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

wriggle room

Expand Messages
  • neeveofredriver
    Reading the thread regarding the celestial design fabric from 1616 brought a question to mind which may result in an interesting exchange of ideas. I hope this
    Message 1 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Reading the thread regarding the celestial design fabric from 1616 brought a question to mind which may result in an interesting exchange of ideas.
      I hope this will be a fun discussion.

      Suppose one's persona is based in any given decade, and supposing there were patterns for garb to be found for some decades before and some decades after that, how far in either temporal direction is it reasonable to extend one's researching reach? Barring any specific evidence that establishes the discovery/invention of a technique or material, how do we go about deciding what could have been available to our persona?

      Lords and Ladies, blessings upon you and your good works.
      Nem Aibhann Rua
      [Carrie Thomas]
    • Colleen Vince
      No opinion on Garb, but as for woodworking I extend my cut off to 1683. Joesph Moxon wrote a manual on Handyworks including a very detailed overview on wood
      Message 2 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        No opinion on Garb, but as for woodworking I extend my cut off to
        1683. Joesph Moxon wrote a manual on Handyworks including a very
        detailed overview on wood turning. I wouldn't make a piece from 1683
        for an A&S competition, but for documenting how to turn in period I'd
        use it as there is little to no information on wood turning before
        that. Better a slightly out of period documentation than none at all.



        --
        Mary Ostler
        Apprentice to Mistress Agnes Cresewyke
        www.maryostler.com
      • CLEY
        In vocal music, I cut off England at around 1625, as that was when the two last great Renaissance genres died out, those being the madrigal and ayre. In Italy,
        Message 3 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          In vocal music, I cut off England at around 1625, as that was when the
          two last great Renaissance genres died out, those being the madrigal and
          ayre. In Italy, the cut off is earlier, being around 1598, with the rise
          of opera.

          Arlys
        • wodeford
          In an effort to reduce agonizing over things, I would like to add that the only one who can decide how late is too late is YOU. We all make compromises in the
          Message 4 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            In an effort to reduce agonizing over things, I would like to add that the only one who can decide how late is too late is YOU. We all make compromises in the pursuit of this hobby: time, materials, tools, skill level, and so forth.

            For some projects, 1602 is too late, for others, 1650 is in the ballpark. It takes a bit of homework to determine which, and ultimately, a judgement call on the part of the individual.

            Jehanne de Wodeford
            West Kingdom
          • gedney@OPTONLINE.NET
            ... for ME... I believe that, since I sign a document (waiver) that I agree, on y personal honor, to abide by the Rules of the SCA , I am conscrained,
            Message 5 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              > For some projects, 1602 is too late, for others, 1650 is in the
              > ballpark. It takes a bit of homework to determine which, and
              > ultimately, a judgement call on the part of the individual.
              >

              for ME... I believe that, since I sign a document (waiver) that I agree, on y personal honor, to "abide by the Rules of the SCA", I am conscrained, personally to go by Corpora, which says "an attempt at preseventeenth century dress" which, by a simple excercise of logic, cannot apply to a conscious attempt at POST 16th century dress. So, for me, the 16th-17th century boundary is my delimiter.

              Capt Elias


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • christopher chastain
              Capt I would agree with you mostly on that point unfortunately the archeaology isnt there in some cases and a little fudge on the end time is warranted. Now
              Message 6 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Capt I would agree with you mostly on that point unfortunately the archeaology isnt there in some cases and a little fudge on the end time is warranted. Now should every possible effort be made to get as close to 1600 yes if it goes a couple years past grey area anything beyond 1640-50 is pushing it and had best be something that is known to not have changed in the 51 years before that date. Otherwise it's outside period and goes to the next group of reenactors timeline whoever that maybe.


