Having trouble identifying this tartan

[doctorg]

Do either of those "Lamont" tartans have the black flanking lines?

I have no idea which (if either) of those two collections DC Stewart is referencing when he says

"In a collection made some years before 1822 two specimens appear under the name of Lamont, and they conform to the two setts we distinguish as Lamont and Forbes."


Or is Stewart incorrect? Does Lamont with the black flanking lines not appear until after 1822?

Do we have two different Forbes appearing between 1822 and 1831?

1) Lamont with black flanking lines to the white stripe.

2) Lamont with black flanking lines to the white stripe, and lacking the Black Watch alternating double-track lines (Logan 1831).

Or is Logan's Forbes not like that?

Now it's becoming impossible.

[doctorg]

Richard - as a wearer of the Lamont tartan I have come to learn it is a very subtle difference indeed. Forbes has to two black tracings on their side of the white stripe, while in the Lamont the white stripe stands alone. From a distance (and often in photos on auction sites) they are almost indistinguishable.

Too bad the OP does not have a photo of the tartan in question. I'm sure then we could put a finer point on the pencil.

I reckon it's Lamont. No black lines either side of the white Here it is.

[figheadair]

Do either of those "Lamont" tartans have the black flanking lines?

I have no idea which (if either) of those two collections DC Stewart is referencing when he says

"In a collection made some years before 1822 two specimens appear under the name of Lamont, and they conform to the two setts we distinguish as Lamont and Forbes."


Or is Stewart incorrect? Does Lamont with the black flanking lines not appear until after 1822?

Do we have two different Forbes appearing between 1822 and 1831?

1) Lamont with black flanking lines to the white stripe.

2) Lamont with black flanking lines to the white stripe, and lacking the Black Watch alternating double-track lines (Logan 1831).

Or is Logan's Forbes not like that?

Stewart was referring to the Cockburn Collection. It's been many years since I examined the collection but my records indicate that both are the standard (no black guard to the white). One is unusual in that the blue is in fact Wilsons' Lavender. Alas, whilst I have photos of some of the specimens, these two are not amongst them.

Apparently DCS spent 'a few hours on day' examining the collection and is known to have made a number of transcriptions. In this case, I therefore conclude that he was wrong and that neither specimen, both Wilsons,(he only mentions one) was labelled Forbes. Other than perhaps a later misnaming, I am not aware of the Lamont ever having been woven with black guards.

Conversely, Wilsons’ 1819 KPB included two settings for Forbes; one with K guards and one without, and no Lamont despite the latter appearing in all the early collections and the former not. The not K guard Forbes setting is supported a kilt and plaid I examined years ago that were made from Wilsons’ cloth c1820 in the non-black guard setting setting but which has always belonged to a Forbes family.

Whilst many of Logan's scales are defective, his Forbes one is not. It shows the standard setting with black guards to the white.