early kilts with pleats in front?

[Mex5150]

Notable lack of sporran as well, could the two be connected?

[timemeddler]

Notable lack of sporran as well, could the two be connected?

you think it might be a "stealth sporran"? like a big pocket in front using the same fabric?

[figheadair]

you think it might be a "stealth sporran"? like a big pocket in front using the same fabric?

There is absolutely no evidence to support this idea. Sporrans were often smaller at the time of the painting and so it may be hidden in the folds. Note the size of his servant's sporran. Alternatively, as a gentleman depicted in his finery he may have chosen to be shown without a sporran.

[timemeddler]

thanks all for the info, now I'm thinking about how to recreate a kilt pleated all around.

[OC Richard]

Isn't the "flat in front, pleats in back" just a byproduct of putting on the breacan-an-feileadh?

At least one that doesn't have a drawstring and is just a rectangle of cloth.

When the "little kilt" was introduced there wouldn't be any reason not to pleat it all around.

I wonder if there was a military influence which helped the "flat in front" small kilt become the 19th century standard.

I say that because when the military dropped the belted plaid and began wearing the small kilt in Full Dress they did so in conjunction with a new garment devised to imitate the look of the belted plaid. It amounted to the upper half of the old belted plaid, ending at the waist, and with a narrow self-belt fastening around the waist (the belt being hidden under the jacket).

I've read that in 1794 this switch took place for enlisted men but for a time Officers continued to wear the old belted plaid. Thus with their new imitation upper-halves, and small kilts with flat fronts, the enlisted men would resemble their Officers wearing the full belted plaids.

(I can't find a date for when Officers' belted plaids were likewise abolished for Full Dress, but I think it would have to have been around 1800. The Officers too wore the new upper-half belted plaids as soon as they switched to small kilts for Full Dress.)

[figheadair]

When the "little kilt" was introduced there wouldn't be any reason not to pleat it all around.

Richard,

I, and Bob Martin before me, make a distinction between the feileadh beag and the kilt. I known that the terms were used interchangeably in the late 18th century but it seem a useful way to differentiate between a sewn garment and one with gathered pleats, by a draw-string for example. The portrait of the MacDonald Boys shows the older boy wearing such a gathered (pleated all the way around) feileadh beag, whereas the portrait of an unidentified 73rd (MacLeod's Highlanders) Officer c.1780 clearly shows a kilt with the pleats sewn in and a flat front.

I wonder if there was a military influence which helped the "flat in front" small kilt become the 19th century standard.

It's possible insofar as the military likes to standardise things for easy of uniformity. That said, one needs to remember that the earliest evidence of a sewn kilt appeared during the Proscription era and so civilian references are rare.

[Pleater]

thanks all for the info, now I'm thinking about how to recreate a kilt pleated all around.

You'd need to decide just what it is you want to make - perhaps making a few mock-ups to see what could be done and deciding on the options.

If you wanted to make the pleats shaped into the small of the back at waist level you'd still need to consider the kilt as two parts, the front pleats falling from waist level and the rear fairly standard with pleats falling free below hip level.

I'd be inclined to join the edges at the right hip, maybe making a placket and pocket there and a false edge of apron, as to have an unpleated under apron would create a restriction to the pleats moving freely, and it would also make for multiple layers of fabric.

Knife or box pleats would both work, though being too exuberant with the depth of the pleats would make a heavy garment.

Anne the Pleater