Re: [h-cost] Advice on Web Presence
Greetings! At 10:14 PM + 6/5/09, Jane Pease wrote: Here I come meandering along behind the times as usual, but I have been thinking that it is time to have a costume presence on the web, both for the purpose of organizing and storing information and providing information to others. Some of you on this list have the most marvelous sites, and I wondered if you all would mind sharing your thoughts on the best approach. Frex, journal vs. website, vs. ... I would recommend building a web site using the Content Management System (CMS) Drupal (http://Drupal.org/). This can be done without you actually having to know HTML, PHP, or MySQL, but at the same time you get a very powerful tool that uses all those things to create an attractive, essentially infinitely expandable site. One of the advantages of Drupal is that it is not organized around pages so much as organized around content/information. As a result, you can easily place the same content in multiple places --for example, both organized and categorized by topic, and presented in a linear blog-like fashion-- without having to re-enter the content (and with any later edits appearing instantly everywhere the content appears). Another advantage is you can start very simply, and as you learn more, add more powerful features. Also, the visual design is almost entirely independent from the content, so it is very easy to change the look of a site without touching the content. Apart from installation, site development and adding content is done through a web browser, and you can even have user accounts and let select people contribute content (with what they allowed to do determined by you). Oh, and Drupal is OpenSource software, and free. You would just need to pay for the hosting, not Drupal software. The main requirements of a hosting package would be that it includes at least one MySQL database, and PHP (preferably PHP 5.x), and some way to extract/uncompress compressed archives on the server (instead of on your desktop and then uploading individual files to the server). If you'd like to play around with it a little before making decisions about hosting providers, you can use XAMPP (http://www.apachefriends.org/) to set up a local test apache server with PHP MySQL, and then install Drupal locally on your desktop/laptop computer (Windows or Mac or Linux, etc.). Sharon -- Sharon L. Krossa, PhD, skrossa-...@medievalscotland.org * Drupal Training Consulting in the Stanford Community * Independent Academic Technology Consultant, http://SharonKrossa.com ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Found it! - Colored shirts in the 16th century?
At 6:55 AM -0700 1/18/08, Saragrace Knauf wrote: Ah Ha! http://www.museothyssen.org/thyssen_ing/coleccion/obras_ficha_zoom605.html I suppose one could argue this isn't a shirt, but I've never seen an under dress with this kind of cuff... The portrait shows the garment as being lined, however -- or magically blue on the outside and red on the inside. Whatever it is, I really don't think this is persuasive evidence for colored underwear (shirts). Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, PhD - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ Shopping Online? Help support! - http://MedievalScotland.org/patron/ The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names: The Medieval Names Archive - http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Another Historical Wedding Question
At 6:23 PM -0500 12/19/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am doing some digging around for rules concerning types of marriage in the British Empire in the 1870's. A Google search for British Common Law Marriage got me a Wikipedia entry that had a reference that mentions Marriage By Correspondence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_the_United_Kingdom#Scotlan). However, I have been unable to find any other mention of it. Do any of you have any more information about Marriage By Correspondence? The Wikipedia article (like so many Wikipedia articles) is a garbled mix of fact and nonsense. In particular, they do not seem to really understand the history of marriage law in Scotland. I don't really do the 19th century, but for the basic foundation (which remained essentially unchanged until 1940), see the Marriage sections of my article Historical Handfasting at http://MedievalScotland.org/history/handfasting.shtml Note, however, that marriage law was not uniform throughout the UK (let alone the whole British Empire). At a minimum, Scotland had (and still has) a separate legal system and laws. So marriage law and practice will depend on the particular place you have in mind. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, PhD - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ Shopping Online? Help support! - http://MedievalScotland.org/patron/ The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names: The Medieval Names Archive - http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Another leine question
At 1:38 PM -0400 7/9/07, Dianne Greg Stucki wrote: At 12:58 PM 7/9/2007, you wrote: I've also seen them with drawstrings alone in the same area--both make a very pretty presentation, but I'm wondering if they are documentable in period? I have some gorgeous saffron linen here that I really want to make into a leine, but I'd like it to be as correct as possible. Drawstring sleeve leines are a Ren Faire invention. Pretty, but not accurate. Likewise, pleating along the sleeves is a modern invention, based on the drawstring sleeves. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, PhD - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ Shopping Online? Help support! - http://MedievalScotland.org/patron/ The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names: The Medieval Names Archive - http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] International Marks on the Mac Platform
At 8:21 AM -0400 6/27/07, Sharon Henderson wrote: International diacritics on a Mac are reasonably easy: hold down the Option key, type the letter it affects (if you want the Spanish upside-down question mark type the question mark, the upside-down exclamation point is Option + 1... German ess-tset is option + s). Some of them are a little more involved: because the French accents get the option + e, Umlauts have to be option + u + e (or i or a...) That is, to type an e with an umlaut, type option+u, then type e; to type a u with an umlaut, type option+u, then type u; and so on. For typable accents/diacritics, the Mac works on the idea that you type the key combination to produce the diacritic, then type the letter the diacritic goes over/on. Acute accent is option+e (then the letter it goes over), grave accent is option+grave accent key (then the letter it goes over), umlaut is option+u (then the letter it goes over), circumflex is option+i (then the letter it goes over), tilde is option+n (then the letter it goes over), and so on. Note that for these common diacritics, the key combined with option to produce the diacritic is that of a letter most/very commonly used/associated with that diacritic (thus, u for umlaut, n for tilde, e for acute accent, etc.), which makes it easier to remember. There is a web page that lists them all by language (at least for the main ones; more esoteric ones can probably be found elsewhere): http://www.ccsf.edu/Departments/Language_Lab/accentsmac.htm There is also the option of using either the keyboard viewer or the character palette. The keyboard viewer shows what keys to type to produce letters (including special highlighting of keys used in the kind of additive diacritic combinations described above). So, in keyboard viewer, if you press option it shows you what letters would be produced by each key pressed while option is held down, with the some keys marked a different color to show that they are added to whatever it typed next. The character palette lets you enter any character from any font (including all the weird and wonderful things available now via Unicode) and has a favorites feature to make it even easier to insert characters you use frequently (I have thorns, edhs, yoghs, and schwas in my favorites ;-). In Mac OS 10.4.x at least (and probably earlier versions), the keyboard viewer and character palette are accessed via the Input Menu marked by the little flag towards the right hand side of the menu bar (for those using U.S. keyboard, the flag is a US flag, etc.). If you don't have the flag menu, or it doesn't have character palette as an option, then go to System Preferences, choose International, choose Input Menu, then make sure the check boxes are checked for Show input menu in menu bar, Character Palette and Keyboard viewer. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, PhD - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://www.MedievalScotland.org/ Shopping Online? Help support! - http://MedievalScotland.org/patron/ The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names: The Medieval Names Archive - http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Re: HBO Rome series - anyone else watching?