                Yours in Humble Service,
                Pomestnik Dmitrii Zarekoi Ivanov
                "Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing!"
              • Marianne Perdomo
                2009/7/7 neeveofredriver wrote: Suppose one s persona is based in any given decade, and supposing there were ... Am I the only one who didn t think of the SCA
                Message 7 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  2009/7/7 neeveofredriver wrote:

                  Suppose one's persona is based in any given decade, and supposing there were
                  > patterns for garb to be found for some decades before and some decades after
                  > that, how far in either temporal direction is it reasonable to extend one's
                  > researching reach? Barring any specific evidence that establishes the
                  > discovery/invention of a technique or material, how do we go about deciding
                  > what could have been available to our persona?


                  Am I the only one who didn't think of the SCA cut-off date on reading this?

                  I have certainly had this problem... I do many things just because I like
                  them but I try to place most of my efforts on being Spanish from the 1470s,
                  as a kind of personal challenge. Yet for many things I can't get info
                  between say, 1450s and 1490s. Certainly there seems to be less useful
                  paintings available from the 1470s. So I often try to at least determine if
                  something was done before and after - in that case I'm quite happy to assume
                  it didn't cease to be done in between. That's mostly for clothing which
                  changes by decade, it seems, at least in details like sleeves, necklines,
                  that sort of thing.
                  For other things I'll extend that a bit - furniture, for example doesn't
                  seem to change as much - but of course I don't have my persona's furniture
                  (I wish!!) so maybe I just haven't looked enough.
                  For cooking, I try to stay with recipes written in the written or known in
                  the 15th century (for example, the 14th century Sent SovĂ­ cookbook was
                  copied in the 15th c.) but then cooking doesn't seem to change all that
                  much, from what I've seen.
                  For dancing I'll do almost anything :) but consider 15th c. Italian and
                  burgundian dance to be "me".
                  For music... (I listen, but not play, alas) I normally have to turn to
                  material written down towards the end of the century. Better than nothing
                  and not a bad approximation, as far as I know.
                  And it's very annoying that printed books aren't really available to my
                  persona yet... as well as some novels. Still I read them because they'll
                  give me a better feel of the period, being as close as I can reasonably get.

                  To me changes of style are an important consideration... in some periods
                  20-30 years make little difference, but in others it's much greater. Think
                  1480 vs 1500 vs 1520. The latter sees the introduction of a much wider
                  silhouette, squarish shoes, etc. which appear to me as a departure from the
                  erlier gothic ideals, which appear to differ in details only.
                  Having looked at ca 1600 clothing it seems to me that there's a similar
                  turning point towards 1610-1620, when you start to see real heels and lots
                  of lace. The "drawings" on the material seem to change, as do neck-styles
                  and so on. In earlier periods however it's hard to see such sudden changes
                  (say 1050 vs 1150 - can anyone really tell them apart?). And of course high
                  fashion and more normal wear probably differ, too.

                  Id' be very happy to hear about what criteria of this sort other people use.
                  :) or evolution of things and turning points.

                  Cheers!


                  Leonor


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Janis James
                  Researching time for items has always been interesting but often not conclusive. For example: needlework, if we know a particular type was done in (x) century,
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Researching time for items has always been interesting but often
                    not conclusive. For example: needlework, if we know a particular
                    type was done in (x) century, we should also know that it likely
                    didn't spring into use instantly, but was used and developed over
                    time and place. We don't have the extant examples to show this
                    so we can only surmise and use conjecture as to when it started.

                    Of course we do have a few examples - like when blackwork was
                    brought to England from Spain. However, we can't be absolutely
                    certain how and when it actually started in Spain. We just know
                    when it flourished in Spain.

                    In all the research I've worked on over the years I have forced
                    myself to allow a little given time at either end of the generally
                    accepted time-frame to allow for this. I suspect this is true of
                    many things through time other than just needlework. It would
                    be nice of course if we could be absolutely certain such as with
                    actual dated inventions, so I generally accept "wriggle room" unless
                    it can be proven to a set date.

                    Cheers, Sine







                    _________________________________________________________________
                    Internet explorer 8 lets you browse the web faster.
                    http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655582

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • neeveofredriver
                    Thank you Leonor, Your answer captured the spirit of my question best. Although I am glad to have found out more about the cut-off debate. I suppose there is
                    Message 9 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thank you Leonor,
                      Your answer captured the spirit of my question best. Although I am glad to have found out more about the cut-off debate. I suppose there is room to debate the end of our period because the oath taken is to 'attempt' preseventeenth century representation and sometimes borderline/fuzzy documentation is the best you can get.

