Tartan price comparison - Wilsons' and today

[figheadair]

Looking at some of Wilsons' cloth pricing is fascinating and helps explain why the tartan industry of today is but a shadow of its former self but why individuals have far more tartan/kilts/stuff etc., than they would have had if they'd lived in 1820.

In 1819 the manufacturing cost of Wilsons' Superfine tartan was 8d per Scotch Ell (37 inches, so essential the same as a yard) which equates to approximately £1.50 today and explains why hard wearing tartan was in demand across the world. Today the nearest equivalent cloth would cost around £42 p/mtr wholesale. Hardly surprising that our weaving industry has collapsed because of cheaper cloth available from overseas.

8d p/ell = 1.5 yds per Shilling or 13.3 yds of tartan for a £1 which, even allowing for a retailer's mark-up, looks like an incredible price when a £1's worth of cloth would have been more than enough for a whole outfit. Bargin! Until that is, one factors in the equivalent average earnings: a footman in 1820 earned in the region of £8 p/a so a yard of cloth represented 12/5% of annual income. Assume an equivalent type job today earns £15k then the yardage costs 0.28%. An Army Major on the other hand earned £1.2s p/d (£256 p/a) so £1 represented 0.004% of annual income compared with today's officer for whom modern cloth equates to 0.001 of income. In 1820 in income of £500 (£21k today) would mean one was considered rich. Hard to buy a house and bring up a family on that today!

[Orionson]

...a pleasure reading your posts, Mr. MacDonald. Thank you.

[Orvis]

Looking at some of Wilsons' cloth pricing is fascinating and helps explain why the tartan industry of today is but a shadow of its former self but why individuals have far more tartan/kilts/stuff etc., than they would have had if they'd lived in 1820.

In 1819 the manufacturing cost of Wilsons' Superfine tartan was 8d per Scotch Ell (37 inches, so essential the same as a yard) which equates to approximately £1.50 today and explains why hard wearing tartan was in demand across the world. Today the nearest equivalent cloth would cost around £42 p/mtr wholesale. Hardly surprising that our weaving industry has collapsed because of cheaper cloth available from overseas.

8d p/ell = 1.5 yds per Shilling or 13.3 yds of tartan for a £1 which, even allowing for a retailer's mark-up, looks like an incredible price when a £1's worth of cloth would have been more than enough for a whole outfit. Bargin! Until that is, one factors in the equivalent average earnings: a footman in 1820 earned in the region of £8 p/a so a yard of cloth represented 12/5% of annual income. Assume an equivalent type job today earns £15k then the yardage costs 0.28%. An Army Major on the other hand earned £1.2s p/d (£256 p/a) so £1 represented 0.004% of annual income compared with today's officer for whom modern cloth equates to 0.001 of income. In 1820 in income of £500 (£21k today) would mean one was considered rich. Hard to buy a house and bring up a family on that today!

When I was doing 18th c. British Army Highland reenacting (from 1989-2005), we would (when talking to tourists in our camp) always try to make a point of explaining the difference in costs between the 18th c. and today. It was difficult to find examples that modern folk could relate to, and then convert the 18th c. cost into modern values, but the pint of ale was always a good one: 1/2 pence in 1775, and 3-5 pounds today. A government-issued baskethilt backsword with scabbard (for private soldiers) cost 8 shilliings back then, and a modern reproduction (by The Mad Piper) cost me nearly $600 (U.S.). Soldiers had to pay for their uniforms (and replacement parts) then. Plaids were replaced every two years, and enough tartan for a Highland soldier to make a joined plaid (to replace a worn-out one, at the prices cited by Mr. MacDonald, above) would cost a soldier a little over five shillings. For a private soldier making 8p per day (before deductions), that was a tremendous amount, even if it was paid in increments throughout the year.

