Cameron of erracht military kilt

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I've seen some older kilts fade in very interesting ways, so the color change here does not surprise me. (The last kilt OC Richard gave a picture of is a perfect example). However, from the photographs posted, your Cameron kilt appears to be made from a smooth worsted cloth, not the regimental cloth, which is a worsted/saxony blend and has a rather more "fuzzy" appearance. Plus, as you said, the pleating is not the same as the Cameron Highlanders. The other thing I noted is that there is no MoD label in the kilt -- which could simply mean that the lining was replaced at one time and whomever did it did not bother to replace the label. But it also could mean that this is not a military kilt at all, but rather a civilian kilt, or perhaps one made for a pipe band.

In any case, it is obviously an older kilt, and I personally think the unusual fading of the tartan is quite attractive.

[Tobus]

I'm glad these questions have been asked, because I have been curious about them too. I see a lot of kilts sold on eBay saying that they are military kilts, but with all sorts of confusing characteristics like this. I can't remember why I got this impression (perhaps I read it somewhere), but I have been led to believe that officers could choose to have their kilts made privately, as long as they used the correct tartan. But this may have resulted in kilts seeing some level of military service, though not necessarily fitting in with the usual labeling and detail requirements that we expect. Can anyone tell me if this is correct?

[Llama]

I really like the look of the faded bottom, too. Good to see a well worn, well loved kilt.

[macwilkin]

Well is sure doesn't look like a kilt of the Cameron Highlanders of Scotland, anyhow. About overseas/dominions regiments, there were so many of those, who knows?

The STA maintains a fairly comprehensive list here:

http://www.tartansauthority.com/tart...ental-tartans/

Although I do note that the list does not mention:

The Cameron Highlanders of Western Australia
The Queensland Cameron Highlanders
The Cameron Highlanders of Canada
The Cameron Highlanders of Ottawa

T.

[acolander]

Berend,

Chances are what you have is an officer's kilt, which would have been tailored for the officer as opposed to being an issued kilt w/ the bright green binding/trim around the top. Note the black binding/trim around the top, this is again a feature found (previsouly) only on officer's kilts, also the differnce in material as opposed to an OR's issued kilt, both in colour being darker than usual and in hand, would also indicate an officer's kilt. The tartan is indeed Cameron of Erracht, and although now faded it is the darker sett that was worn by the officers andwas a finer wool.

As to the pleasting, being knife pleasted would again indicate it being an officer's kilt as they had more latitude in their uniforms being tailored as they were.

I have 4x Cameron military kilts, 2x issued and 2x officers, and several pairs of trews bot6h officer and OR. Both officer's kilts are knife pleated where as both OR are MBP'd, and all the officers kit is the darker tartan and softer wool, whereas the OR's what OC Richard shows pictures of.

And before anyone suggests that the 2x near identical kilts I have to yours may not be military, yes, both the officer kilts are marked on the inside for the officers they were tailored for, providing name, rank, and date.

So yes, I would wager that what you have is an officers kilt in Cameron of Erracht tartan for the QOCH, or one of the affiliated Dominion regiments.

Christian

[figheadair]

Berend,

Chances are what you have is an officer's kilt, which would have been tailored for the officer as opposed to being an issued kilt w/ the bright green binding/trim around the top. Note the black binding/trim around the top, this is again a feature found (previsouly) only on officer's kilts, also the differnce in material as opposed to an OR's issued kilt, both in colour being darker than usual and in hand, would also indicate an officer's kilt. The tartan is indeed Cameron of Erracht, and although now faded it is the darker sett that was worn by the officers andwas a finer wool.

I agree. It looks like an officer's kilt c1930-40. The chemical black dyes used at that time were very fugutive and had a tendancy to fade out to khaki.

[Lorna]

Cameron of Erracht tartan as worn by pipers of the Cameron Highlanders of Ottawa, July 1, 2010.

[artificer]

Berend,

Chances are what you have is an officer's kilt, which would have been tailored for the officer as opposed to being an issued kilt w/ the bright green binding/trim around the top. Note the black binding/trim around the top, this is again a feature found (previsouly) only on officer's kilts, also the differnce in material as opposed to an OR's issued kilt, both in colour being darker than usual and in hand, would also indicate an officer's kilt. The tartan is indeed Cameron of Erracht, and although now faded it is the darker sett that was worn by the officers andwas a finer wool.

As to the pleasting, being knife pleasted would again indicate it being an officer's kilt as they had more latitude in their uniforms being tailored as they were.

I have 4x Cameron military kilts, 2x issued and 2x officers, and several pairs of trews bot6h officer and OR. Both officer's kilts are knife pleated where as both OR are MBP'd, and all the officers kit is the darker tartan and softer wool, whereas the OR's what OC Richard shows pictures of.

And before anyone suggests that the 2x near identical kilts I have to yours may not be military, yes, both the officer kilts are marked on the inside for the officers they were tailored for, providing name, rank, and date.

So yes, I would wager that what you have is an officers kilt in Cameron of Erracht tartan for the QOCH, or one of the affiliated Dominion regiments.

Christian

Bolding above is mine.

This is slightly off topic, but I think this example will assist in people's understanding of how difficult it can sometimes be to pin down officer's gear.

Officers were required to supply their own uniforms and kit (which is why their uniforms are tailored instead of standard issue).

As a side-project last spring I drafted up plans for a c1880's era officer's Sam Browne harness. I wanted it to be as historically correct as possible in structure and fittings.
The problem was that every officer had theirs made by a local equestrian harness maker (or for the very well off, a high end leather goods house), These makers used the hardware that they had on hand, or that an officer preferred, so the variations were ENDLESS. This was made worse by the fact that the harness was non-standard for home service (it was basically officer's taking the initiative to have one made in the field). Even after the pattern was "SET" and approved for home service in 1898 the belts were still made by individual makers, which resulted in a lot of personal variation.
So the exact details of these harnesses (ring size, placement, exact strap fittings, positioning of components) is nearly impossible to define with 100% accuracy.

ith:

[berend]

Here i am with some new pictures of the cameron kilt.

First: front of the kilt in comparison with the inside and how it has faded
Second: A repair, mended with a thicker wool
Third: the two-sprong buckles and the black top-rim

Although officers were permited to alter there gear, I also think that a sergeant-major could do the same thing bacause of his position within the company (correct me if I'm wrong!).
And I know that pictures of officers during battle, wearing a kilt, would maybe be impossible to find except during 1940. there are lots of other pictures of them wearing kilts behind the front-line, for example during parades, ceremonies and awarding medals. But i have never seen a cameron kilt on these pictures

Question to fighedair: What makes it a 1930-40's kilt to you, is it the colouring?

Greeting rene

[acolander]

I'm glad these questions have been asked, because I have been curious about them too. I see a lot of kilts sold on eBay saying that they are military kilts, but with all sorts of confusing characteristics like this. I can't remember why I got this impression (perhaps I read it somewhere), but I have been led to believe that officers could choose to have their kilts made privately, as long as they used the correct tartan. But this may have resulted in kilts seeing some level of military service, though not necessarily fitting in with the usual labeling and detail requirements that we expect. Can anyone tell me if this is correct?

Tobus, you are correct.