Tartan of the Month - Apr 12: what do you see?

**figheadair** · 6th April 12, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by orvice

Welcome back!

The cloth appears to be home-made and of 18th c. provenance (judging by the herringbone selvedge and the presumably "hard" finish to the cloth. It's dimensions and fringing suggest that this cloth was a shawl or shoulder plaid. The amount of red (cochineal?) suggests that the cloth was made for a person of some financial means.

The tag indicates this cloth came from a collection, and the general lack of wear suggests that it was collected while still relatively new and stored for a long period of time in a folded state. I can't make out the writing on the tag, but if that were to be enlarged, the style of penmanship would help establish the general date when it was written.

I'm guessing that this is home-made shawl or shoulder plaid of hard tartan, and was made for a person of the clan gentry sometime in the mid-to-late 18th century, and that it was collected and made part of a collection (possibly the Highland Club of London's collection) at the end of the 18th c. or the beginning of the 19th c.

The C18th origin is almost certainly correct although it could equally be early C19th and the exact dating would have a bearing on the availability and cost of cochineal and therefore the owner. The piece is certainly well dyed and the cochineal is a good scarlet which can only be obtained using a tin mordant suggesting that it was professionally dyed, probably outside the Highlands.

The cloth is coarse but not hard like some of the C18th linen type pieces but the herringbone selvedge and general handle does point towards the cloth being rurally woven.

The tag does indeed indicate that it is in a collection, the Heriot-Watt University textile collection, but the writing on it is not relevant to the piece as it's merely archival data and does not relate to the piece's origins. Yes, the piece is in good condition but it does not necessarily mean that it was collected a long time ago, simply that it was not used often. The University was donated the piece from a collector who died in the 1970s but they know nothing of how he obtained it, from when or when which is regrettable.

Is the form that we see the original intended use, now there’s a question

**figheadair** · 6th April 12, 12:33 AM

Originally Posted by Dixiecat

1. the herringbone selvedge is along one length (that we can see) and only one fringe edge. I think this says that the piece was cut from a length of cloth instead of being woven for the final product that we see. But, I'm not sure as the second pic shows one herringbone length, but the other length looks smooth and unsewn. Maybe just plain weaving on the right? Sorry, having trouble saying what I mean. Just imagine I'm waving my hands around in an approximation of weaving.

2. looks like single worsted based on the threads seen at the damage in the middle

3. is the damage blue dye related? It seems that most of the damage occurs at places where the blue threads all, but that could be a coincidence of placement of a pin or broach.

I agree with you deduction about the length of cloth versus what we now see. A good logical conclusion – well done. Look again at both pictures and you’ll see that both ends are fringed and that only one side is herringboned whereas the other side is plain i.e. undecorated but still twill and not plain weave but I don’t think that’s what you meant by all that hand waving.

Yes, the yard is worsted singles. As for the damage, who can say what or when that was caused. The piece has no pin marks so the possible causes are many.

Originally Posted by KenB

The label is of interest. I'm wondering if it identifies this as one of the Murray tartans. Possibly one from the collection at Blair Castle. Now, having said that, I don't see anything that looks closely like anything like the listed Murray tartans. But this is a lovely tartan and the dyes remind me of the unidentified Antigonish tartans.
I'll keep looking and guessing.

The label I discussed in my reply in post #11. As for the Murray/Blair connection, there is none that I’m aware of. You are right to make a connection with the Antigonish pieces. This one is not related directly but it is of the same rough era and thus shows many similarities.

**figheadair** · 6th April 12, 12:52 AM

There's one blindingly obvious feature to this piece that's not so far been stated.

**xman** · 6th April 12, 02:50 AM

Asymmetry to the weave, or, the pattern is not perfectly centred. We've seen this before where two halves are woven to be fit together. i'm not sure this pie could accomplish that as woven.

Oh, and I think it is too narrow to be a plaid. A scarf or shawl/stole would be more likely given its width.

**figheadair** · 6th April 12, 04:48 AM

Originally Posted by xman

Asymmetry to the weave, or, the pattern is not perfectly centred. We've seen this before where two halves are woven to be fit together. i'm not sure this pie could accomplish that as woven.

Oh, and I think it is too narrow to be a plaid. A scarf or shawl/stole would be more likely given its width.

That's it! The correct term is that the warp is off-set rather than asymmetric which in tartan weaving is a term that relates to the sett. At 18.5 inches the width is indeed too narrow to make a joined traditional plaid and yes, the warp is not correctly laid out to allow the piece to be joined on the non-herringbone selvedge. This is unusual but not unique; for example, see my paper on the Tullibardie Tartan - http://www.scottishtartans.co.uk/Mur...eappraisal.pdf

Tartan scarves are very much a C20th thing and I suspect that the cloth was intented to be joined as a narrow plaid/shawl in the same manner as Wilsons' Old Superfine cloth that was woven @ 19" wide.