                      Also, I think personality has an influence on each of us and our choices of clothing, household items, etc. For myself, in my mundane life, I have eclectic tastes. I love vintage clothing as well as fresher styles. I think of myself as both ahead of my time in some ways and quite retro in others (not to mention my weekend time-travels to centuries past). This sensibility will undoubtedly carry over into the expression of my persona as well. As I mentioned in my introduction a few weeks ago, I'm an 11th century Irish woman near but not in Dublin. I might choose to don a gown just like Grandmother's because I like it. And the next day wear a chic dress I bought in port, the very cutting edge of trade-route fashion! Or perhaps combine old cuts with new cloths. Who's to say "that just wasn't done"?

                      We can know by historical records and archeological finds what did exist but we can we be absolutely certain about what movers and shakers did NOT experiment with (including failures) given the general technologies and materials available to them at the time?

                      So, good Gentles, what say you? How do each of you go about determining the document-ablity of your own persona, garb, artifacts and all?

                      Enjoying the Creativity of our Anachronism and piecing the puzzle together with you all,
                      Truly,
                      Nem Aibhann Rua
                      [Carrie Thomas]
                    • JL Badgley
                      On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:39 AM, ... Lots and lots of reading. And museum-going. And image viewing. I start with trying to get a picture of the timeframe I m
                      Message 10 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:39 AM,
                        neeveofredriver<neeveofredriver@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > So, good Gentles, what say you? How do each of you go about determining the
                        > document-ablity of your own persona, garb, artifacts and all?
                        >
                        Lots and lots of reading. And museum-going. And image viewing.

                        I start with trying to get a picture of the timeframe I'm going for,
                        and study in order to better understand what it should look like.

                        After that, I look primarily for evidence of things during that
                        timeframe, though I may also look earlier.

                        I generally avoid looking later unless there is a source that is
                        describing earlier information, or something that shows a trend.

                        For example, if I find fabric X with pattern Y before my timeframe
                        (but not during), but can also see that it has survived to after my
                        timeframe, then I can use the two points to make a reasonable
                        assumption that the pattern continued to exist in the timeframe I'm
                        interested in, barring information that would contradict this (such as
                        a sumptuary law specifically prohibiting it). Likewise, if I see X
                        garment, but the only construction information is post the period in
                        question, I won't hesitate to use the later information to make the
                        earlier garment.

                        For food I often look at post-cutoff sources, but I analyze them
                        critically based on earlier evidence. If you find a 1640 recipe for a
                        food that is mentioned (but not otherwise described) in 1590, then
                        would it not be reasonable to assume that they are the same, barring
                        contrary evidence?

                        So I guess what all this means is that I believe post-cutoff sources
                        can be used, provided you've first done your homework regarding your
                        primary time period to be able to understand whether something is
                        plausible. You cannot just arbitrarily make that decision, though,
                        and you can in no wise determine that X number of years after a
                        particular date means it is appropriate. A 1601 painting could be
                        showing clothing that just came into fashion the summer of 1601, for
                        all you know, unless you've done your research.


                        -E. Godric Logan
                      • Cynthia J Ley
                        On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 17:03:35 -0700 Janis James ... Hi all. Sorry about the earlier top post--one of my e-mail servers seems to have more
                        Message 11 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 17:03:35 -0700 Janis James <seja02@...>
                          writes:
                          >
                          >
                          > Researching time for items has always been interesting but often
                          > not conclusive. For example: needlework, if we know a particular
                          > type was done in (x) century, we should also know that it likely
                          > didn't spring into use instantly, but was used and developed over
                          > time and place. We don't have the extant examples to show this
                          > so we can only surmise and use conjecture as to when it started.

                          Hi all. Sorry about the earlier top post--one of my e-mail servers seems
                          to have more problems with interjecture then the other.