At 4:01 PM +1100 3/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does the colour really matter? It is not a documentary. But it _is_ claiming to be set in historical Rome -- to the best of my knowledge it is not marketed as either science fiction or fantasy. Criticizing how well they portray that claimed setting is as legitimate as criticizing any other aspect of the production. Getting the history -- including the costuming -- discernibly wrong is no different than, say, having boulders that are discernibly made of foam rather than rock, or acting that it wooden; it may or may not significantly affect the ability of viewers to suspend disbelief and/or enjoy the film, but either way it is fair game for comment (that is, criticism). Why so many people think that _historical_ movies/programs should be immune from any criticism of such a major component of their content is a mystery to me... If we are gonna nit- pick over the clothes, we have to nitpick over the plaster walls, the forced perspectives and the obvious cycloramas. This is H-Costume, naturally it is the clothing that attracts the most attention. On a mailing list dedicated to other aspects of history other aspects of the series will attract more attention. On a mailing list dedicated to physics, physics-defying aspects will attract the most attention. And so on. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, PhD - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://www.MedievalScotland.org/ Shopping Online? Help support! - http://MedievalScotland.org/patron/ The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names: The Medieval Names Archive - http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
RE: [h-cost] Wikipedia as a source
At 11:15 PM -0400 9/29/06, Guenievre de Monmarche wrote: Wikipedia's not a good source for hard data. But it IS a good source for random facts. IE just surfing around from one eye-catching topic to another to find things that look like they WILL be interesting. Make that random assertions (rather than random facts), and I would agree... but then, the same can be said of many other sources, some of which are considerably more reliable. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Deadwood
At 12:42 PM -0400 9/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/27/2006 11:55:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're obviously not a Victorian. Neither are the *Americans* in Deadwood. :-P Victorian values and culture were not limited to the UK or even the British empire, and the term is not unreasonably applied to the entire Anglophone world for the relevant period, whether under the rule of Victoria or not, especially when discussing such things as social mores (and, of course, houses -- I'm not sure there are any Victorian houses in the UK, in the sense of the particular housing design style known as Victorian, but there are tons in the US). And, of course, the evidence cited to support the Victorian comment were clearly American in origin -- so whether you call the period Victorian or not, the point that in that period even in the American West they didn't normally cuss, even in whore houses, stands. (Our modern ideas about cussing are, like everything else in our culture, modern, and there is no particular reason to expect the attitudes toward and practice of cussing to have been the same in the past as it is now.) Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: Fwd: [h-cost] Bad historical costume movies
At 12:44 PM -0400 9/23/06, Catherine Olanich Raymond wrote: And King Arthur with Clive Owen, Keira Knightley in blue paint and leather bra, Beats me why they seemed to think she was a Pict. :-) Beats me why they seemed to think a Pict would have worn an outfit apparently inspired by the female lead in the science fiction film _The Fifth Element_! Other, of course, then the general modern movie fashion for basing historical film costuming on sf/fantasy costuming. (In my opinion, a study of the development of historical movie/tv costuming can't be done without considering and covering the developments in fantasy film/tv costuming -- most modern historicals owe more to Xena Warrior Princess and the like than any historical research for their costuming... And by this I really do mean there is a connection, not just that the costuming isn't as historically accurate as it could be.) Sharon PS I can understand why they think a Pict would wear blue paint -- they're wrong, of course, but so many people are wrong on this that one can understand why yet another is also wrong... -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Deadwood
Note that I haven't actually seen Deadwood, so I don't know specifically how they are actually using language, so my comments below about Deadwood really do mean those ifs... At 1:35 PM -0600 9/24/06, Sylvia Rognstad wrote: Well, as I said, I wondered about the frequency of it too. I doubt your grandfather hung around in the same company as the guys on Deadwood. Since we never (I don't think) see that word in writing before the late twentieth century, how do we know how they really talked? Do the writers have references to back up the usage (or overusage) of foul language? Note that it isn't just the age of the _word_ used, but also whether that word was used in that _way_ in the relevant period. For example, if Deadwood has characters talking about men and women having sexual intercourse and these characters use a certain word in place of have sexual intercourse in their sentences, then that may be historically reasonable. However, if they have their characters using that same word as an expletive (e.g., ! exclaimed when they hit their thumb with a hammer), or as an intensifying adjective/adverb (e.g., I hit my thumb with a ing hammer!), that is an entirely different kettle of fish, and it is less likely that real people --even real foul-mouthed people-- of that time used those words in that way. Just as words themselves change over time, so to do how words are used. Bad language has grammar as well as vocabulary, and just like all other aspects of language, is time and (sub)culture dependant. Also, it is worth noting that we have experienced something of a bad word devaluation in recent decades. Even mid-century, damn was still a really scandalous word to say in polite company (as an expletive) -- only recently has that become G (or at least PG) rated, and previous generations of the foul-mouthed could have achieved the same effects exclaiming Damn! and complaining about a damned hammer as are now served (though with less and less effect) by using the modern sexual offensive words in the same manner. I have just remembered that I actually have a book relevant to this discussion _Swearing: A Social History of Foul Language, Oaths and Profanity in English_ by Geoffrey Hughes (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140267077/ref=nosim/medievalscotland http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140267077/ref=nosim/medievalscotla02) Interestingly, and not very surprisingly, Hughes notes that the insulting use of sexual terms (calling someone a er, a pr***, etc.) are first recorded only within the last century or so, with some (such as calling someone a t*t) only showing up in record from around mid-century. Even with an assumption that the first written record post-dates by some time the first spoken usages, there is clearly a time difference in using such sexual terms vs. using excremental terms as insults (many of which were used in this way in the Middle Ages). Hughes also lists eight different categories of usage for a word, and has a table illustrating how (modernly) different words get used in different combinations of ways (with only one on his list, bugger, being used in all 8 categories modernly). And, of course, which categories any given word gets used in is just as time dependent as anything else. For the curious, his 8 categories are: 1. personal: 'You ---!' 