Thoughts on the MacGregor Drawstring Plaid

[Sir Didymous]

I gave the apron slippage a bit of thought and honestly I don't think it would be any different than wearing a philabeg with an attached half-belted plaid. The 24 inch length would allow plenty of cloth above the belt to hold it into place. So consider that question retracted. About the bulk distribution however, I have a few things to take into consideration. I have experimented with a style of kilt that was pleated all the way around as was popular (in art at least) for a brief period. I found when doing some swordplay that having the bulk all in the rear is preferable. The extra up front, though more balanced, tended to get in the way. Though that could be more from the pleating than the material's location itself. You did mention one thing that made me think a bit in your most recent post. The three yard length. I have a three and a half yard plaid that I use in the hotter times of summer and when I am doing the fancier combat techniques that the crowds enjoy. It doesn't allow much in the way of pleats. Not sure if it would even require that many loops if worn doubled over lengthwise. Albeit I'm 6'2" and 287 as opposed to the average sized person of the era. I'm a firm believer that the experience of us reenactor types can more than augment the findings of the so-called experts, it can at times even prove or disprove them. Who are you going to trust more, one who theorizes from behind a desk, or one who has tried it for themselves. That is not to say that the authors and the ones who contributed their expertise to this article are just desk jockeys, but rather a bit of trial and error could shed new light on this subject. Like I said, I want to try this out as soon as the opportunity arises.

[figheadair]

Calgacus,

Now that I have access to a screen rather than on my not so Smart Phone I can see your original drawing in detail and understand your concept which is interesting but I'm not necessarily convinced that that was the reason for the central unsown section nor how the plaid was worn.

To put this piece in context, it is the only complete surviving plaid that I know of that was definitely intended to be worn in a belted fashion rather than used as a domestic blanket of which there are a number of surviving examples. The plaid also post-dates the clan era by some 60+ years, roughly 2 generations, albeit that there might have been the odd old man still alive from the '45 era who might have worn a belted plaid. Portions of older belted plaids survive but there is no evidence of this technique in any of those pieces of any such construction or indeed evidence of drawstring ties. Nor is there portrait evidence or, and perhaps importantly, is there anything in any of the military writings, instructions etc to support this style pre-1800. The absence of evidence for something does not of course mean that it did not exist but nor does it mean it did.

Early writings and the drawings of people like Burt and Sandiman all suggest that the plaid was worn as a single layer in the way most re-enactors have assumed. Add to that the references to wool/plaids being treated with whale oil (nice!) to waterproof them makes me doubt your concept. I just question why?

The Highland Revival era was one that saw a good deal of cultural 'invention' not least in aspects of traditional dress. I'm still inclined to the view that this plaid is one of them, which does not preclude it having been worn as you suggest, I just doubt its use historically and feel that to wear it thus on-the-hill would affect some of the garment’s practical properties. I can see the attraction in a ‘fancy dress’ setting, which is what the Levee effectively was, as it would make the plaid less bulky and so would look smarter in polite company.

I won’t have access to the drawings I mention for a few weeks but in the meantime here’s a contemporary portrait of the chief wearing the plaid in a more fulsome manner that looks more like earlier portraits of a plaid being worn and which might go some way to support this idea that your interpretation could have been employed as a sort of Court Dress for special occasions where the effect was desired but the full benefits of the cloth not needed. I’m sure that this is something that we could toss around for ages but for me and based on surviving evidence this appears to be a one off..

[Calgacus]

I gave the apron slippage a bit of thought and honestly I don't think it would be any different than wearing a philabeg with an attached half-belted plaid. The 24 inch length would allow plenty of cloth above the belt to hold it into place. So consider that question retracted. About the bulk distribution however, I have a few things to take into consideration. I have experimented with a style of kilt that was pleated all the way around as was popular (in art at least) for a brief period. I found when doing some swordplay that having the bulk all in the rear is preferable. The extra up front, though more balanced, tended to get in the way. Though that could be more from the pleating than the material's location itself. You did mention one thing that made me think a bit in your most recent post. The three yard length. I have a three and a half yard plaid that I use in the hotter times of summer and when I am doing the fancier combat techniques that the crowds enjoy. It doesn't allow much in the way of pleats. Not sure if it would even require that many loops if worn doubled over lengthwise. Albeit I'm 6'2" and 287 as opposed to the average sized person of the era. I'm a firm believer that the experience of us reenactor types can more than augment the findings of the so-called experts, it can at times even prove or disprove them. Who are you going to trust more, one who theorizes from behind a desk, or one who has tried it for themselves. That is not to say that the authors and the ones who contributed their expertise to this article are just desk jockeys, but rather a bit of trial and error could shed new light on this subject. Like I said, I want to try this out as soon as the opportunity arises.