                          > Of course we do have a few examples - like when blackwork was
                          > brought to England from Spain. However, we can't be absolutely
                          > certain how and when it actually started in Spain. We just know
                          > when it flourished in Spain.

                          And even the first statement is not entirely correct. It's reasonably
                          fair to say that someone famous made it popular (Catharine of Aragon),
                          but we don't really know how far back its roots go, and it seems to have
                          at least some foundation in the non-representational arts of the Moors.
                          All this by way of emphasizing what Sine said. :-) A lot of times all we
                          have are pieces of the puzzle, and a lot of times pieces are missing.
                          Enter Ye Educated Guess.


                          > In all the research I've worked on over the years I have forced
                          > myself to allow a little given time at either end of the generally
                          > accepted time-frame to allow for this. I suspect this is true of
                          > many things through time other than just needlework. It would
                          > be nice of course if we could be absolutely certain such as with
                          > actual dated inventions, so I generally accept "wriggle room" unless
                          > it can be proven to a set date.

                          And even then, there are usually antecedents in one form or another.

                          Arlys


                          > Cheers, Sine
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > _________________________________________________________________
                          > Internet explorer 8 lets you browse the web faster.
                          > http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655582
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >

                          ____________________________________________________________
                          You're never too old to date. Senior Dating. Click Here.
                          http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTQbQWKw2XfL3YDIqUaNc6a8msZ4R5inJXCRhxe8ZuP8k232gYrOjm/
                        • Jeff gedney
                          Well, the thing is, If you can legitimately show that it is likely that a item from out of period is logically consistent with being in period, then you can
                          Message 12 of 19 , Jul 7, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Well, the thing is, If you can legitimately show that it is likely that a
                            item from out of period is logically consistent with being in period, then
                            you can "work the fuzzy"...
                            For example if you have name reference that is a church record of a burial
                            of a 44 year old in 1625, then it is logical to assume that the name was
                            given in period...
                            (but this is not reliable, names elide and change their usage, a name given
                            at birth may change to a more modern form just by vernacular usage and the
                            spelling standardization that widely took place in early modern England in
                            late 16th- early 17th century.

                            For my money,
                            if you are making the claim that a characteristically 17th century clothing
                            (like a buffecoat) is "an attempt" at PRE-seventeenth century, and
                            you can't document that it is preseventeenth, you fail that standard.
                            I don't care how cool you think you look in it.

                            > We can know by historical records and archeological finds what did
                            > exist but we can we be absolutely certain about what movers and shakers
                            > did NOT experiment with (including failures) given the general
                            > technologies and materials available to them at the time?

                            Its functionally impossible to prove that they did NOT experiment with
                            clothes and such....
                            For that matter it is also impossible to prove that some genius was not
                            experimenting with nuclear fission, or automotive vehicles, or antigravity.

                            So as far as I am able to judge, the line has to be what we can prove that
                            they DID do, not what they Might have done.

                            > So, good Gentles, what say you? How do each of you go about
                            > determining the document-ablity of your own persona, garb, artifacts
                            > and all?

                            I research, use good sources, juried, where possible, with clear
                            documentation that I can trace back to originals.
                            I take period iconography with a grain of salt, and prefer to have that
                            backed up with textual or better yet artefactual survivals...

                            THEN I decide what I am going to make.
                            I don't decide what I want and then try to "justify" it to period.
                            That way leads to bad scholarship.

                            Capt Elias
                          • bronwynmgn@aol.com
                            In a message dated 7/7/2009 5:51:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, marianne@historiaviva.org writes:
                            Message 13 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              In a message dated 7/7/2009 5:51:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
                              marianne@... writes:

                              <<Am I the only one who didn't think of the SCA cut-off date on reading
                              this?
                              >>

                              I didn't in relation to myself, because my persona is firmly based in the
                              12th century and the cut-off date is over 400 years in the future for me :-)
                              I did think of the cut-off date on reading the inital post.