2. personal by reference: 'The ---!' 3. destinational: '--- off!' 4. cursing: '--- you!' 5. general expletive of anger, annoyance, frustration: '---!' 6. explicit expletive of anger, annoyance, frustration: '--- it!' 7. capacity for adjectival extension: '---ing' or '---y' 8. verbal usage: 'to --- about' Unfortunately, he doesn't give as detailed a time analysis for the words he examines the modern grammatical range of... Anyway, all of which is to say, if the swearing sounds modern -- that is, if the characters are swearing in essentially the same ways (in aggregate) as modern early 21st century people do, such that they sound like modern 21st century people swearing -- chances are that they are then _not_ using foul language as it would have been used in the real historical period, even by that era's most foulmouthed people. There are undoubtedly things done now that were not done then (and things done then that modernly we would not consider as offensive as it was considered then). To what degree they are off, however, would depend on exactly when Deadwood is set, and, of course, how they are using language in the program... Sharon, who would really like to find a book that more clearly presents both the time and grammar developments of various words... -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/
Re: [h-cost] Deadwood
At 7:05 PM -0300 9/24/06, Kelly Grant wrote: But it's not really worth arguing over...producers of TV and movies are going to do what they like with costume and language...bummer, but true. Who has been arguing over it? We can discuss what we want, regardless of what tv and movie producers do, and, likewise, we can voice opinions about what tv and movie producers choose to do, just as we can about anything else. Those who don't enjoy such discussions needn't participate, of course, but those who do wish to participate are going to do what they like... Just because (some) tv and movie producers don't know and don't want to know what really happened historically doesn't mean _we_ have to not be curious, too. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Bad historical costume movies
At 8:30 AM -0600 9/23/06, Sylvia Rognstad wrote: ... costumes from movies, and not just good examples but some really bad ones. For instance, I happened to see on tv a bit of an old movie from the 1950s a couple weeks ago called Princess of the Nile which took place in the Middle East and the costumes were so bad they were really laughable. The women were wearing high spiked heels for instance. So I'm wondering if you all can name some other old movies with really anachronistic or just plain wrong historical costumes. Three movies that illustrate how movie costumes aren't about actual history but rather modern ideas (whether those modern ideas are about modern or historical fashion) are _Brigadoon_, _Rob Roy_, and TFWNSNBU**. Taken together, there are some interesting similarities and contrasts in the films approaches and ideas about historical costuming. Particularly fascinating to me is what the three films reveal about the changes in popular ideas about what historical clothing ought to look like. (The modern fashion is for unkempt fantasy savages, quite a change from Brigadoon.) Interestingly, _Brigadoon_, for all its straight out of the 1950s women's clothing, actually manages to get it's Scottish men's clothing a lot more historically accurate than Mel They really did that Gibson's flick, despite the much hyped (and publicized) specially woven tartans and similar promotional copy efforts. Mind you, getting Scottish clothing a lot more accurate than a Mel Gibson's film isn't exactly saying much... ;-) And, of course, part of that is probably because, unlike Mel's film, Brigadoon (and Rob Roy) are actually set in a period (or at least from a period) when historically men were dressed in a form of the well known popular stereotypes of Scottish clothing. Another potential factor that probably works both for and against Brigadoon is that it was made before the latest major wave of Celtic Romanticism... Sharon **That Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered -- that is, the one with Mel Gibson supposedly portraying William Wallace. -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: Fwd: [h-cost] Bad historical costume movies
At 2:06 PM -0400 9/24/06, Catherine Olanich Raymond wrote: On Sunday 24 September 2006 5:18 am, Sharon L. Krossa wrote: Other, of course, then the general modern movie fashion for basing historical film costuming on sf/fantasy costuming. (In my opinion, a study of the development of historical movie/tv costuming can't be done without considering and covering the developments in fantasy film/tv costuming -- most modern historicals owe more to Xena Warrior Princess and the like than any historical research for their costuming... And by this I really do mean there is a connection, not just that the costuming isn't as historically accurate as it could be.) Though there's also a decent argument that it's a waste of time and money to devote historical costume research to a summer popcorn movie--which this particular King Arthur definitely was. So that leaves the costume department cribbing from the SF/Fantasy section--the other source of popcorn movies. It isn't just summer popcorn historical movies that get a great deal of their historical costuming ideas from sf/fantasy films/programs. From what I have seen, they are *all* doing it. From what I have observed, the two genres feed on each other across the board with regard to costuming (and hairstyles, etc.). Further, it should be noted that King Arthur was one of those historical films that went out of its way, both in marketing and in how the film itself was presented, to claim historical accuracy for itself. So, while a producer could make the argument that it would be a waste of time and money to research historical clothing, that argument would have been more than usually hypocritical, given the money spent elsewhere in the budget combined with the claims being made for the movie. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Deadwood
At 4:20 PM -0600 9/24/06, Sylvia Rognstad wrote: If you grandfather hated swearing, then he must have heard it from others who did use it at that time. Not necessarily -- he could have hated what he heard much more modernly. Also, even if he did hear swearing when he was younger, what he heard could have been (and probably was) different from what is used modernly. (Heck, what I hear modernly is much, much different from what I heard when I was younger, and I'm only 41!) Language changes over time, and swearing is language. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help with technology for your research or teaching? Hire me! http://MedievalScotland.org/hireme/ Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] DaVinci Code Claims of Truth (was: h-costume Digest, Vol 5, Issue 358)
