Animal Tails

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
StaffordCleggy
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 7:25 pm
Location: Rochdale

Postby StaffordCleggy » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:02 pm

Colin Middleton wrote:My wife has been chewing my ear off with some ofthe re-enactorisms that she saw at Bosworth this weekend, so I'm throwing them into the mix for her:

Modern jewelery (faceted stones, clusters of small stones, etc).
Women wearing mens coats.
Women in sleevles kirtles without a gown on (especially if made of linnen).


Plus :-

Young lady (early 20's) in sleeveless kirtle, long uncovered hair & wearing a velvet chaperon.
Young(er) ladies wearing highly visible from a distance eyeliner.
Lots of people not wearing hats (obviously just having come from the battle is a good excuse, but not walking around the market/camps).


"You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."
- Anne Lamott

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:06 am

I'd go along with everything except the hats, There are as many images of men not wearing hats in 15th century illustrations as there are wearing them.
If you are using only "camp" style scenes such as those of Berne and Venice then more men are without them than with them (maybe military camps wear more "relaxed" and allowed young men to cast off their social concerns?)
I'd actually say that the idea that men wore hats all the time is the re-enactorisim.
That said I do wear a hat because my group expect me to and I have lots of nice hats-in fact i lend them out to those poor souls who shamefully bare their naked heads before the Lord.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
Ghost
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:11 pm
Location: York

Postby Ghost » Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:32 am

All the above posts regarding infringements show the majority of us have an ongoing desire for improvement but none of these have as much negative effect on the public view of us as seeing re-enactors in kit wearing modern items such as glasses/sunglasses (market) and smoking (sat on the boxes adjacent the rope line watching the horse display) - I'd rather see everyone wearing foxtails on their belts than see another example of these blatant failures :cry:
Last edited by Ghost on Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:19 pm, edited 3 times in total.


"Tell your masters that Englishmen do not surrender" - Thomas Beaufort, Earl of Dorset to French Herald; Valmont, 1416.

User avatar
Laffin Jon Terris
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:32 am
Contact:

Postby Laffin Jon Terris » Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:59 am

Ghost wrote:All the above infringements show the majority of us have an ongoing desire for improvement but none of these have as much negative effect on the public view of us as seeing re-enactors in kit wearing modern items such as glasses/sunglasses (market) and smoking (sat on the boxes adjacent the rope line watching the horse display) - I'd rather see everyone wearing foxtails on their belts than see another example of these blatant failures :cry:


I think these transgressors tend to operate under the belief that "I'm not in the Living History camp so therefore it doesn't matter if I'm not dressed properly."

This is related to the "I'm only here for a bit of fun so it doesn't matter if I wear a kilt or a great helm to Tewkesbury" theory.

The problem is that this "logic" is not made clear to the paying public who come expecting to see "Medieval Life", to them if you're doing it then its what our ancestors obiously did (unless someone points it out to them or they are out to find fault that is!)


Knowing is only half the battle.
Image

User avatar
Allan Harley
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Plotting world dominoes
Contact:

Postby Allan Harley » Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:59 am

I would also add that the wearing of "mens" coats by women although not common did happen, especially on campaigns.

Nice to see which people concentrate on the positives or on the negatives.

If negative offer a solution, always looking for marshalls, helpers at events to inmprove everything.


Away from the battle all are soldiers.

User avatar
Jenn
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Scotland

Postby Jenn » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:21 am

Absolutely much though foxes tails pain me I'd rather people wore them if it's a choice than..as Ghost says.
So how about positive recognition of groups which keep their camp looking presentable for the whole time and that includes all of the people that they state are attending the event.



User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Postby Fox » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:27 am

Well, I see my favourite two hobby horses in the past few posts.

[Saddle Up]

First, that we know much less than we think and that dogmas are often wrong.
Hat's, kertles and coats, it's always or never with us.
Lots of people wore hats, and generally we should. But particularly for the second half of the 15thC people (especially working people) seem to often to go bare headed, no coif, no hat. It's never as simple as we'd like.

Second, if you're going to be 21st C (or 20th C in some cases :wink: ), just don't get into kit.
I'm not unreasonable, if people want to eat a burger or an ice cream then I don't see the harm in standing to one side of the catering and having it.
But why wander round the market in kit, eating a hot dog, smoking a tab and wearing sun glasses? Just don't get dressed into kit; most people can afford that luxury.

