Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Authentic_SCA] Looking for Angelcynn

Expand Messages
  • Ro
    IIRC, this is pretty spot on from what little is known of Merovingians. I took a class in Merovingian Grave Goods this past fall at Atlantian University. It
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 8, 2004
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      IIRC, this is pretty spot on from what little is known of Merovingians. I
      took a class in Merovingian Grave Goods this past fall at Atlantian
      University. It was authored by Mistress Ingvild.


      http://www.livejournal.com/users/ladyrowansplace/
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Saerlaith ingen Ruadan" <barknark@...>
      To: <Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 11:07 PM
      Subject: [Authentic_SCA] Looking for Angelcynn


      >
      >
      > Anyone know where their site went?
      >
      > Also, any early period folk know anything about the line drawings on this
      > page?
      > http://www.kipar.demon.co.uk/frankish.html
      >
      > The shorter dresses/tunics look way to practical to be period 8- ) I'm
      > shooting for 10th C. but not having to wear floor-length draperies might
      > just change my mind.
      >
      > Many thanks!
      > Saerlaith
    • ennoguent
      ... Not to burst your bubble, but the short tunics are highly contested. Some believe in them, some don t. IIRC, the only reasoning for them was 1. the fancy
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 10, 2004
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        >>The shorter dresses/tunics look way to practical to be period 8- ) I'm
        >>shooting for 10th C. but not having to wear floor-length draperies might
        >>just change my mind.

        Not to burst your bubble, but the short tunics are highly contested.
        Some believe in them, some don't. IIRC, the only reasoning for them was
        1. the fancy garters on the lower legs and 2. no threads from the tunic
        were found on the lower legs (on arnegunde, anyway). Personally,I'm
        ambivalent. I like to wear a peplos under my coat, mainly because I made
        the sleeves too tight. ;-)

        We talked about this on this list after Pennsic this year, and I'll be
        darned if I can remember what was said. :-/

        Enn.
      • Saerlaith ingen Ruadan
        Oh Poo! I guess I ll be conservative for now and go with a longer length. Maybe I ll try a shorter get up for camping 8- ) Why didn t the Irish save their 10th
        Message 3 of 4 , Dec 10, 2004
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Oh Poo!
          I guess I'll be conservative for now and go with a longer length. Maybe I'll
          try a shorter get up for camping 8- ) Why didn't the Irish save their 10th C
          back issues of Hiberno-Norse Vogue for posterity??

          --Saerlaith

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: ennoguent
          To: Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 4:20 AM
          Subject: [Authentic_SCA] Re: Looking for Angelcynn



          >>The shorter dresses/tunics look way to practical to be period 8- ) I'm
          >>shooting for 10th C. but not having to wear floor-length draperies might
          >>just change my mind.

          Not to burst your bubble, but the short tunics are highly contested.
          Some believe in them, some don't. IIRC, the only reasoning for them was
          1. the fancy garters on the lower legs and 2. no threads from the tunic
          were found on the lower legs (on arnegunde, anyway). Personally,I'm
          ambivalent. I like to wear a peplos under my coat, mainly because I made
          the sleeves too tight. ;-)

          We talked about this on this list after Pennsic this year, and I'll be
          darned if I can remember what was said. :-/

          Enn.



          ----------

          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.6 - Release Date: 12/5/2004


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.