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

Re: 14th Century Bra Kind of Found in Austrian Castle

Expand Messages
  • xina007eu
    Hi all, The scientist who is working on these finds, Beatrix Nutz, thinks they are men s underpants. Unfortunately, she has not yet found someone who is
    Message 1 of 12 , Jul 26 7:28 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all,

      The scientist who is working on these finds, Beatrix Nutz, thinks they are men's underpants. Unfortunately, she has not yet found someone who is willing to pose for a photo in a reproduction of these underpants. Her male colleagues are scientists and not underwear models. This is what she said in an interview, published in the German-language Die Welt newspaper:
      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/07/120711-lost-viking-town-germany-archaeology-science/

      Ms. Nutz is writing her doctoral thesis on these finds and plans to have an article on the underwear items in the NESAT XI publication (abstract of the NESAT talk is on http://www.nesat.org/abstracts/lecture_nutz.pdf).

      See
      http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/projekte_forschung/textilien-lengberg/forschungsprojekt-ma-textilien-lengberg.html
      for more on the finds (also in German, but some of the linked articles are in English).
      On http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/projekte_forschung/textilien-lengberg/sortieraktion.html
      you can see people sorting through the textile finds - there seems to be a lot more stuff than just the underwear!

      Best regards,

      Christina

      --- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, Heather Rose Jones <heather.jones@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > On Jul 17, 2012, at 5:28 PM, Cilean_69 wrote:
      >
      > > So they found a pair of ladies undies as well, it is a good read but I am waiting for the University information
      > >
      > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2174568/Found-castle-vault-scraps-lace-lingerie-rage-500-years-ago.html
      > >
      > > Mind the wrap!
      > >
      > > Cilean
      >
      > They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a surviving pair of medieval underpants!
      >
      > Tangwystyl
      >
      > **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.
      >
    • Scott Carledge
      After attending Tangwystyl s class on Getting into Women s Underwear, I shall hold any decision in abeyance until I hear (read) something from the expert.
      Message 2 of 12 , Jul 28 11:18 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        After attending Tangwystyl's class on "Getting into Women's Underwear," I
        shall hold any decision in abeyance until I hear (read)

        something from the expert. I join her in amazement that we actually found
        any medieval underwear.

        Colm



        From: Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com]
        On Behalf Of Heather Rose Jones
        Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:00 AM
        To: Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Authentic_SCA] 14th Century Bra Kind of Found in Austrian
        Castle






        On Jul 17, 2012, at 5:28 PM, Cilean_69 wrote:

        > So they found a pair of ladies undies as well, it is a good read but I am
        waiting for the University information
        >
        >
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2174568/Found-castle-vault-scraps-
        lace-lingerie-rage-500-years-ago.html
        >
        > Mind the wrap!
        >
        > Cilean

        They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for
        identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a
        surviving pair of medieval underpants!

        Tangwystyl

        **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's
        underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • lilinah@earthlink.net
        ... Well, there s one 16th c. Ottoman underpants, called chakshir, which i have reproduced in my size... So, OMG, we have a surviving pair of medieval European
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 29 8:41 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Heather Rose Jones wrote:
          > They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for
          > identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a
          > surviving pair of medieval underpants!
          >
          > Tangwystyl
          >
          > **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's
          > underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.

          Well, there's one 16th c. Ottoman underpants, called chakshir, which i have reproduced in my size... So, OMG, we have a surviving pair of medieval European underpants.

          Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
        • Catherine Olanich Raymond
          ... What reasons are those? We know more about men s underpants from artwork, and they look more like modern tighty-whiteys than anything else, and not like
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 29 8:46 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            > Heather Rose Jones wrote:
            >> They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for
            >> identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a
            >> surviving pair of medieval underpants!
            >>
            >> Tangwystyl
            >>
            >> **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's
            >> underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.

            What reasons are those? We know more about men's underpants from
            artwork, and they look more like modern tighty-whiteys than anything
            else, and not like these underpants.


