- ... Oooops... I didn t notice the spurs OVER it. Artistic license, maybe? If the artist *knew* that women protected their skirts with whatever- we-call-it andMessage 1 of 11 , Sep 1, 2002View Source--- In SCA-Garb@y..., "Jennifer Hill" <welshladygwen@c...> wrote:
> It really looks like a lap robe to me. However, she wears her spurs OVEROooops... I didn't notice the spurs OVER it. Artistic license, maybe?
> it. Really odd looking. Gwen
If the artist *knew* that women protected their skirts with whatever-
we-call-it and *knew* that the Wife of Bath always wore spurs, this may
be the resulting compromise of art over common sense. Ya' think? ;)
- On Sun, 1 Sep 2002 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Joan Hall ... It was definately the Prioress. Who would really care if the Wyf of Bath was fashion forward? TheMessage 2 of 11 , Sep 1, 2002View SourceOn Sun, 1 Sep 2002 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Joan Hall
>It was definately the Prioress. Who would really care if the Wyf of
>--- unclrashid <unclrashid@...> wrote:
>>The other illustration is a classic houppelande, but
>>she has a rather extravagent heddress. I can't
>>figure out what is going on around her
>>neck in that pic. SHe seems to have an extra layer
>>if something that is pleated. Maybe that is an odd
>I can't remember if it's the Wife of Bath or the
>Prioress. With one of them, Chaucer specifically
>comments on the unusual, trendy and fashion-forward
>way in which she wears her wimple. It might have been
>the Prioress, though, with her dainty manners and
>little lap dogs.
Bath was fashion forward? The Prioress, OTOH, was supposed to be the
bride of Christ, and therefore shouldn't have a need to impress men.
(He didn't like the Prioress much....)