At 10:58 AM -0700 4/27/06, Onaree Berard wrote: Just curious, when did Dan Brown claim to DaVinci Code was true. He has repeatedly asserted that although the main characters and the specific plot involving them are fictitious, the background history is true (not only the marriage and offspring of Mary Magdalene and Jesus, but the two millennia long competing conspiracies to cover up and to preserve this knowledge, including the Priory of Sion, the supposed clues in artwork, etc.) I listened to the unabridged audio book and it seemed like an author who took some facts, some legends, a few other theories tweeked to taste and shook well to create an interesting *story*. He explicitly claims -- in both interviews and also in text published in the book with the text of the novel -- as facts things that are not only not facts, but demonstrably untrue, and generally by various means actively encourages people to believe that what is presented in the novel as history/facts are indeed history/facts. I couldn't figure out why so many people were trying to prove/debunk it. Because so many other people are believing things are true based on having read it in a novel. To me it was like trying to prove/debunk Tarzan or Sherlock Holmes. If everyone treated it like it was Tarzan -- or rather, if everyone treated it like it was Star Wars -- no one would bother trying to debunk it. But people aren't treating it like Star Wars, they're treating it like a history book, with the sole exception of the immediate plot and its main characters. That is, things Brown presents in the novel as history many people are believing as history. They're using a novel as if it were a source of reliable historical information. Thus, the need for debunking, to clearly demonstrate that novels are novels, not reliable history books. Now, Brown would be blameless in this -- like George Lucus is blameless for those few who really think there is a galaxy far, far away where Ewoks lived -- if he didn't himself actively encourage people to misuse his novel by claiming the history in it really is true. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Historical Films
At 7:55 PM -0700 4/23/06, Lavolta Press wrote: I don't even want to think about what church historians and Renaissance historians are going to go through when the Da Vinci Code movie comes out. There are going to be an awful lot of people who will think it's entirely factual. So what? There are a great many fields which you and I know little about, which are no more or less important than history, and which we probably have many misconceptions about. And if you're going to teach you need to be able to deal with people not knowing everything already without looking down on them. The problem isn't people not knowing everything -- the problem is people who don't know something about a subject thinking they do _based on having seen a movie_ (often despite their claims of knowing it's just movie, etc.) One of the things good teachers do, in addition to teaching how to evaluate evidence logically, is teach about evaluating sources. Movies, by their very nature, are not good or reliable sources. And many students, just like many readers of online forums and mailing lists, really, really hate hearing that the movies they love are not good or reliable sources and should not be used as such. Some insist on arguing about it. Which wouldn't be a problem in the history classroom, if it weren't for the fact that the time spent on it is time not spent teaching and learning about real history (including good and reliable sources). And it wouldn't be a problem in the world at large if it weren't for the fact that being able to evaluate sources and use them appropriately, and generally being able to tell reliable from unreliable information, isn't a skill important only for professional historians -- it's important for managers and workers (regardless of industry), voters, jurors, parents, and so on. It's important for many every day, real world decisions -- even, in some cases, life and death decisions. Wisdom isn't knowing everything -- it's knowing when you don't know something. And I, perhaps naively, believe everyone has the capacity to be wise. That's why I care not only about professional historians, but also amateur ones, and even casual movie goers. So when the opportunity comes up, I talk about the nature of films, and how they shouldn't be used. That such comments inevitably get not only strong reactions but also misinterpreted just demonstrates that the subject isn't all that obvious or a non-issue and that there is indeed a need for people to make such comments and observations. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Historical Films (was: h-costume Digest, Vol 5, Issue 351)
At 5:53 AM -0400 4/22/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/22/06 6:05:50 AM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, the other Mel Gibson Scottish film. ah - but william wallace took York, you know;-) [For those who don't know -- and there is no reason why most of you should, which is why I take the time to clarify here -- actually, he didn't. And there ain't no way anyone who doesn't already know that can figure it out from the film, where the fantasy William Wallace is shown taking York...] I actually have one friend (Scottish) who rants for about half an hour every time it's mentioned - on the basis of how large an insult it is to william wallace to show him as basically a peasant (given he was actually a lowland knight, and very well educated). And then he starts on the tartan and blue faces Nothing wrong with tartan, per se -- just the way the used it! Anyway, the film in question does seem to be especially gratuitously historically inaccurate, but while that makes it particularly annoying to those with an affection for Scottish history, the real issue is not that TFWNSNBU is especially inaccurate, but that *all* films are historically inaccurate, and *no* film is or should be used as a reliable source of pre-modern historical information, yet, alas, many people none-the-less use films as sources of historical information, frequently encouraged by film makers who go to great lengths to persuade people that their films are true and real. Because it doesn't matter if 99% or 50% or only 25% of a film is inaccurate -- unless you are already an expert (and so, by definition, not using the film as a source of your information), you can't tell which bits are made up and which bits are accurate history. Take, as an example of the difficulties of guessing what is and is not historically accurate, A Knight's Tale, recently mentioned. How many of you have assumed that a female smith was one of the film's anachronisms? If you did, you assumed wrong. Whether the movie makers knew it or not (and my guess is that they didn't know it), in Medieval England, at least, there were actually female smiths. What is accurate and what is inaccurate isn't obvious or at all something one can determine by watching the film -- even the film's makers rarely (if ever) know how much, or exactly which bits, of their film is pure fiction vs. historically plausible vs. historical fact. Not to mention that even when film makers do know, their goal is to make their film seemless, so the audience won't know... Which, again, is why I prefer films such as A Knight's Tale and Shakespeare in Love, which include enough truly obvious anachronisms (such as modern rock music, psychiatrist jokes, modern coffee mugs, etc.), and attitude, to essentially scream out If you use this movie as source of historical information, you're a fool over movies such as TFWNSNBU, Elizabeth, and Kingdom of Heaven, which go out of their way, both in the film itself and in the promotion of the film, to try to persuade people that the film is historically accurate and real and true and can and should be used as a source of historical information -- that is, instead of screaming If you use this movie as a source of historical information, you're a fool, they whisper seductively Honest, really, we're not making this up -- believe us. Because the problem isn't that films are inaccurate -- the problem is when audiences believe what they see in films. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Historical Films (was: Knight's Tale)
