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

[SCA-JML] Re: tv show or movie????

Expand Messages
  • nostrand@acm.org
    Noble Cousins! There was a long standing dispute over whether SCA period should end at 1600 or 1650. Quite a few members still contend that the cut off should
    Message 1 of 20 , Oct 21, 1999
      Noble Cousins!

      There was a long standing dispute over whether SCA period should end
      at 1600 or 1650. Quite a few members still contend that the cut off
      should be 1650. The BoD ruled that the cut-off would be 1600. People
      generally agree that documentaiton up to 1650 can be used.

      Your Humble Servant
      Solveig Throndardottir
      Amateur Scholar
    • Barbara Nostrand
      Baron Edward! Greetings from Solveig! Sorry, but the A&S community now generally accepts post 1600 sources. A good example of this in dance is a book by Caesar
      Message 2 of 20 , Oct 21, 1999
        Baron Edward!

        Greetings from Solveig! Sorry, but the A&S community now generally
        accepts post 1600 sources. A good example of this in dance is a
        book by Caesar Negri which appeared around 1603. Other examples
        can be found in cooking. The idea is that post-1600 documentation
        can be used to document pre-1601 stuff. You need to distinguish
        between when the stuff was extant and when it was written down.

        As for post 1600 Japanese clothing and hair styles. I am very
        much in agreement with you. Clothing changed significantly during
        the Edo period. There were significant clothing and hair fads
        and what naught. (I have a rather nice history of clothing in
        the Edo period and a matching history of hair styles in the
        Edo period.)

        In Japan, by 1650 you can easily have clothing and hair that
        was unseen before 1601.

        Your Humble Servant
        Solveig Throndardottir
        Amateur Scholar

        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM |
        | de Moivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
        | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Ignored domains: bestbiz.net, pop.net, hotmail.com, aibusiness.com |
        | vdi.net, usa.net, tpnet.pl, myremarq.com |
        | netscape.net, excite.com, bigfoot.com, public.com |
        | com.tw, eranet.net, yahoo.com, success.net |
        | mailcity.com, net.tw, twac.com, netcenter.com |
        | techie.com |
        +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
      • Anthony J. Bryant
        ... Regardless, the SCA cutoff is 1600. Period. (so to speak. ) The only extra allowed was a misguided Laurel ruling years ago to allow anything first
        Message 3 of 20 , Oct 21, 1999
          nostrand@... wrote:

          > Noble Cousins!
          >
          > There was a long standing dispute over whether SCA period should end
          > at 1600 or 1650. Quite a few members still contend that the cut off
          > should be 1650. The BoD ruled that the cut-off would be 1600. People
          > generally agree that documentaiton up to 1650 can be used.

          Regardless, the SCA cutoff is 1600.

          Period. (so to speak. <g>)

          The only "extra" allowed was a misguided Laurel ruling years ago to allow anything first
          documented between 1600 and 1650 under the supposition that if it's first public reference was
          then, it was POSSIBLE that it first appeared earlier, IN period.

          People started using this to claim things that were documentedly INVENTED in 1600-1650 (OOP) were
          allowable in the SCA under that rule.

          I do not and will not do post period. Nor can I or will I support it.

          Effingham
        • Anthony J. Bryant
          ... That s what I m talking about. This is the only acceptable use of post-period material. The trouble is when people start wanting to do post period things
          Message 4 of 20 , Oct 22, 1999
            Barbara Nostrand wrote:

            > Baron Edward!
            >
            > Greetings from Solveig! Sorry, but the A&S community now generally
            > accepts post 1600 sources. A good example of this in dance is a
            > book by Caesar Negri which appeared around 1603. Other examples
            > can be found in cooking. The idea is that post-1600 documentation
            > can be used to document pre-1601 stuff. You need to distinguish
            > between when the stuff was extant and when it was written down.
            >

            That's what I'm talking about. This is the only acceptable use of
            post-period material. The trouble is when people start wanting to do post
            period things (the Edo style kataginu, for example) even though it's only
            "a little" after 1600.


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