                              <<I have certainly had this problem... I do many things just because I like
                              them but I try to place most of my efforts on being Spanish from the 1470s,
                              as a kind of personal challenge. Yet for many things I can't get info
                              between say, 1450s and 1490s. >>

                              There's not a lot of 12th century information, either. For clothing, we
                              have a lot of statues and some illuminations that are more or less stylized,
                              and a very few extant pieces such as coronation robes or ecclesiatical
                              clothing.
                              For cooking, there is one Anglo-Norman cookery collection that is close in
                              time, but I'm not sure it's been published in it's entirety yet - I do have
                              a photocopy of some of the recipes. Otherwise I'm limited to mostly 14th
                              and 15th century sources, but I won't go further than that. I also tend to
                              limit myself to Northern European sources. There's the Harpestrang cookery
                              manuscript which is also 13th century, I think, and exists in several northern
                              European versions (German, Norwegian I think, etc) but which is probably a
                              copy of a more southerly-based text based on the ingredients used.


                              Brangwayna Morgan
                              Shire of Silver Rylle, East Kingdom
                              Lancaster, PA
                              **************Popular laptop deals plus free shipping!
                              (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221917659x1201411421/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.media
                              plex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D2)


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • bronwynmgn@aol.com
                              In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:28:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, neeveofredriver@yahoo.com writes:
                              Message 14 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:28:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
                                neeveofredriver@... writes:

                                <<So, good Gentles, what say you? How do each of you go about determining
                                the document-ablity of your own persona, garb, artifacts and all? >>

                                For me, it's important that it be as close as I can get it to my time
                                period and country, and I like to have at least one solid point of data for what
                                I'm doing. There aren't really many for cooking, so I have to go further
                                afield for solid data points. For clothing, I have lots of data points, but
                                not many that give me a lot of detail on construction, so I need to work with
                                interpretations on those, and decide which interpretations I think are
                                accurate.


                                Brangwayna Morgan
                                Shire of Silver Rylle, East Kingdom
                                Lancaster, PA
                                **************Popular laptop deals plus free shipping!
                                (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221917659x1201411421/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.media
                                plex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D2)


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • bronwynmgn@aol.com
                                In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:51:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tatsushu@gmail.com writes:
                                Message 15 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:51:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
                                  tatsushu@... writes:

                                  <<For food I often look at post-cutoff sources, but I analyze them
                                  critically based on earlier evidence. If you find a 1640 recipe for a
                                  food that is mentioned (but not otherwise described) in 1590, then
                                  would it not be reasonable to assume that they are the same, barring
                                  contrary evidence?>>

                                  Similar yes, but quite possibly not the same. After all, we have lots of
                                  contemporary manuscripts which list a recipe of the same name in each, but
                                  the recipes themselves can be anything from slight variations of each other to
                                  completely different. We also have evidence that a dish can be listed by
                                  the same name in an earlier and a later source and have evolved significantly
                                  in between. So assuming that a dish named Bukenade in one source and a
                                  dish named Bukenade in another source are the same dish is a faulty premise.
                                  It may be the closest you can get, but you shouldn't fool yourself that the
                                  person who referred to it 50 years earlier means exactly what the person who
                                  wrote it down did.

                                  Not to mention the fact that some period recipes are so vague that it's
                                  very possible to make entirely different dishes from the same recipe in the
                                  same source. Bukenade's a good example; one recipe I have for it basically
                                  says to take good meat, whatever you have, boil it with beef, and add onions
                                  and spices. I've done chicken and beef, lamb and beef, and pork and beef, and
                                  a variety of different spice comibinations depending on what is usually
                                  used with the "other" meat I've chosen, so each result has been quite different
                                  from the others.