[Dismount]

All that said, I see a year on year improvement in kit and behaviour. I'm generally pretty proud of what we do.



Gary
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:06 pm
Location: St.Andrews

Postby Gary » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:38 am

Hmmm, I always thought this was a SCA/Renfest thing...

Quoted from the registered user are of the Armour Archive, (www.armourarchive.org).

It probably comes from this:

Richard Rieser, in his essay
“Disability discrimination, the final frontier”*
says that “Disabled people were
often scapegoated for the ills of society,
as in Brueghel’s painting “The Cripples,”
where the fox tails [they wear] denote
wrongdoing.”


Now in great RenFest fashion, the rennies took "wrong doing" as "being Naughty" Ie, a tramp, trollop, prostitute, WENCH, etc. So, took to wearing fox tails as a symbol of "naughtiness" much like the painted on scarlett "A" you see on some bosoms.


Also
http://tribes.tribe.net/renfairehistory ... f9d139aa42

Interesting if this being seen at the bigger re-enactments events here now.



User avatar
Colin MacDonald
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:43 am
Location: Jockland

Postby Colin MacDonald » Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:59 pm

CFarrell wrote:The armies of William Wallace used the fox and wolf tail as a symbol of identification during the Scottish Wars of Independence. Wallace fought under the standard of a Wolf Tail, and eventually all the Scottish skirmishers used it as their symbol and wore one on their belt. [...] If you want I'll ask around the older members of the group and try to find a source for you.


Thanks, that'd be great. I wasn't aware that we had any evidence about Wallace's arms or standard, so anything that you could turn up would be much appreciated.



User avatar
zauberdachs
Post Centurion
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:38 pm

Postby zauberdachs » Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:16 pm

Colin MacDonald wrote:
CFarrell wrote:The armies of William Wallace used the fox and wolf tail as a symbol of identification during the Scottish Wars of Independence. Wallace fought under the standard of a Wolf Tail, and eventually all the Scottish skirmishers used it as their symbol and wore one on their belt. [...] If you want I'll ask around the older members of the group and try to find a source for you.


Thanks, that'd be great. I wasn't aware that we had any evidence about Wallace's arms or standard, so anything that you could turn up would be much appreciated.


Yep, I'd second or third that. Sounds interesting, would love to see a reference for it.

Incidentally it's good to see someone from the Swords of Dalriada on here. Unless of course they have for a while but I've never noticed...


Do not be loath, diligent reader, to winnow my chaff, and lay up the wheat in the storehouse of your memory. For truth regards not who is the speaker, nor in what manner it is spoken, but that the thing be true - Nennius, 8th century

User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Postby Colin Middleton » Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:40 pm

Allan Harley wrote:Nice to see which people concentrate on the positives or on the negatives.

If negative offer a solution, always looking for marshalls, helpers at events to inmprove everything.


Not yet Allan. I've got to bring my own standards upto scratch before I start telling anyone else that they're wrong. I was ashamed to stand next to Phil on Sunday, his kit was so nice!

Taking Jenn's advice:
I was hugely impressed by the Beauforts at Bosworth. Their costume looked to be both hight status and very authentic (though our kitchen staff were disgusted with their meal! :roll: [Edited to add emoticon]) In general the standard all over at Bosworth was good. There were the traditional transgressions (ones I mentioned above, 13th C hosen at a 15th C battle, etc), but nothing too bad.
Last edited by Colin Middleton on Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Ghost
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:11 pm
Location: York

Postby Ghost » Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:59 pm

[quote="Colin Middleton I was hugely impressed by the Beauforts at Bosworth. Their costume looked to be both high status and very authentic (though our kitchen staff were disgusted with their meal!)


Thanks for those kind words - but can you expand on the meal comment ? - note sure i get your gist


"Tell your masters that Englishmen do not surrender" - Thomas Beaufort, Earl of Dorset to French Herald; Valmont, 1416.

User avatar
Allan Harley
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Plotting world dominoes
Contact:

Postby Allan Harley » Wed Aug 20, 2008 2:23 pm

HI Colin - you have me confused as well - was running around a lot but the meal what was the problem???

Only thing is that normally food would be served as set courses with gaps in between - but everything was condensed to take into account all the other activities that had to be done during the day


Away from the battle all are soldiers.

User avatar
StaffordCleggy
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 7:25 pm
Location: Rochdale

Postby StaffordCleggy » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

RE: the food comment.