At 12:12 PM -0400 4/23/06, Carol Kocian wrote: Braveheart SharonC., who says Macbeth backstage too, and doesn't spit, turn around, go out and come back in, etc. I quite happily say Macbeth, and I don't really care if anyone else says in my presence the name of That Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered (though I may spit ;-). I avoid saying the name as an expression of my feelings (which others may or may not share), not superstition. On the Revlist (American Revolution) some people will write *spit* after they mention the movie, The Patriot. It's a testament to Mel that there are such reactions to his movies... I don't find this reaction surprising, given that Mel in particular goes to great lengths to persuade audiences that his historical films are accurate, while at the same time not really bothering much with historical accuracy and essentially making the same movie over and over again. The resulting reaction to the supposedly historical films by those who care about history is predictable, and magnified by the popularity of his movies (which increases the numbers who believe the nonsense peddled as truth by Gibson). (The Patriot *spit* and TFWNSNBU are essentially the same plot, which plot borrows a great deal from the plots of various contemporary and futuristic movies Mel has been in. Never mind that the real history he claimed to be portraying doesn't actually fit that plot...) If Mel did not work so hard at selling his movies as accurate, he and his movies would not get the strong reaction they get for being so inaccurate. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] TFWNSNBU (was: h-costume Digest, Vol 5, Issue 351)
At 9:30 AM -0400 4/22/06, Gail Scott Finke wrote: Sharon wrote: No, the other Mel Gibson Scottish film. I always thought The Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered was the one with the title ending Prince of Thieves. Around here, anyway. Sorry if I caused any palpitations by writing even that much of it-- I have always used (and many others have picked it up) That Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered (aka TFWNSNBU) for Mel Gibson's 1996 film supposedly about William Wallace. It does not surprise me, given that it is a fairly obvious joke, that others use a similar phrase for other films they find particularly objectionable for one reason or another. (I'm a trained Scottish historian, which is why TFWNSNBU gained that designation from me -- not so much due to the film being inaccurate as due to all the people who believe what they see in the film, and, even worse, tell others what they know about Scottish history based on what they saw in the film, usually without mentioning their source of historical information was a movie, etc.. The film has made necessary a lot of unteaching, which is annoying for many reasons, including that teaching is much more enjoyable than unteaching...) Sharon PS For those who still aren't sure what film I am referring to by That Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered, the actual title is uttered on the web page I mentioned before: http://MedievalScotland.org/scotbiblio/braveheart.shtml -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Movies, was: Knight's Tale
At 8:35 PM -0400 4/21/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Designers often use styles from the whole century all at once without following the time line. They seem to do this more in the 18th century than any other. I don't think they do it more in the 18th century than any other -- I think rather that the fashion time-span they squish together (rather than following the historical time line) in general increases the further removed from our own time period the historical setting is. So, for things set in the late 20th century, the fashions may compress a few years, for the early 20th century they might use styles from a decade or two, for the 19th century they might draw from several decades at once, for they 18th century the whole century, etc. And when the setting is medieval, they throw together styles spanning multiple centuries. There appears to be a similar dynamic when it comes to cultures -- the further back the setting, people tend to be happy to squish together styles from ever more culturally and geographically far-flung places. (Thus, for a movie set in a relatively narrow medieval time and place, you might see styles taken from half a millennium of time and culled from cultures half a world apart...) Perhaps because the changes aren't a drastic as they are in the 19th century. Although, I can't tell you how many 1840s and 1850s dresses get used in Civil War epics! I think it is more that the further back you go, the less people know and so care about the various distinctions. (And even if the costume designer knows, the audience is unlikely to.) A sort of the further away things are from their own experience -- in time or space -- the more it all looks the same to them effect. (Which also explains why those who _do_ learn all about a particular historical time/place don't think it all looks the same -- it's no longer far from their experience.) I once worked for an LA designer who mainly did TV. He and his assistant were snotty to us hayseeds [they thought] here in NC. His assistant with his nose in the air gave me a speech on how carefully they had researched and how the designer was a stickler for accuracy. Then he handed me to alter for the ... Yeaha stickler for accuracy alright. [For those who's period is not the mid 1800s, all those details screamand I mean scream... 1840s] The more I learn about the entertainment industry, the clearer it becomes that accuracy is more an advertising buzz-word (used to attract audiences) than something truly pursued. That is, it is far more important to persuasively _claim_ accuracy than to actually _be_ accurate. (I'm know there are exceptions among individuals who work in these industries -- but in the industry as a whole...) Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Historical Films
At 3:34 PM -0700 4/23/06, Lavolta Press wrote: Because the problem isn't that films are inaccurate -- the problem is when audiences believe what they see in films. On the other hand, the benefit is that films, novels, and other forms of fiction have gotten many people interested in historical subjects who might well not have given them a second thought. Except for getting a passing grade in required American History and History of Civilization courses--and then forgetting almost all the material immediately after finals. Let's face it, history is neither particularly valued nor particularly job-getting in our society. My bet is that most college history professors seeing enthusiastic enrollment increase after a major film for that era is released, waft a mental Thanks! to the producers. The reality, also, is that there's absolutely nothing you can do to make the film industry work your way--unless you're a mogul in it. You're just another viewer. If you don't like the film, get rid of the DVD and view another one you like better. You're missing the point of my comments: The problem isn't that films are inaccurate means that the problem isn't that films are inaccurate. Thus, since the problem isn't that films are inaccurate, the solution isn't for film makers not to make inaccurate films. (Which is just as well, since they _can't_ make films that are accurate -- all films, by their nature, are inaccurate to one degree or another. It is inevitable.) The problem, as I said, is when audiences believe what they see in films. The solution to that is to try to get more people to understand the nature of films -- such as that they are inevitably inaccurate -- and thus the appropriate and inappropriate uses of films, and to stop using them inappropriately, specifically, to stop using them as if they were reliable sources of historical information. Now, admittedly, it would help a lot with this if movie makers would stop lying to their audiences by making false claims about the accuracy of their films. Personally, I'm not holding my breath on this, as unscrupulous movie makers show no signs of giving up lying about this or any other matter. (There are other movie makers who seem to do just fine without such lying, but my guess is the unscrupulous kind will always be with us...) So while I do urge movie makers to be more honest, my real target for change is movie watchers, not movie makers. As for college history professors, their reactions to seeing enthusiastic enrollment increases after a major film varies greatly, depending not only on their individual personalities, but also the specific topic they are teaching and the degree of damage the particular film has done, and especially whether the students attracted believed what they saw or not. Many professors would rather have only 20 students truly interested in learning real history than 200 students insisting they already know all the answers because they saw the movie and getting mad when the professor shatters those fondly held movie myths that inspired them to study history. For as I said in a previous post -- teaching is a lot more fun than unteaching, and movies that bring students to the classroom usually also bring a lot of need for unteaching. Sometimes the balance is tolerable, sometimes it isn't. I know TFWNSNBU has resulted in me wasting a lot of time trying to unteach things that were never an issue before the film -- and in Scottish history we already had more than our fair share of things that need to be untaught just from the general culture. It is very easy for all the unteaching of what didn't happen to completely crowd out any positive teaching of what did. But if more movie goers didn't use movies as if they were reliable sources of history... Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
RE: [h-cost] Knight's Tale
At 6:53 PM -0700 4/21/06, Sharon at Collierfam.com wrote (in reference to my reference to That Film Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered): Do you mean Macbeth? (hee-hee) No, the other Mel Gibson Scottish film. Sharon PS For those interested, I have a page with a few comments on the film in question at http://MedievalScotland.org/scotbiblio/braveheart.shtml (but those who don't like to hear that films are historically inaccurate should stay away ;-) -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Gifts for Brits (was: 16th century and gifts for Brits)
At 9:30 AM + 1/30/06, Kate Cole wrote: Someone suggested Hershey's Kisses - I would say don't bother as I have a LONG list of people in America to whom I send British chocolate on a regular basis because they say it is so much nicer than American chocolate. Having tasted US chocolate, I can only agree. Chocolate is a matter of taste, and fairly unpredictable taste, at that. I have two long lists -- one of people who much prefer either Hershey's chocolate specifically, or American chocolate generally, over British chocolate, and another of people who prefer British chocolate over Hershey's chocolate specifically or American chocolate generally. And there are both Americans and British folks on both lists. Actually, there is a third list -- people who like all kinds of different chocolate, British or American. And then there is the dark chocolate vs. milk chocolate thing (again, with 3 lists), not to mention the Belgian vs. everything else, premium vs. mass market, etc... In any case, on the subject of candy as food gifts for English hosts, for a sort of entertainingly twisted gift, consider also things like Cinnamon Altoids -- even though the company is a British one, and the mints are made in Britain, apparently you can't get the non-original flavours in Britain (at least not in London, according to my recent house guest who was both delighted and frustrated to discover the existence of Cinnamon Altoids). However, going back to the chocolate theme, and for a more local flavor (that is, local to Chris, not her hosts), there is also See's Candies. (For those who live outwith the See's region, See's is a California based chocolate maker that is not only a local institution/tradition, but also got high marks from Consumer Reports when they did their premium chocolate comparison issue.) I also echo the other suggestions -- local cookbooks (esp. ones with lots of pretty pictures of the place as well as the food), California wine (if you know your wines, this can be especially good if you find a really good small winery whose wines aren't sold in Britain). Another thought is some small piece by a local artist/craftsman -- especially one made out of particularly Californian materials (e.g., redwood) or with a particularly Californian (or more local) theme. Sharon PS For regular chocolate I am one of those who like all kinds -- I am only picky when it comes to white chocolate, where I prefer milk white chocolate (that is, white chocolate that has at least 25% milk content and so a more milky flavour and texture) and don't really like the non-milk varieties. Alas, in the US it is very hard to find milk white chocolate (especially at a reasonable price) -- I miss my big Milky Bars!!! (Which is what the previously mentioned house guest brings me from London, much to his disgust, as he thinks all white chocolate is an abomination ;-) ObCostume: So, for those familiar with See's -- what era is the inspiration/origin of their uniforms? (See http://www.sees.com/about.cfm for an example.) It strikes me as somehow earlier rather than later 20th century, but the 20th century isn't exactly my area of costuming interest... -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] OT: White Chocolate (was: Lots of different replies (most of them OT, sorry))
At 6:10 PM + 1/30/06, Kate Cole wrote: Re: white chocolate: Which is what the previously mentioned house guest brings me from London, much to his disgust, as he thinks all white chocolate is an abomination ;-) IT IS an abomination!! I think white chocolate is pure evil disguised as confectionery!! After some years of research, and finally pinning down the milk vs. non-milk difference in white chocolate as what distinguishes good from bad white chocolate for my tastes, I begin to wonder how many of the white chocolate is an abomination crowd only have experience with one kind of white chocolate and might actually quite like the other kind if they gave it a chance. Again taking myself as an example, if my only experience of white chocolate were the non-milk kind, I too would think white chocolate an abomination -- but I love milk white chocolate, though I classify the taste as being milk-like confectionery rather than [brown] chocolate-like confectionery. I suspect another issue is that people who approach white chocolate with the idea that it should be like [brown] chocolate are of course doomed to be disappointed -- but then, so is someone who approaches nougat with the expectation that it should be like [brown] chocolate. (Not being like [brown] chocolate doesn't necessarily make a confectionery bad, it just makes it not [brown] chocolate.) Sharon PS ObCostume: Expectations can also play a large role when interpreting costume evidence -- if you are expecting or looking for a certain thing, that influences how you re-act to what you actually see. (I find this a lot when it comes to people's interpretations of various Scottish evidence -- they see things in it they would never see if the evidence had come from, say, Germany, rather than Scotland!) (How many extra, erm, brownie points do I get for managing to come up with an ObCostume for white chocolate? ;-) -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
OT: [h-cost] gifts for Brits
At 1:29 PM -0500 1/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After 8 Mints, but not so much the thick patties. I don't think they have Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, either. Britain now has Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, and have done since the mid-to-late-1990s. Reese's used to be one of the things I pined for and imported in large quantity every trip back from home, but then Woolworth's started carrying them and my constant craving disappeared ;-) As I recall, Woolworth's also had Reese's Pieces, too. Sharon, USAmerican who used to live in Aberdeen (Scotland, of course!) PS ObCostume: Is the notion I have that Woolworth who started Woolworth's was a clothing designer a figment of some historical romance I read, or is there any basis in fact -- even if twisted fact? -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 16th c. costume experts?