            --
            Cathy Raymond
            cathy@...
            (610) 805-9542

            "Remember that time is money."
            --Benjamin Franklin
          • Honour Horne-Jaruk
            ... ...And we have four (or more) 16th century Italian undrepants. Knee-length, but still... Yours in service to both the Societies of which I am a member-
            Message 5 of 12 , Jul 29 10:43 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Respected friends:

              --- On Sun, 7/29/12, lilinah@... <lilinah@...> wrote:

              > > **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting
              > that they are women's
              > > underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the
              > moment.
              >
              > Well, there's one 16th c. Ottoman underpants, called
              > chakshir, which i have reproduced in my size... So, OMG, we
              > have a surviving pair of medieval European underpants.
              >
              > Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
              ...And we have four (or more) 16th century Italian undrepants. Knee-length, but still...

              Yours in service to both the Societies of which I am a member-
              (Friend) Honour Horne-Jaruk, R.S.F.
              Alizaundre de Brebeuf, C.O.L. S.C.A.- AKA Una the wisewoman, or That Pict

              "If you're a normal human, the inside of your head is not a pretty
              place. Venting it unfiltered to the internet may feel therapeutic,
              but it's unlikely to end well."
              --Goedjn
            • Heather Rose Jones
              I tend to count 16th century as post-medieval. (After all, we have 16th c. underpants from Italy as well.) Tangwystyl
              Message 6 of 12 , Jul 29 11:47 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                I tend to count 16th century as post-medieval. (After all, we have 16th c. underpants from Italy as well.)

                Tangwystyl

                On Jul 29, 2012, at 8:41 AM, lilinah@... wrote:

                > Heather Rose Jones wrote:
                >> They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for
                >> identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a
                >> surviving pair of medieval underpants!
                >>
                >> Tangwystyl
                >>
                >> **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's
                >> underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.
                >
                > Well, there's one 16th c. Ottoman underpants, called chakshir, which i have reproduced in my size... So, OMG, we have a surviving pair of medieval European underpants.
                >
                > Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > ----------------------------------------------------
                > This is the Authentic SCA eGroupYahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
              • Heather Rose Jones
                ... I forget whether the topic has been covered on this list since my post. (The discussion has been going on in parallel on at least a dozen different lists
                Message 7 of 12 , Aug 3, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Jul 29, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Catherine Olanich Raymond wrote:

                  >
                  >> Heather Rose Jones wrote:
                  >>> They found a pair of underpants. I have yet to see any sound reason for
                  >>> identifying them as _women's_ underpants.** Nevertheless, OMG we have a
                  >>> surviving pair of medieval underpants!
                  >>>
                  >>> Tangwystyl
                  >>>
                  >>> **There are excellent reasons for strongly doubting that they are women's
                  >>> underpants, but let's just leave it at that for the moment.
                  >
                  > What reasons are those? We know more about men's underpants from
                  > artwork, and they look more like modern tighty-whiteys than anything
                  > else, and not like these underpants.

                  I forget whether the topic has been covered on this list since my post. (The discussion has been going on in parallel on at least a dozen different lists and forums that I frequent.) The very short version is:

                  * This exact style of underpants can be seen worn by men in 15th c. German contexts.

                  * There is extensive evidence both from art and text sources indicating that medieval Europeans (and by "medieval" I mean pre-16th century) considered underpants to be such a definitively masculine garment that they were used symbolically to represent women usurping masculine authority and status by wearing them. _Every_ artistic depiction I've found (or had pointed out to me) from medieval Europe that portrays women wearing or in the act of putting on underpants is in a context that is specifically depicting the woman either masquerading as a man or usurping masculine authority. The image depicted here:

                  http://inpress.lib.uiowa.edu/feminae/DetailsPage.aspx?Feminae_ID=30960

                  is typical of the genre. Underpants-wearing women could not be such a consistent and powerful symbol of transgression if underpants were an ordinary, everyday female garment.

                  Tangwystyl
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.