Ok, Dick3 would be eating the finest food available even on campaign & would have had his personal chefs/cooks with him. However, the reality is very different. How many of us are professional cooks & able to turn out a high-status meal on an open portable fire (no oven) & operating on a small budget?
Having seen how much work goes into the annual Feast - a meal that is created in a modern kitchen - i am loathe to critisise anyone's attempts at camp cooking. I have only cooked a meal for our group 3 times & stressed myself out each time!


As for positive/negative comments, we each see good kit from all status levels at each event - that's not particularly unusual & nor should it be.
Maybe the fact that we do comment on things being 'off' is precisely because they do stand out so much against the good stuff?

We can all find area's to improve upon - i would agree with Ghost's comments about the fags/sunglasses/ice creams et. whilst still in kit & still within opening times . These things stick in the public mind far, far more than all the authentic kit on display.
I mentioned a young lady in a man's chaperon but let's be honest, how many MOP's would know that is wrong? Yes it IS wrong, but the public know for sure that the fags etc. is most definitely wrong.


"You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."

- Anne Lamott

User avatar
craig1459
Post Centurion
Posts: 646
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:06 am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Postby craig1459 » Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:56 pm



die Behmen hinder iren bafosen ... stunden vest wie die mauren

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:32 pm

Hah! What about the fella with the maul (cracking) with the claymore strapped to his back in the style of Connor MacCloud/Braveheart/Blade at Bosworth.
Sometimes we get focused upon the little details and ignore the huge errors such as the smoking/eating ice cream etc in kit.
I wouldn't know a 13th century hose if it hit me. :oops:


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
Allan Harley
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Plotting world dominoes
Contact:

Postby Allan Harley » Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:19 pm

This is better - its the point of what is completely out of order and what can be improved

Simon, I think both Ghost and yourself have it

Lets get rid of the no no's and work on getting better all round

The point I was making is that when running organising an event there are several thousand things you are trying to sort out at once.

I can give examples for Bosworth but all those I asked to change/stop/hide did so with good grace so won't name names
BUT
We always need more help at events and we always ask and never get enough - if you want things better don't just talk about it, volunteer and help make it so
Last edited by Allan Harley on Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:25 am, edited 1 time in total.


Away from the battle all are soldiers.

User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Postby Fox » Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:37 am

Marcus Woodhouse wrote:I wouldn't know a 13th century hose if it hit me. :oops:


I assume Colin's refering to single pointed split hose. If so that's a little bit unfair.
Single point split hose go right into the 15thC, but become less and less common, as split hose tend to become "fuller".
Later split hose do seem to be a little bit under represented, people seem to prefer joined hose, although I am seeing more.



User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Postby Colin Middleton » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:11 pm

Sorry Ghost, Allan, my bad, I should have put a smily on that. Pretty much as Cleggy said, what you were eating & how you were eating were much as I would do if I had to serve my own food at an event. KIBS does as part of our shows a mobile kitchen in which authentic styled food is cooked and then served to us for the entertainment of he public. I've known them bake bread, pies and tarts as well as roasting and boiling meats at a show. It's all a bit of a mystery to me, I just chop wood and try not to get in the way.

Anyway, they 'grumbled' about it at Bosworth and were duley volunteered to do a better job for you next year. I think that they've already started planning it :shock:

Like I said, the emoticon (which I've now added) was to indicate that while your kit was of very high standard your meal was mearly good! :wink:

Again, sorry if I caused any offence that I didn't intend.

Colin



User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Postby Colin Middleton » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:18 pm

Fox wrote:Single point split hose go right into the 15thC, but become less and less common, as split hose tend to become "fuller".
Later split hose do seem to be a little bit under represented, people seem to prefer joined hose, although I am seeing more.


I'm amazed at that. :shock: I knew the split (open) hosen existed through most of the 15th C, but I thought that the pointy topped, tie it to your breaches type had vanished by the end of the 14th C. I was under the impression that by then, they were all pointing to the botom edge of the doublet at front back and sides and further up the leg/body as the century wore on. Can you point me to a reference on those early style hosen in the 15th C please?

Many thanks


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Allan Harley
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Plotting world dominoes
Contact:

Postby Allan Harley » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:58 pm

Duly noted - next year be ready to set up this kitchen for the king as you will be closely scrutinised.

Personally not pleased though as I was cooking myself until midnight on the Thursday to get the great pies and jewell puddings made.