In the 18th c. British Army, regimental economy worked like this: Each year the Crown would pay the proprietary regimental Colonel (he literally owned the regiment), through his agent, enough money to operate the regiment. This included uniforms, weapons, food, Colours, pay and allowances and so forth. With regard to uniforms, the Colonel's agent would annually contract with tailors to produce the other ranks' uniforms (officers purchased their own uniforms), which were issued in June. In Highland regiments, plaids were issued every two years, and each soldier received enough red/white diced cloth to make four pairs of hose annually. The soldier's old plaid was usually modified into a philabeg. The Highland soldier's uniform was purchased annually from his proprietary Captain (who owned the company the soldier was in), who in turn purchased it from the regimental Colonel. Consequently, if a soldier was killed, captured or deserted before he'd paid off his uniform expenses, the Captain was still responsible for paying back the Colonel and could incur a considerable financial loss. If a regiment was hit too hard by casualties or losses from other causes, a Colonel could likewise incur a considerable loss. It was a roll of the dice for regimenal Colonels and Captains - they had the chance to profit from this business (perfectly legitimate), but also had the chance to be financially ruined. In late 18th c., the system of proprietary Colonels was abolished and the Army took on the responsibility of issuing uniforms and the like to the soldiers, and the post of Colonel of the Regiment became a ceremonial one.

[OC Richard]

Thanks so much Orvis for that information!

I can see the parallels with the Navy in Jack Aubrey's day (early 19th century).

The separate contracting of uniform manufacture explains all the little features unique to each regiment.

And the Captains owning the Companies explains the old system of Company Pipers, who were not on the official establishment, but paid for by the officers, and dressed in a variety of ways (some in the ordinary regimental uniform, some in elaborate livery).

Pipers weren't on the official regimental establishment, paid by the Crown, until the mid-19th century.

[figheadair]

The different quality of the plaid for Officers, Sergeants and Privates was reflected in the cost of the material. For example, a Wilsons' account letter of 1779 relating to the Athole Highlanders Regt lists the price per yard as:

Officers Plaids - 2/1d (two shillings and a penny)
Sergeants " - 1/6d
Privates " - /11d

Kilt cloth was slightly cheaper which I assume was because it was 'coarse cloth'.

Officers Kilts - 1/7d
Sergeants " - 1/2¹/₂d
Privats " - /10d

Kilt cloth was 22" wide in all qualities, which would make for a short kilt on anyone over 5' 10"; Officers' plaid material was 27" wide, Sergeants' and Privates' was 26" wide. So, it is clear that by c1780 there was a different quality of cloth for plaids and kilts, although the former were no doubt re-used as kilts in some cases.

What isn't clear is whether 'kilt' meant a sewn garment or an unsewn feileadh beag and none survive from that period. The oldest survivng kilt I know of is the 92nd one c1794 in the collection of the National Museum of Scotland. It has sewn pleats but is not made from coarse cloth but a finer material with silk used for the yellow which suggests it was an officer's kilt.

[Orvis]

Thanks so much Orvis for that information!

I can see the parallels with the Navy in Jack Aubrey's day (early 19th century).

The separate contracting of uniform manufacture explains all the little features unique to each regiment.

And the Captains owning the Companies explains the old system of Company Pipers, who were not on the official establishment, but paid for by the officers, and dressed in a variety of ways (some in the ordinary regimental uniform, some in elaborate livery).

Pipers weren't on the official regimental establishment, paid by the Crown, until the mid-19th century.

OC Richard,

The British Navy was on a completely different "economy" setup than the Army. For example, there was no purchase of commissions for officers. Officers were the only uniformed men in the Navy, and thus purchased their own uniforms. Enlisted sailors had no uniform (except for the crews of the captain's or admiral's barges, who were uniformed at the expense of the officers), but did get "slops" from the ship to replace worn-out clothing, which resulted in a charge against their pay. Also, in the Navy (as far as I know), food was not charged against the sailors' pay, and officers mostly paid for their own food.

With regard to the Army system of proprietary Colonels, that did explain the differences in regimental uniforms. However, the Army's Board of General Officers had to approve of each regiment's uniforms, and there was much that they rejected. In the 1740's, for example, the Colonels were forbidden to put their personal coat of arms or crest on the Colours, and they were also forbidden to dress drummers (and later fifers, when authorized) in their personal livery. Musicians uniforms and Colors were regulated.