                                  Brangwayna Morgan
                                  Shire of Silver Rylle, East Kingdom
                                  Lancaster, PA
                                  **************Popular laptop deals plus free shipping!
                                  (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221917659x1201411421/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.media
                                  plex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D2)


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Heather Rose Jones
                                  ... My favorite example of this problem is how to interpret the Welsh clothing term pais . The word shows up as a description of a specific garment
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Jul 8, 2009, at 4:11 AM, bronwynmgn@... wrote:

                                    > In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:51:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
                                    > tatsushu@... writes:
                                    >
                                    > <<For food I often look at post-cutoff sources, but I analyze them
                                    > critically based on earlier evidence. If you find a 1640 recipe for a
                                    > food that is mentioned (but not otherwise described) in 1590, then
                                    > would it not be reasonable to assume that they are the same, barring
                                    > contrary evidence?>>
                                    >
                                    > Similar yes, but quite possibly not the same. After all, we have
                                    > lots of
                                    > contemporary manuscripts which list a recipe of the same name in
                                    > each, but
                                    > the recipes themselves can be anything from slight variations of
                                    > each other to
                                    > completely different. We also have evidence that a dish can be
                                    > listed by
                                    > the same name in an earlier and a later source and have evolved
                                    > significantly
                                    > in between. So assuming that a dish named Bukenade in one source
                                    > and a
                                    > dish named Bukenade in another source are the same dish is a faulty
                                    > premise.
                                    >

                                    My favorite example of this problem is how to interpret the Welsh
                                    clothing term "pais". The word shows up as a description of a specific
                                    garment continuously from the earliest written sources (the Book of
                                    Aneurin) to the present day. But the specific nature of the garment
                                    being referred to changes enormously over that time. Even if you had a
                                    picture of a garment in century X with an arrow pointing to it saying
                                    "this is a 'pais'", that wouldn't tell you what the word referred to
                                    in century X-1 or X+1.

                                    Tangwystyl
                                  • JL Badgley
                                    On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Heather Rose ... All true, but then again, this is where we get into the reasonable attempt --we get as close as we can
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Heather Rose
                                      Jones<heather.jones@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > On Jul 8, 2009, at 4:11 AM, bronwynmgn@... wrote:
                                      >
                                      >> In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:51:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
                                      >> tatsushu@... writes:
                                      >>
                                      >> <<For food I often look at post-cutoff sources, but I analyze them
                                      >> critically based on earlier evidence. If you find a 1640 recipe for a
                                      >> food that is mentioned (but not otherwise described) in 1590, then
                                      >> would it not be reasonable to assume that they are the same, barring
                                      >> contrary evidence?>>
                                      >>
                                      >> Similar yes, but quite possibly not the same. After all, we have
                                      >> lots of
                                      >> contemporary manuscripts which list a recipe of the same name in
                                      >> each, but
                                      >> the recipes themselves can be anything from slight variations of
                                      >> each other to
                                      >> completely different. We also have evidence that a dish can be
                                      >> listed by
                                      >> the same name in an earlier and a later source and have evolved
                                      >> significantly
                                      >> in between. So assuming that a dish named Bukenade in one source
                                      >> and a
                                      >> dish named Bukenade in another source are the same dish is a faulty
                                      >> premise.
                                      >>
                                      >
                                      > My favorite example of this problem is how to interpret the Welsh
                                      > clothing term "pais". The word shows up as a description of a specific
                                      > garment continuously from the earliest written sources (the Book of
                                      > Aneurin) to the present day. But the specific nature of the garment
                                      > being referred to changes enormously over that time. Even if you had a
                                      > picture of a garment in century X with an arrow pointing to it saying
                                      > "this is a 'pais'", that wouldn't tell you what the word referred to
                                      > in century X-1 or X+1.

                                      All true, but then again, this is where we get into the "reasonable
                                      attempt"--we get as close as we can justify to the truth of the
                                      matter, and don't ever try to adjudicate things in a vacuum.