Difficult to cook and run an event on this scale


Away from the battle all are soldiers.

Man from Coventry
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:55 pm

Postby Man from Coventry » Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:40 pm

I think it only fair to point out that whilst things could have been done better, it has to be borne in mind all the other things that the Beaufort's members were doing all day.

Allans group not only did the feeding the King, they also provided the Commentators for the main afternoon Bosworth battle for both days, they also provided the commentators for the firepower and foot tourney,they also provided their full complement of billmen and archers for the firepower display, provided the only competing pair in the foot tourney on Saturday and a further pair on the Sunday, took part in both battles, with several members in command roles, and relatively authentically fed the rest of their group too. As well as their captain having to co-ordinate the whole event and co-ordinate tha battle, liaise with the client etc.

Given the above I believe eating with the King was probably as good as it could be. I'm sure they could have done still better had they been able to devote more of their time to this activity. If all other groups did half as much (and some do) then the Bosworth show would have been unbelievably awesome.

I got to taste the great pie too and it was delicious !

I can sympathise with Allans frustration, standards do need to be improved and things could be done better (and he is first to admit this), but it is also easy criticise. At least Allan personally and his group are actually doing something about it. If others can do better,please do so - put your money where your mouth is - offer to do activities - I'm sure Allan will be delighted to accomodate whatever you wish to do.

Volunteers I might add are requested for a number of activities for Blore, judging from posts responses to date are limited.


A good sword, a trusty hand, a merry heart and true.

User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Postby Fox » Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:38 pm

Colin Middleton wrote:
Fox wrote:Single point split hose go right into the 15thC, but become less and less common, as split hose tend to become "fuller".
Later split hose do seem to be a little bit under represented, people seem to prefer joined hose, although I am seeing more.


I'm amazed at that. :shock: I knew the split (open) hosen existed through most of the 15th C, but I thought that the pointy topped, tie it to your breaches type had vanished by the end of the 14th C. I was under the impression that by then, they were all pointing to the botom edge of the doublet at front back and sides and further up the leg/body as the century wore on. Can you point me to a reference on those early style hosen in the 15th C please?

Many thanks


Well, it didn't all stop on one day in December 1396, there's an evolution, and it's pretty much as you describe.

And as ever with illustrations it's all for debate (artists nationality, period painted vs period depicted, etc).

It's not helped that some illustrations show "full hose", but worn only pointed by just one or two points from the front:
Image
(circa 1450)
So then you can debate exactly what it is you're seeing with less detailed pictures. (e.g. Bedford's Tower of Babel, circa 1425)

My point is, it's not completely clear cut, and suggesting people are wearing 13thC hose is a little unfair when they're wearing early 15thC hose, which may or may not be ok for some people later in the century.
Last edited by Fox on Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.



User avatar
Allan Harley
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Plotting world dominoes
Contact:

Postby Allan Harley » Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:16 pm

Plus I did "arming the knight" Sunday & entertain the dignitaries
Shortly followed by sticking a broom up my ..... and brushing the field :D


Away from the battle all are soldiers.

Marcus Woodhouse
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Postby Marcus Woodhouse » Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:46 pm

Mind you you made me day by calling us a Fenian bar steward on the way out. Thinks of everything does that poor excuse for a Celtic brother.


OSTENDE MIHI PECUNIAM!

User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Postby gregory23b » Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:33 am

13thc hose are different from open hose of the 15thc, mainly due to length of starting height and that single point at the front or side, they are not that common, rare even, the only 15thc one I can think of is the Catherine of Cleves pic, 1430/40s and not sure of teh context as it is in a book of hours, it could easily be a nod to earlier styles as part of the composition.

Arseless hose, ie the earlier sort are pretty much gone and not the run of the mill outfit for normal people. Especially if wearing other appropriate kit, why wear '13thc' hose with a decent 15thc (of whichever part) doublet, that would not make sense, or in some cases actually work. You either dress archaically or you dress up to date, if up to date then you would hope to have the cash to buy decent harness etc to go with it. Poor man's clothing with good harness is a crappy thing to behold, regardless of the reasoning.

Images of open hose, even though undone at the back show as hose due to the mass of gather or hose fall at the back, earlier hose do not have that spare material.

The old argument is about do we portray common or assumed 'average' or do we use rare items because:

we already have them and can justify their use

they are heirlooms - different and much more useful point imho

they are really interesting and used to compare styles in use - how many people have conversations with the public about why they are wearing something 200 years out of date?

