Pearse's thoughts on the matter online easy enough.

Now your preaching to the choir (I wholeheartedly agree).

[BoldHighlander]

Just a head's up! I've decided to post all 12 woodcuts from Derricke's The Image of Ireland later this evening in their own thread.


Update: Though I got them scanned, the new thread will have to wait until tomorrow as I'm not feeling rather well at the moment (flu-like symptoms). Sorry for the delay.

[Paul Henry]

Just a head's up! I've decided to post all 12 woodcuts from Derricke's The Image of Ireland later this evening in their own thread.


Update: Though I got them scanned, the new thread may have to wait until tomorrow as I'm not feeling rather well at the moment. Sorry for the delay.

in the meantime how about this reference? already hosted and labelled
Derricke's The Image of Irelande