Why is there no attempt to categorize and market these original tartans

[NorCalPiper]

I absolutely love the work Peter is doing. His post and academic approach to tartan is awesome.
What I'd like to know is that since THERE ARE tartan remnants that pre-date the Sobieski frauds and other so-called "Clan submissions", why has no one bothered to possibly organize and present them maybe under a number scheme. I've sen DC's reproduction line....It just looks like weathered tartans proxy modern designs (Excluding the Gordon and maybe a couple more).

I would love to see one of the weavers take this into account and have a tartan selection based on designs that are truly authentic. Whether these tartans were associative, or just fashion, I'd still feel a real link to my heritage if i could wear one of these.

[davidlpope]

I absolutely love the work Peter is doing. His post and academic approach to tartan is awesome.
What I'd like to know is that since THERE ARE tartan remnants that pre-date the Sobieski frauds and other so-called "Clan submissions", why has no one bothered to possibly organize and present them maybe under a number scheme. I've sen DC's reproduction line....It just looks like weathered tartans proxy modern designs (Excluding the Gordon and maybe a couple more).

I would love to see one of the weavers take this into account and have a tartan selection based on designs that are truly authentic. Whether these tartans were associative, or just fashion, I'd still feel a real link to my heritage if i could wear one of these.

Some of these early tartans are marketed by the major mills: Strathspey, Huntly, Aberdeen, Kidd, Lochaber, Caledonia, etc. In most cases the original thread counts have been modified a bit (almost no currently woven tartans seem to agree with the recorded thread counts, anyway) and most have become known by other names. For my part, I think the biggest difference between these old setts and modern tartans are the colors used in weaving. I agree with Peter M. that the WOB colors make any of these setts look very nice, particularly with green/blue tartans. The nice thing is that you can have ANY tartan custom-woven in the WOB colors by Dalgliesh!

David

[NorCalPiper]

Like i found this one-Its lovely

reference number: 0630

tartan name: Unidentified Plaid Barbie's Moss

type: Artefact/Unidentified

notes: A plaid wrapped around the body of Barbie, (surname not known) who committed sucide through the loss of her lover in the Napolionic Wars, she was buried in a peat hagg, and was exhumed in the 1990s, see S.T.W.R No 2695.

source: Plaid from Barbie's Moss

[davidlpope]

Like i found this one-Its lovely

reference number: 0630

tartan name: Unidentified Plaid Barbie's Moss

type: Artefact/Unidentified

notes: A plaid wrapped around the body of Barbie, (surname not known) who committed sucide through the loss of her lover in the Napolionic Wars, she was buried in a peat hagg, and was exhumed in the 1990s, see S.T.W.R No 2695.

source: Plaid from Barbie's Moss

Right, but as I read the description it appears that the real colors were blue and white, not yellow and green.

[NorCalPiper]

Yeah-
i googled the tartan and saw the blue and white one. Actually a gray blue and gray/white. simple , yet lovely.

[figheadair]

Like i found this one-Its lovely

reference number: 0630

tartan name: Unidentified Plaid Barbie's Moss

type: Artefact/Unidentified

notes: A plaid wrapped around the body of Barbie, (surname not known) who committed sucide through the loss of her lover in the Napolionic Wars, she was buried in a peat hagg, and was exhumed in the 1990s, see S.T.W.R No 2695.

source: Plaid from Barbie's Moss

It's difficult to tell without access to the specimen but if the dates are right then this would probably be an early C19th plaid as opposed to a typical C18th Highland one.

[figheadair]

I absolutely love the work Peter is doing. His post and academic approach to tartan is awesome.
What I'd like to know is that since THERE ARE tartan remnants that pre-date the Sobieski frauds and other so-called "Clan submissions", why has no one bothered to possibly organize and present them maybe under a number scheme. I've sen DC's reproduction line....It just looks like weathered tartans proxy modern designs (Excluding the Gordon and maybe a couple more).

I would love to see one of the weavers take this into account and have a tartan selection based on designs that are truly authentic. Whether these tartans were associative, or just fashion, I'd still feel a real link to my heritage if i could wear one of these.

A couple of the weavers have offered attempts at these, most noticeably House of Edgar's Old and Rare range but in every case they fail to get it right. Why? Because they are interested in sales and not historical accuracy. Add to this the fact that most of the weavers have been producing a particular version of a given sett and are not interested in doing another version that would invalidate what they previously sold. Strange logic to me but that's why I do what I do and am not in the industry.

The other thing to bear in mind is that this is specialist/technical stuff and they don’t have the knowledge and in my experience are not prepared to pay those that have. Much the same could be said for a separate database in which the old setts are organised – those that can are not employed by those that want and so it sits on the back burner as a good idea.

[figheadair]

Some of these early tartans are marketed by the major mills: Strathspey, Huntly, Aberdeen, Kidd, Lochaber, Caledonia, etc. In most cases the original thread counts have been modified a bit (almost no currently woven tartans seem to agree with the recorded thread counts, anyway) and most have become known by other names. For my part, I think the biggest difference between these old setts and modern tartans are the colors used in weaving. I agree with Peter M. that the WOB colors make any of these setts look very nice, particularly with green/blue tartans. The nice thing is that you can have ANY tartan custom-woven in the WOB colors by Dalgliesh!

David

Whilst the setts you mention are indeed pre-Sobieski, as are most of Wilsons' setts, they are not the same as the pre-Proscription setts which probably need their own category as they are the truly old ones.

[davidlpope]

Whilst the setts you mention are indeed pre-Sobieski, as are most of Wilsons' setts, they are not the same as the pre-Proscription setts which probably need their own category as they are the truly old ones.

Agree.