As to pipers in the Army, before the early 1850's, Scottish regiments (including Highland ones) were only allowed one piper on the official establishment (i.e., that the government would pay for). Any other pipers were hired by the officers and, in order to cut costs, sometimes they were deceptively enlisted as drummers or private soldiers. In their playing, they functioned rather like the clan chief's piper - for his and his guests pleasure, possibly on the march, and in battle. Pipers were not organized as battalion pipe bands until the 1850's, when the Army authorized pipe bands and set up the official establishment of pipers in each regiment, when each company got a piper as a "field musician" (to serve along with a drummer), and the pipers and drummers played as a band on parade when the Commanding Officer so specified. I might add that during most of the 18th c., regimental bands (as opposed to field musicians) were completely unofficial and were paid for by the officers. Thus, being privately-hired entertainers, they could be dressed any way the CO wanted. It is my understanding that at one point in the 18th c., the 42nd Regt's (Black Watch) band was dressed in a Turkish mode. Only when the Army took over the organization of regimental bands did that change.

Peter, thanks for the 1779 information on Wilson's tartan cost to the Highland regiments. I was aware (from your book) of the various qualities of cloth for officers, serjeants and other ranks, but not the cost. The cost and quality of tartan goes along with the quality of other uniform items in Highland regiments - Officers had the finest (privately purchased), Serjeants had less fine cloth (but better quality than the Other Ranks), and the Corporals and Private Soldiers had the least quality. I have a couple of old books that describe the the history of the Strathspey Fencibles and the 97th Foot in the early 1790's. In the opening chapter of each book, pains are taken to describe the uniforms, and I was interested to learn that private soldiers only got three yards of tartan for philibegs, serjeants got four yards and officers as much as they cared to purchase. Quality of cloth for each group was not discussed. The Strathspey Fencibles were interesting, in that much of their regimentally owned equipment and clothing (such as grenadier caps) ended up stored at Castle Grant, where it is still available to researchers.

As to military plaids and philabegs not surviving, that is due to the fact that after the soldiers finished paying their Captains (and through him, the Colonel) for them, these uniform items (along with coats, shoes, etc) were theirs to dispose of as they pleased. Thus, the plaids were recycled into philabegs, and worn philabegs, coats and other bits were probably given to soldiers' dependents to make clothing from, or the soldiers (and possibly their dependants) sold old uniform items to civilians for cash. It is my understanding that 18th and early-19th c. Highland regiments were noted for their sobriety and good order, so I don't think they had a problem with soldiers pawning uniform items for drink until the national character of the Highland regiments was undermined by increasing numbers of Lowland, English, and Irish enlistees during the Napoleonic Wars.

[figheadair]

Peter, thanks for the 1779 information on Wilson's tartan cost to the Highland regiments. I was aware (from your book) of the various qualities of cloth for officers, serjeants and other ranks, but not the cost. The cost and quality of tartan goes along with the quality of other uniform items in Highland regiments - Officers had the finest (privately purchased), Serjeants had less fine cloth (but better quality than the Other Ranks), and the Corporals and Private Soldiers had the least quality. I have a couple of old books that describe the the history of the Strathspey Fencibles and the 97th Foot in the early 1790's. In the opening chapter of each book, pains are taken to describe the uniforms, and I was interested to learn that private soldiers only got three yards of tartan for philibegs, serjeants got four yards and officers as much as they cared to purchase. Quality of cloth for each group was not discussed. The Strathspey Fencibles were interesting, in that much of their regimentally owned equipment and clothing (such as grenadier caps) ended up stored at Castle Grant, where it is still available to researchers.

The 97th's knapsacks, weapons etc (the Seafield Collection) is now owned by the NTS and on display in Fort George. Interestingly, there is a photograph showing some of the preservation work of the knapsacks; in one was a piece of Government tartan. That makes it the oldest piece surviving piece I know of. The cloth appears to be Wilsons' (which I would expect) and I'm in the process of trying to track it down. No doubt it's in a store somewhere.

[Orvis]

The 97th's knapsacks, weapons etc (the Seafield Collection) is now owned by the NTS and on display in Fort George. Interestingly, there is a photograph showing some of the preservation work of the knapsacks; in one was a piece of Government tartan. That makes it the oldest piece surviving piece I know of. The cloth appears to be Wilsons' (which I would expect) and I'm in the process of trying to track it down. No doubt it's in a store somewhere.

Thanks for that additional information, Peter. I was at work when I typed my previous post and did not have access to my books, so thanks also for correcting the bit about which regiment's equipment was saved for modern display. Good luck in your search for that bit of Government tartan!