                                      -E. G. Logan
                                    • Chris Laning
                                      ... I think you have a good point here. You mention that clothing in a certain time period seems to change by decade. You know this *because* you have
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Jul 8, 2009
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On Jul 7, 2009, at 2:50 PM, Marianne Perdomo wrote:

                                        > I have certainly had this problem... I do many things just because
                                        > I like
                                        > them but I try to place most of my efforts on being Spanish from
                                        > the 1470s,
                                        > as a kind of personal challenge. Yet for many things I can't get info
                                        > between say, 1450s and 1490s. Certainly there seems to be less useful
                                        > paintings available from the 1470s. So I often try to at least
                                        > determine if
                                        > something was done before and after - in that case I'm quite happy
                                        > to assume
                                        > it didn't cease to be done in between. That's mostly for clothing
                                        > which
                                        > changes by decade, it seems, at least in details like sleeves,
                                        > necklines,
                                        > that sort of thing.


                                        I think you have a good point here. You mention that clothing in a
                                        certain time period seems to change "by decade." You know this
                                        *because* you have studied the period, the clothing, the times before
                                        and after, etc. in detail, and you have deduced that in *this*
                                        particular case, *this* category of things (necklines, sleeves, etc.)
                                        doesn't change that fast.

                                        The more you know, the more plausible your educated guesses are going
                                        to be.

                                        Of course, ultimately how far you decide you want to stretch your
                                        educated guesses is always going to be up to you. What I think is
                                        important is that you *know* when you are extrapolating on the basis
                                        of not enough information, and not kid yourself that your guesses are
                                        on solid ground when they aren't.

                                        I tend to agree with Capt. Elias -- I try to first study the
                                        information to find out what people actually DID do, and then decide
                                        what I want to do based on that. So far, that's always given me
                                        plenty of ideas for projects I think are really cool.
                                        ____________________________________________________________

                                        O (Dame) Christian de Holacombe, OL - Shire of Windy Meads
                                        + Kingdom of the West - Chris Laning <claning@...>
                                        http://paternoster-row.org - http://paternosters.blogspot.com
                                        ____________________________________________________________
                                      • Marianne Perdomo
                                        ... Actually, they do. It s very annoying! That s for 15th c. but I think it s pretty similar for 14th... Before then it s probably manageable. My impression
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Jul 9, 2009
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          2009/7/9 Chris Laning wrote:

                                          >
                                          > I think you have a good point here. You mention that clothing in a
                                          > certain time period seems to change "by decade."


                                          Actually, they do. It's very annoying! That's for 15th c. but I think it's
                                          pretty similar for 14th... Before then it's probably manageable.
                                          My impression from my looking around at late 16th and early 17th century
                                          clothing is that it does change fairly quickly, too.

                                          That said I think I am going to go ahead and make myself a dress from 10-20
                                          years back, because I want something from that period. And I figured it
                                          could be an old dress of my persona... But when I do wear anything
                                          significantly older, or further in the future, I do so knowing that my
                                          persona wouldn't have done so. Just like I don't dress like my grandmother
                                          (with a retro touch, maybe, but not quite like her). I just either ignore
                                          the fact or think I'm just "different" on that day. Again, this is late
                                          middle ages... not sure if actually makes a difference before 1250-1300.
                                          A piece of jewellery I think would be different, too, but I don't know
                                          whether it's because I don't know enough of its evolution, or if it really
                                          was more estable, as I suppose (hints from jewelry fans/experts welcome
                                          here!).


                                          > You know this
                                          > *because* you have studied the period, the clothing, the times before
                                          > and after, etc. in detail,


                                          Exactly. I also find that sometimes you're paying attention to general dress
                                          shape but you don't pay so much attention to say... neckline, or sleeve
                                          width.
                                          I also avoid special one-offs (things which are odd and only appear in one
                                          or a very few examples).


                                          > The more you know, the more plausible your educated guesses are going
                                          > to be.


                                          Yes, ultimately, as you say it's a line you have to draw yourself, about how
                                          comfortable you are with what you've found out and what you can do. To me
                                          it's all about coming closer and closer :) (within economic restraints!)

                                          I tend to agree with Capt. Elias -- I try to first study the
                                          > information to find out what people actually DID do, and then decide
                                          > what I want to do based on that. So far, that's always given me
                                          > plenty of ideas for projects I think are really cool.


                                          Are you talking of extant examples? I wish I could do that! :)

                                          Cheers!


                                          Leonor


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