Yes, the aprons work just like a philabeg as you state.

As for bulk, the splits mean that the bulk just above the belt that occurs with a normal blanket plaid disappears, or at least can be made to disappear around the back, depending on how you choose to wear the upper part. the fact that you have four layers of flat cloth rather than two at the front balances the weight, but doesn't lead to a big increase in 'bulk'.

I'm 5'9" and 150 lbs with a 31", so probably more like a typical Scot of the period. There are seven loops, so six pleats, and they are sewn at a spacing of one per sett, so if worn by me there would therefore be six pleats roughly 3" wide each, pleated to the line.

I agree that experimental archaeology is very important, and it's my experience with wearing a kilt on the hill and messing about briefly with a blanket plaid that got me thinking. That, and the fact that the central split is exactly double the length of the two end splits.

[Calgacus]

Calgacus,

Now that I have access to a screen rather than on my not so Smart Phone I can see your original drawing in detail and understand your concept which is interesting but I'm not necessarily convinced that that was the reason for the central unsown section nor how the plaid was worn.

To put this piece in context, it is the only complete surviving plaid that I know of that was definitely intended to be worn in a belted fashion rather than used as a domestic blanket of which there are a number of surviving examples. The plaid also post-dates the clan era by some 60+ years, roughly 2 generations, albeit that there might have been the odd old man still alive from the '45 era who might have worn a belted plaid. Portions of older belted plaids survive but there is no evidence of this technique in any of those pieces of any such construction or indeed evidence of drawstring ties. Nor is there portrait evidence or, and perhaps importantly, is there anything in any of the military writings, instructions etc to support this style pre-1800. The absence of evidence for something does not of course mean that it did not exist but nor does it mean it did.

Early writings and the drawings of people like Burt and Sandiman all suggest that the plaid was worn as a single layer in the way most re-enactors have assumed. Add to that the references to wool/plaids being treated with whale oil (nice!) to waterproof them makes me doubt your concept. I just question why?

The Highland Revival era was one that saw a good deal of cultural 'invention' not least in aspects of traditional dress. I'm still inclined to the view that this plaid is one of them, which does not preclude it having been worn as you suggest, I just doubt its use historically and feel that to wear it thus on-the-hill would affect some of the garment’s practical properties. I can see the attraction in a ‘fancy dress’ setting, which is what the Levee effectively was, as it would make the plaid less bulky and so would look smarter in polite company.

I won’t have access to the drawings I mention for a few weeks but in the meantime here’s a contemporary portrait of the chief wearing the plaid in a more fulsome manner that looks more like earlier portraits of a plaid being worn and which might go some way to support this idea that your interpretation could have been employed as a sort of Court Dress for special occasions where the effect was desired but the full benefits of the cloth not needed. I’m sure that this is something that we could toss around for ages but for me and based on surviving evidence this appears to be a one off..

I agree with you that this is the only example of it's type, it's not necessarily representative of how any other plaid was worn, and I further agree that since Highland dress was proscribed in 1746 and the Levee was in 1822, giving a 76 year gap, add that to the age of a youngster able to remember plaids being worn, you are looking at 85-90 years. There would have been precious few alive who would have remembered how they were worn. It is precisely this time gap with almost none of the old Jacobites remaining that made the revival possible.

I'm fully prepared to accept that this plaid is a one-off, I'd just like people to consider a) that it makes more sense as an item of dress worn the way I suggest, and b) that it's possible (only possible) that other plaids might, at least some of the time, have been worn doubled.

I think the proof of the pudding is to make a copy and try wearing it both ways.