At 9:39 AM -0600 1/29/06, Robin Netherton wrote: If you were looking for information on 16th c. costume in written sources, whose research/publications would you seek, other than Janet Arnold's? Doesn't it kind of depend on exactly what kind of 16th century costume you were interested in? The answer is going to be different if you're looking for 16th century Scottish (especially Highland) costume than if you're looking for 16th century English, or Italian, etc. I see in another post you're clarified that you mean British, but not just Elizabethan (that is, I'm interested in finding people known for doing work on the first half of the 16th c.). -- but I'm not entirely sure if by this you actually mean British (including not only Welsh but the various kinds of Scottish) or if you really mean only English. [Alas, it is so common for people to use British and English as synonyms that even when people use British to mean British one often still has to ask...] In any case, I haven't really noticed anyone currently publishing academically on 16th century Scottish clothing, and the best sources for (paper) published information on historical Scottish costume (from many centuries, though usually but not always concentrating on Highland clothing) in written sources are still the works of John Telfar Dunbar and H. F. McClintock (see http://MedievalScotland.org/clothing/books/). Turning to web publications, there is my Historical Scottish Clothing Project http://MedievalScotland.org/clothing/project.shtml, but it is still in early stages (and somewhat stalled by my plans to switch to dynamic database driven web pages) and currently only has a little that is not already in Dunbar and/or McClintock. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] warming a castle
At 7:35 PM + 1/17/06, Laura Dickerson wrote: A number of years ago we visited Cothele House in Cornwall on a cold rainy April day. It's a granite and slate Tudorish house with fancy woodwork and lots of tapestries on the walls. No electric lights, no central heating. There was a blazing fire in the great hall fireplace, but unless one was standing quite near the fire, it didn't seem to help much. Dark and damp and chilly, although it was at least out of the wind. From the web site I note that this house is closed during the winter, from November through late March, and so doesn't really answer the question of how warm it would be if it was lived in all year round (including the fire places going at least all winter, possibly all year round) -- especially not when visited in April only a few weeks after opening again. (Another consideration is, even when it is open, is it kept heated when tourists aren't there, or are the fires only going during business hours?) All those layers of woolen clothes seemed like a good idea. I have no doubt this is true -- indeed, it is still true in Britain, in my experience, even with central heating... Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Underwear Menses (was: medieval quote on underwear)
At 8:16 PM + 1/10/06, Caroline wrote: If you are pregnant or breastfeeding you are unlikely to have monthly cycles. Admitted women who are not sexually active won't be pregnant much but once you take nuns out of the equasion most women wouldn't need sanitary protection much during their life. But they'd still need it enough of their lives for it to be a consideration in their lives. (And even most married women were probably not producing a child every year, or even every two years, and so would have spent much of their mature lives menstruating every month -- and not all women got married, remained married constantly until menopause, were fertile, etc...) In any case, since this was raised in the context of discussing underwear, it is worth explicitly reminding ourselves that while currently in the US and similar cultures we often deal with menstruation by attaching something to underwear, this solution is in fact extremely modern. When I first started menstruating (circa 1980, give or take a couple years) many were still wearing special belts with dangly bits to which sanitary pads were attached (no underwear needed), and even as recently as the early 1990s when I was in hospital in the UK, the hospital issue pads assumed such a belt (which, naturally, I didn't have, not having used one since I was a young teenager -- nor were any of the British women I knew still using such things). And even though I have myself used such non-adhesive backing methods in the past, I still tend to forget that adhesive pads attached to underwear hasn't been around since time immemorial -- that is, until forcibly reminded by hospital time-warps or the like! So, even if it were true that historically women didn't need sanitary protection much during their life, that wouldn't explain lack of women wearing underwear as underwear is completely unnecessary for sanitary protection (even without tampons) and, further, modernly underwear only became part of the sanitary protection solution in very recent decades. That is, sanitary protection tells us nothing about underwear, and underwear tells us nothing about sanitary protection, except and unless there is specific evidence linking the two frequently unrelated variables in some specific context (such as, say, very late 20th, early 21st century US similar cultures). Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Public vs. Private Events (was: Catching up)
At 3:58 PM -0700 9/8/05, Kahlara wrote: SCA - from my limited esperience the SCA has evolved ... An excerpt from an SCA article states, ...describe the SCA as recreating the Middle Ages as they ought to have been. A better description is that we selectively recreate medieval culture, choosing elements of the culture that interest and attract us. (from http://www.sca.org/sca-intro.html) Selective recreation is a much better description. The SCA is a place where each individual decides for themself what (if anything) they will re-create -- and to what (if any) level of historical accuracy. And as Lilinah said, many events are open to the public. An attempt to dress 'period' by visitors and newcomers is appreciated and basic loaner garb is provided. I took my niece to an event a couple of weekends ago, and we found a wonderful T tunic type dress for her to borrow that was quite accurate. (Was also pleased that the little tom-boy commented the dress was really comfortable!) Incredibly low participation requirements is not the same as being open to the public. If you get invited to come to a private party (whether in advance or as you wander by), once you accept that invitation you aren't a member of the general public anymore but a participant in the private party -- one of the people entertaining yourselves. SCA events are private parties where participants often invite random strangers to join the private party. This is very, very different from other historical re-creation groups events such as renaissance fairs and many revolutionary, civil war, and other battle re-enactment societies. Usually at their events, there is one group of people who are participants and another, different group of people (the public) who are the audience, and one of the basic, intentional purposes of the event is for the participants to entertain the audience. Being solicited to come watch other people entertain you (as in a theater) is very different from being invited to join a private party and entertain yourself (with other likeminded people). (BTW, note that at a renaissance fair, although yes a significant number of the participants whose role is to entertain the audience are merchants trying to sell things, there is still a functional divide between participants [merchants and actors] vs. [paying] audience.) Another way to think of it is like this: at an SCA event, everybody at the event is expected to follow the same rules (e.g., with regard to dress, behavior, etc.). At other kinds of historical re-creation events, it is expected and there are different rules for participants than for the public/audience (with regard to dress, behavior, etc.). At such public events, members of the public are allowed to do things that participants are not allowed to do (e.g., wear entirely modern clothing, talk about modern things in modern language in front of the audience, and/or the like) and participants are allowed to do things that members of the public are not allowed to do (e.g., go back stage, go on stage, participate in the battle re-enactment itself, be on site before and after closing, and/or the like). Sharon, who has participated in renaissance fairs, battle re-enactment societies, and the SCA... -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] Kilcommon Bog Jacket/Ionar
