|
-
5th July 14, 11:27 PM
#21
 Originally Posted by OC Richard
I wonder if the switch to knife pleats (in two of the regiments) was driven by the increase in sett size, which caused an increase in the amount of fabric in each pleat. They would have to either switch to knife pleats or resort to putting an overlap in the box pleats, no?
That's an interesting idea and one I've never thought about, principally because my interest lies in Wilsons' and older cloth. But it's certainly a possibility.
I'm not sure what the sett size of late 19th and 20th century military cloth was but Wilsons' 1819 Key Pattern Book gave counts for kilt cloth for the 42nd and 78th. In both cases the sett size ranged from 10.45 to 5.63 for Coarse Kilts and Fine Kilts respectively. In each case the kilts would have had a balanced box-pleat and been 3.5 - 4 yds in total.
-
-
6th July 14, 05:19 AM
#22
Interesting, I didn't know they were using sett sizes that big (10.45 inches) in the military at that early date.
The few photographs I've seen of early 19th century army kilts show quite small sett sizes.
Perhaps the large sett was intended for the belted plaid? I can't remember when they were abolished in the army; I don't think they would still be worn in 1819, but perhaps by officers.
In The Highlanders Of Scotland it can be seen that sett sizes in civilian kilts of the mid-19th century are all over the map, some much smaller than we would reckon proper for a man's kilt (more like we would use in 9oz fabric) and some quite huge.
The army, by 1900 at least, seems to have settled on large sett sizes.
Some book I have somewhere lists the yardage in army kilts for various points in the 19th century (possible for a single regiment). I can't remember which book, and I wonder how reliable this information is anyhow.
Last edited by OC Richard; 6th July 14 at 05:28 AM.
Proud Mountaineer from the Highlands of West Virginia; son of the Revolution and Civil War; first Europeans on the Guyandotte
-
-
6th July 14, 07:33 AM
#23
Now its been pointed out I see it all the time on them kilts the Roil regiment of Scotland is again the same set military box pleat but a lighter colour it seems its mainly a shading thing with the same Patten on most of them with an addition of a pin stripe on the Gordon Highlanders.
Its like being at school im learning stuff every time I come on hear.
-
-
6th July 14, 09:03 AM
#24
 Originally Posted by OC Richard
Interesting, I didn't know they were using sett sizes that big (10.45 inches) in the military at that early date.
The few photographs I've seen of early 19th century army kilts show quite small sett sizes.
Perhaps the large sett was intended for the belted plaid? I can't remember when they were abolished in the army; I don't think they would still be worn in 1819, but perhaps by officers.
The 1819 counts for plaids, of which there is one each for Officers, Sergeants and Privates all give a sett size of about 13.25 inches. The weaving instructions suggest that the counts are post 1800 so are probably contemporary with the 1819. I think Bob Martin's book mentions when the plaid was dropped permanently. I have a feeling that it was c1820-25.
-
-
6th July 14, 09:35 AM
#25
 Originally Posted by figheadair
The 1819 counts for plaids, of which there is one each for Officers, Sergeants and Privates all give a sett size of about 13.25 inches. The weaving instructions suggest that the counts are post 1800 so are probably contemporary with the 1819. I think Bob Martin's book mentions when the plaid was dropped permanently. I have a feeling that it was c1820-25.
Very interesting. My military Mackenzie has a sett size, red line to red line, of 15 inches and is knife pleated to the white line. I believe it to be 22 ounce Cheviot weave (as per an earlier discussion with Peter). The gentleman from whom I inherited it, along with my given name, died just before I was born, so it's at least 70 years old and maybe older. But that pre-dates the adoption of knife pleats by the HLI in 1948 - curious!
Regards, Sav.
"The Sun Never Sets on X-Marks!"
-
-
7th July 14, 08:29 AM
#26
They both look like wonderful kilts. Great stuff. Too bad the first one is 34". Glad you got such a nice kilt. Congratulations.
-
-
8th July 14, 07:49 AM
#27
The more I look at the Blackwatch the more I think I could undo the folds on ether side to make the apron bigger from both sides and get some longer buckles and it may just fit. the buckles would only need to be about 2" linger and with the extra width would fit my 36" and I can use the 2 lime green hangers to go at the top so it looks all the same and you cant see the unfolded parts at ether side as they all so with have a green pice all around same as the rest of the kilt .
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks