MacKenzie tartan on bagpipes

[OC Richard]

Interesting things all the time on Ebay.

Here's a set of bagpipes said to be Army issue with the MacKenzie tartan bag-cover:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ARMY-ISSUE-...IAAOSwns1a7b7L

[Taskr]

for the price, one could have hoped Johnstone would have identified maker and added a chanter

[Mike S]

$590 is a good price for regulation army full imitation ivory mounted sticks and stocks, provided they are in good repair and from a respected maker. Most utilize their own, or their band's matched chanter anyway.

I agree that the seller should make an effort to ID the maker, most likely on the drones underneath the cord fastening points. I'm betting that they are R. G. Hardies. What say you Pancelticpiper?

[OC Richard]

My point in posting this here in The Tartan Place is that tartan-spotters will notice that the bag-cover isn't MacKenzie.

The seller doesn't know his tartans, evidently.

The funny thing is that I messaged him saying that the cover wasn't MacKenzie. His response was to the effect that it was MacKenzie because the pipes were army pipes. That is circular reasoning.

Flipped the other way, what does the fact that the cover isn't military say about the provenance of the pipes?

Did his mis-identification of the tartan play a role in his identification of the pipes as military pipes?

[Mike S]

As a piper, my concentration was immediately diverted to the pipes themselves. Seeing the red and white stripes in the sett, I didn't look further to validate whether it was indeed the MacKenzie tartan or not to be honest. .

[OC Richard]

Yes and the Ebay seller was probably the same, he didn't take a close look at the tartan.

MacKenzie is the Black Watch tartan with a white line in every green band but a red line in every other blue band.

MacDonald of the Isles Hunting was designed AFAIK by the infamous Allen brothers as part of their elaborate hoax. It has a bit different background pattern and a different red and white overstripe pattern, a white line in every green band and a red line in every blue band.

The differences are more clear in the ancient colourings

[MacKenzie]

My point in posting this here in The Tartan Place is that tartan-spotters will notice that the bag-cover isn't MacKenzie.

The seller doesn't know his tartans, evidently.

The funny thing is that I messaged him saying that the cover wasn't MacKenzie. His response was to the effect that it was MacKenzie because the pipes were army pipes. That is circular reasoning.

Flipped the other way, what does the fact that the cover isn't military say about the provenance of the pipes?

Did his mis-identification of the tartan play a role in his identification of the pipes as military pipes?

Too many incongruities.

If "make unknown" then how can one know they are military pipes?

Ross Johnstone Bagpipes, who "fully refurbished [the pipes] to a high standard" couldn't ID them? I don't know doodly squat about bagpipes. Are there tons of anonymously made pipes floating around out there?

The bag cover is Seaforth HLI (but we already know that's not true) yet the bag itself is goretex? According to wiki-know-it-all, "The Highland Light Infantry was amalgamated with the Royal Scots Fusiliers in 1959". Gore-Tex didn't exist in 1959.

[Mike S]

Too many incongruities.

If "make unknown" then how can one know they are military pipes?

That could be a case of "a little knowledge being a dangerous thing". I can remember when full imitation ivory mounted pipes were described by a number of makers as "Regulation Army" style in the vendor catalogs. I'm not sure if this is still a common descriptor, but one can still occasionally hear that nomenclature among we old timers. That MAY explain the wording in that listing.

In terms of the maker, a number of manufacturers have supplied pipes to the MOD over the decades.