It is hard enough trying to get decent looking kit for the era portrayed let alone trying to explain the exotic and old fashioned.

However, it is entirely logical and would have to be acceptable to have someone at a mid 15thc event wearing kit from the mid 14thc due to the provable rarity factor, that would not do much for the representation of 15thc kit though. Likewise to turn up at a 13thc event dressed as an Anglo Saxon etc......where and how is the line drawn?

Interesting pic Fox, German? Austrian? out that way? Have you noticed his breech colour?


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Postby Colin Middleton » Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:35 am

Man from Coventry, I agree absolutely with what you said. The food comment was ment to be a quip and I forgot to put an emoticon on to indicate that it was such :oops: . My very, very bad. I thought that the Beuaforts (and especially Allan) did a wonderful job and will put my name forward to help with something at Blore so that they can spread the load a bit.

I shall now shuffle off in shame for my stupidity... :cry:

:wink:


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Postby Fox » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:15 am

Can we stop calling them 13thC hose? They exist both before and after. Can we call them single point hose?

gregory23b wrote:Images of open hose, even though undone at the back show as hose due to the mass of gather or hose fall at the back, earlier hose do not have that spare material.

Not all pictures have that level of detail, in fact most pictures of working men do not. I've seen others late in the 15thC where you can't tell, although my personal opinion is that they're full hose, unlaced at the rear.

Regardless, on lots of pictures you can tell nothing of the nature of the hose at all, because other garments cover that detail. We might argue more about how common split hose were in the 15thC if just about every picture of working men didn't show at least one fellow with his hose rolled down; if they didn't we wouldn't be able to tell.


gregory23b wrote:Interesting pic Fox, German? Austrian? out that way? Have you noticed his breech colour?

It's from the Church of St. Leonhard at Bad Aussee in central Austria. It's dated about 1450. I know nothing about the artist, I'm afraid.

I had not noticed, but he appears to have dark coloured underwear, doesn't he?



User avatar
gregory23b
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2923
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Gyppeswyk, Suffolk

Postby gregory23b » Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:15 pm

"Can we stop calling them 13thC hose? They exist both before and after. Can we call them single point hose?"

I do believe in some quarters they are referred to as chausses, now whether that is a Frenchified version of hose or means something else I don't know.

But they are not the same as open hose of the 15thc, the differences from 15thc open hose include:

low starting edge, often well below the backside

single point to either the side hip or front, the front of the leg comign to a single point rather than a waisted or leg that follows around the thigh.

So when someone talks about hose from the mid 14thc and back I see a different garment, so it makes much sense to distinguish the two versions, especially as chausses are not pointed to upper garments but attached to breech rolls via ties or possibly buttons/small stones covered in cloth.

Hence it is not a simple matter of saying single point hose are ok because they are almost not represented and are markedly different, ie they are archaic, open hose have their time and changes too, they rise on the waist as the years draw towards the mid second quarter of the 15thc and also are joined

As for the lack or presence of detail, that works both ways, you can easily argue any number of possibilities based on a lack of reference, but it is surely better to start from what we know and can see than conjecture about what we cannot. I would also attempt to compare other images of the same period to see what they portray, to have a crack at the prevailing styles, there are few images that cannot be compared to others of the same time frame, a single point of reference or lack of is not enough.

"in fact most pictures of working men do not. "

Whose 'most' is that? yours or others? 'most' is a powerful word. How about the images that do have that level of detail? they surely have more use than ones that do not?


middle english dictionary

Isabela on G23b "...somehow more approachable in real life"

http://medievalcolours.blogspot.com

"I know my place." Alice the Huswyf

User avatar
Fox
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2652
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Cheshire

Postby Fox » Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Actually, my point was:

I'll work with the evidence I have; which is that I wear full split hose or joined hoses for 15thC.

However, I think the sample space where you can tell what type of hose people are wearing is very small.
Therefore, I won't immediately assume that other people are wrong. We make that kind of judgement on this forum all the time, and frequently research over takes us.
For example, people on this thread are having a go at people without hats at Bosworth; but this is not wrong.

I'll stick to my point about 13thC hose; from now on please refer to them as 12th, 13th and 14th Century hose. :wink: :D

Meanwhile, I'll go back to my evidence and see if can gather together some more pictures....




Return to “1100-1500”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest