Another old tartan

[A Robertson]

Reminds me of Robertson red...

I think so too.

[Domehead]

Mr. MacDonald,
I was just going over the Fraser tartans - confirming some information for a friend who's having a kilt finished by Mrs. Ann Stewart's daughter, Hazel (a brilliant kilt maker in her own right). I was sorting the 78th from the Lovat, the Cockburn sample from the VS "Grant", and so on...when I came across the Altyre Fraser. I believe this is that.

Ryan M. Liddell

[figheadair]

Mr. MacDonald,
I was just going over the Fraser tartans - confirming some information for a friend who's having a kilt finished by Mrs. Ann Stewart's daughter, Hazel (a brilliant kilt maker in her own right). I was sorting the 78th from the Lovat, the Cockburn sample from the VS "Grant", and so on...when I came across the Altyre Fraser. I believe this is that.

Ryan M. Liddell

Bang on Ryan, well done. This is the original sample of the Altyre tartan. Unlike some old samples, this one is of sufficient size to allow one to determine the sett. It is therefore surprising that some early researchers got it wrong. I can only think that they must have been working from someone else's record and so compounded earlier errors rather than having access to the actual specimen or a descent photograph.

What's frustrating in this case, as with some of his other research, is that Jamie Scarlett didn't label it and left no record of where he found it. l would expect that this particular fragment is still owned by a Fraser family, but I've been unable to find out which so far.

[Domehead]

Mr. MacDonald,
Aye, Good afternoon and thank you.

Ryan

[figheadair]

I have just come across some other pieces of what is obviously from the same plaid. The history behind those throws into doubt the attribution of this as 'of Altyre'. A little bit of further research should clarify when/why that suffix was added and may lead me/us (the STA) to re-categorise the sett.

[Domehead]

Lucky you, to have such access. I, as well as others, await your research findings. Thanks you for your continued efforts in this field. I will / do have questions re: naming conventions (specifically), commercialization & tartan trade, revisionism (not a pejorative term). Until then, well done.

Ryan M. Liddell

[figheadair]

Ask away Ryan. It would be best to run them as a new thread and we can all join in.

[figheadair]

Delving into this throws up the intriguing possiblity that it has been mis-named. Altyre was a Cumming designation; James Cumming of Altyre married Mary Fraser, dau of the 5th Lord Lovat, c1580. There was, as far as I can find, no Fraser of Altyre family. Andersons (now Kinloch Anderson) had a sample in the 1930s which they called Fraser of Altyre but it's unclear why.

So, a Cumming or a Fraser tartan: anyone what to have have a guess which?

[Domehead]

Delving into this throws up the intriguing possiblity that it has been mis-named. Altyre was a Cumming designation; James Cumming of Altyre married Mary Fraser, dau of the 5th Lord Lovat, c1580. There was, as far as I can find, no Fraser of Altyre family. Andersons (now Kinloch Anderson) had a sample in the 1930s which they called Fraser of Altyre but it's unclear why.

So, a Cumming or a Fraser tartan: anyone what to have have a guess which?

My opinion tempered by our continued education is as follows:
It stays a "Fraser" ascription. Now, language - specifically terminology - is important. That being said, what do we know of Tartanry Naming convention?
Essentially, there is no single convention, hence continued revisionism. We know the following:

1. Progression from creative design...regional affect (D.W. Stewart & J.D. Scarlett)...numbered pattern (P. MacDonald)...Family name for commercialization...Clan / House ascription as extensions of commercialization, as well as pseudo-Historic preservation (W. Scott & 1822)

2. The conflation of Myth / Legend / Fact proves very difficult to parse. Combined with theory, however solidly triangulated, these conflations are but a Deconstructionists dream: see the 42nd Setts as Campbell Tartans (particularly D.C. Stewart vetted by J.D.Scarlett); The Moy Hall plaid as a Robertson Sett (particularly fragment analysis by P. MacDonald), among others.

3. Setts, so-named in context of their time, were variably ascribed: see "Comyn, Cumming, Glenorchy, Buchan" (particularly as tabulated by J. Logan and depicted by Smith Bros. & T. Smibert vetted by P. MacDonald); see "Forbes, LaMont" (particularly as tabulated by J. Logan and vetted by D.C. Stewart), among others.

4. The invention of peculiar sobriquets are unsettling and only obfuscate fact further (at least to me). The addition of "hunting" barely suffices grammatically, let alone historically. It's like saying "I need to buy some new shoes: tennis. My old pair is worn out" If one reverses the syntax, it emphasizes the utilization of the sett. However, we know said "hunting" setts were rarely, if ever, used for Deer Stalking. Although "dress" designations were used after 6:00pm, they may be laid at the door of J. Claude Fres. & Cie. (late C19). In fact, "mourning" designee's are on point, so developed during that specific Victorian period. All this despite what we know to be fact re: regional affectation; the socio-psychology of red ground tartans (cochineal v. madder); The economy of GKB tartans v. variegated colours: see P. MacDonald The 1819 KPB "Wilson's Colours"; D. W. Stewart Old & Rare pp. 6-11; J.D. Scarlett Tartan The Highland Textile "Military Tartans"; et al.

What makes the afore mentioned authors and researcher's, in turn Mr. MacDonald, continued effort invaluable is, for nerds like myself (us), we can assist at festivals and perhaps prevent the unfortunate purchase of a 500 quid closet remnant. Or, aide our resident Master Kilt Makers in dealing with an informed clientele. Otherwise, just as the MacGregor of MacGregor told Matthew Newsome [paraphrased], "It should be called the Black & Red MacGregor. But, call a Mill and ask for that. Now, call and ask for the Rob Roy"

Ryan M. Liddell

[figheadair]

In this particular case, I'm having real difficulty in finding any justification for the suffix 'of Alytre'.

Andersons, now Kinloch Andersons, don't know anything about naming of the silk specimen they had, a piece of which is now in the STA Collection. It looks to be a c1930-40 sample and was almost certainly woven as a 'special', presumably for a Fraser but whether Andersons called it by that name because the customer did or whether it was already being sold as such is unclear. I favour the former but have been unable to track down who/which family might have ordered it. A recent research discovery means that it's now quite clear to me that the current name of this sett is wrong.