[BoldHighlander]

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

With the gretest of respect, I fear, you are grasping at straws to keep your dream alive.

Whatever...

Again Jock, I understand what your saying, but all I can go by is what eyewitnesses wrote about the man....I'm going to let it drop because I feel like I'm beating my head in the wall on the subject

One question I have for everyone though: is it just me or would'nt this thread, given the subject, be better served in the Historical Highland Attire section rather than Traditional Highland Dress section?

[BoldHighlander]

Here's what one might call a more realistic look at every day rural highland wear during the later half of the 19th century /early 20th century:



the image is of Donald MacDonald, Kinagarry, Arisaig, photographed by Miss M E M Donaldson about 1900-1910. He is dressed in tattered re-made garments representing the twilight of tartan as everyday wear of Highlanders
(from TARTAN by Hugh Cheape).

[Jock Scot]

Originally Posted by BoldHighlander

Whatever...

Again Jock, I understand what your saying, but all I can go by is what eyewitnesses wrote about the man....I'm going to let it drop because I feel like I'm beating my head in the wall on the subject

One question I have for everyone though: is it just me or would'nt this thread, given the subject, be better served in the Historical Highland Attire section rather than Traditional Highland Dress section?

Those eyewitnesses I am sure have been truthful in speaking about what they saw and I don't doubt that. Just as YOU would say(following my example from my last post) to your friends in America after a visit stalking here, you would have pictures to prove it too, that Estate tweeds are worn all the time. From your certain knowledge from what you have seen and can prove with photographs taken by your good yourself that is absolutely true. What you are not privy to and this is my point, is what happens for the rest of the time. No I was not around in Victorian times so I can only guess, just like you and anyone else. The only difference is that I live here and know how it works and how it traditionally works, so do please give me some credit for knowing what I am talking about on a subject that I know about and even if I do say myself, rather better than most. Dream on, if that pleases you, ignore the facts if that pleases you, walk away from those facts if it pleases you and be my guest. We shall both get on with our lives just the same whatever we may think.

[Jock Scot]

Originally Posted by BoldHighlander

Here's what one might call a more realistic look at every day rural highland wear during the later half of the 19th century /early 20th century:



the image is of Donald MacDonald, Kinagarry, Arisaig, photographed by Miss M E M Donaldson about 1900-1910. He is dressed in tattered re-made garments representing the twilight of tartan as everyday wear of Highlanders
(from TARTAN by Hugh Cheape).

What a super picture and far nearer the actual fact than those figments of imagination of Victorian times!

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I somehow missed the part of this thread where people were suggesting that MacLeay's portrait represented the day-to-day dress of the average Highland Scot.

These men were getting dressed to have their portrait painted by one of the most talented portrait artists of the period, whose work was commissioned by Royal command.

Would you wear what you normally wear when puttering about the house, if you were asked to have your portrait painted for the Queen?

So why would anyone suggest that these Highland men are wearing their daily work clothes? Then again, I don't think anyone has actually made that suggestion. So I'm not sure what the argument here is about....

[BoldHighlander]

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

What a super picture and far nearer the actual fact than those figments of imagination of Victorian times!

Which I imagine is what the "unkempt" every day appearance of William Duff was really like

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Originally Posted by HarborSpringsPiper

I surmise that the odd pair of hose with "lines" that Richard pointed out above is a similarly less than accurate portrayal of that particular gent's hose. I know for some this is tantamout to heresy, but I think all artists take a little license now and again.

Actually, I have seen hose knit this way. Now, whether the knitter in this case was inpsired by this historic portrait, or whether the portrait accurately depicts the hose being worn, are entirely seperate matters.

But my point is that it is very possible to knit hose in this style, so there is no reason to assume that the artist was accurately depicting what he saw. After all, you can look at the other portraits and see evidence that MacLeay was certainly capable of accurately depicting tartan and diced hose.

[BoldHighlander]

Originally Posted by M. A. C. Newsome

I somehow missed the part of this thread where people were suggesting that MacLeay's portrait represented the day-to-day dress of the average Highland Scot.

These men were getting dressed to have their portrait painted by one of the most talented portrait artists of the period, whose work was commissioned by Royal command.

Would you wear what you normally wear when puttering about the house, if you were asked to have your portrait painted for the Queen?

So why would anyone suggest that these Highland men are wearing their daily work clothes? Then again, I don't think anyone has actually made that suggestion. So I'm not sure what the argument here is about....

Exactly Matt.... I never disputed that fact, and actually knew from past research on the prints that they were mostly dressed in their finest. All I was trying to point out was that the portrait of William Duff was closer to his every day appearance, though in reality more on the unkempt side.

[OC Richard]

Originally Posted by HarborSpringsPiper

I surmise that the odd pair of hose with "lines" that Richard pointed out above is a similarly less than accurate portrayal of that particular gent's hose. I know for some this is tantamout to heresy, but I think all artists take a little license now and again.

Not this artist: I've seen actual vintage examples of just about everything shown in these portraits, or vintage photos of same, and his eye for detail is quite amazing.

"Artistic license" is a term thrown about, but in the history of art this licence takes different forms at different times, and varies with the skill of the artist.

We today, living after the art world has gone through impressionism and expressionism etc etc sometimes have a hard time seeing back to a time before these ideas existed. Many portraits painters in the 17th century for example, though having an incomplete grasp of human anatomy, were obsessive about the accuracy of surface detail, for example painting with painstaking accuracy all the intricacies of the lace being worn on a jacket.

It's why I trust the detail of the costume and pipes in this portrait, even though the artist had obvious difficulty painting knees, and fingers:

[HarborSpringsPiper]

Originally Posted by M. A. C. Newsome

Actually, I have seen hose knit this way. Now, whether the knitter in this case was inpsired by this historic portrait, or whether the portrait accurately depicts the hose being worn, are entirely seperate matters.

But my point is that it is very possible to knit hose in this style, so there is no reason to assume that the artist was accurately depicting what he saw. After all, you can look at the other portraits and see evidence that MacLeay was certainly capable of accurately depicting tartan and diced hose.

I went back and enlarged that print of MacNaghton and they actually appear to be tartan hose and not just lines as was initially suggested. See what you think.