At 8:55 PM -0700 9/8/05, Kimiko Small wrote: And to add even more of a mess to the mix, various knowledgeable Irish re-enactors may or may not adhere to the theory that among the Irish, one's rank is seen by the number of colors worn in one's garment, up to seven colors, iirc, for the clan chief. How that many colors is shown on the garment is unclear. Maybe it was the colors woven into a multi-colored garment, or maybe it was the embroidery or trimmings added, or who really knows. This is supposedly based on Brehan (sp?) laws that I think actually date to an earlier time frame, but I do not claim any knowledge of those laws or how applicable they are to any given time frame. The color thing is a medieval legend about events thousands of years earlier -- in other words, about as relevant to late medieval Irish clothing as Old Testament stories are to late medieval Irish clothing. Specifically, the number of colors = ranks theory among modern historical re-creators has its origins in entries in the Irish Annals of the Four Masters which claimed that Eochaidh Eadghadhach in the year of the world 3664 -- that is, about 1530 *B.C.* -- ordered that the colours of clothes worn should denote the wearer's rank in society: 'one colour in the clothes of slaves, two in the clothes of soldiers, three in the clothes of goodly heroes or young lords of territories, six in the clothes of ollavs [professional men], seven in the clothes of kings and queens.' [Dunlevy, _Dress in Ireland_ p. 16] However, this is purely legendary, recorded millennia after the events supposedly happened, and even if taken as historically accurate is talking about a time period about three _millennia_ before the era depicted in the woodcuts discussed above. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
RE: [h-cost] 1968 SCA views of medieval clothing
At 10:01 AM -0500 9/5/05, Susan B. Farmer wrote: Quoting otsisto [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -Original Message- SCA events in public parks draw non-costumed spectators too. * Usually, these are refered to as demos, fighter practice or recruitment(for lack of a better word). Events are usually something on a much more grander scale and normally is not posted to the regular public. Our two big tourneys are held at the group came at a local state park -- which is very much a public site. The spectators do watch the fighting from a distance -- many ask questions and some stay and feast with us (suitably garbed/tabarded of course). One year, one of the park rangers came, stayed and later joined. Unless your event is held on Private Property, if you at a visible part of State Park property (which is where many of our events are held), you have spectators. Yes, but in the case of SCA events, these general public spectators are an unintended (and unavoidable) accident, not a primary, intended part of the plan. SCA events are not put on for the benefit/entertainment of a non-participatory audience, while many other re-creation societies do put on their events purposefully for the benefit/entertainment of a non-participatory audience. (If the same SCA event that attracts an audience on public property were held on private property, there would be no audience -- while the civil war battle re-enactment will have an invited audience regardless of whether held on public or private property.) In short, SCA events are not a performance for an audience. Renaissance fairs and nearly all battle re-enactment societies' events are. And this difference profoundly affects the nature of these events and re-creations. Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
[h-cost] Re: Jacobite/Scottish
I'm coming to this discussion late (just having rejoined the list), but on an issue of terminology origin raised... At 8:31 AM -0700 7/22/05, Kahlara wrote: Yes, Jacobite shirt - I have also seen it refered to as a ghilie shirt, presumably because the opening was laced. There is a good chance that it is (modernly) called a gillie/ghillie shirt (and other spelling variants) because it is (modernly) associated with gillies, that is, with (Highland) male servants, especially attendants on Highland chiefs, and/or more modernly, 19th century and later sportsmen's attendants (for fishing hunting, etc.). See the Dictionary of the Scots Language (DSL, available online free at http://www.dsl.ac.uk/) entry from the SND s.v. GILLIE http://www.dsl.ac.uk/dsl/getent4.php?plen=9304startset=14404904query=GILLIEdtext=snd This is the source of the gillie in gillie brogues, after the style shoes worn by such attendants -- so it would not be surprising if it were also the source of the gillie in gillie shirt, possibly derived from the style of shirts actually worn by such attendants, or, probably more likely, based on more modern associations of this style of shirt with such attendants, or at least the Romantic past and rustic image often modernly associated with such attendants and/or their attire. Note, btw, that the defining stylistic characteristic of gillie/ghillie brogues is not that they are laced, or even the decorative pierced patterns in the leather, but the scalloped cut of the leather around the eyelets through which the lacing is threaded. In contrast, non-gillie day brogues or plain brogues, which are also laced and can have the decorative patterns, do not have the scalloped cut. (There may be additional terms for specifically non-gillie brogues, but I can't figure out what they may be, other than simply being called brogues. BTW, in addition to the laced brogues, there is also the buckle brogue. A brogue is just a heavy men's shoe, which of course can have various styles.) For examples of day brogues, see http://www.kiltmakers.co.uk/catalogue_shoes.htm (shows both) http://66.70.66.18/geomantics/preview/index.cfm?action=producta=1b=1c=3d=5g=GAEs=BR For examples of gillie/ghillie brogues, see http://www.kiltmakers.co.uk/catalogue_shoes.htm (shows both) http://66.70.66.18/geomantics/preview/index.cfm?action=producta=1b=1c=3d=4g=GAEs=BBP The above are, of course, modern shoes, and, for that matter, the terms ghillie brogue and especially ghillie shirt are likewise modern. How far back the style of shirt now called ghillie shirt (or Jacobean/Jacobite shirt, etc.) goes, I don't myself know, though I would guess at very earliest early modern, and more probably later than earlier. Finally, I should probably comment explicitly that, especially since it seems the term ghillie shirt was coined relatively recently, it is also possible that rather than being named for associations of that style of shirt with ghillies (Highland attendants) and/or their (historical) image or the like, the term arose among various modern people who associate the term ghillie in ghillie brogues with lacing rather than the defining scalloping (nevermind ghillies), and so does refer to the lacing. [It's difficult to know for sure without finding the earliest uses of the term and knowing more of the context and coiners.] Sharon -- Sharon Krossa, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resources for Scottish history, names, clothing, language more: Medieval Scotland - http://www.MedievalScotland.org/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
