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

RE : Re: [sig] Re: Dushegreya

Expand Messages
  • L.M. Kies
    ... Well...  you are partly correct.  It s true in the sense that, while men would show varying lengths of trouser-covered legs, women s legs
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 20, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      > I was taught that until
      >recently, it was MEN's hemlines that fluctuated, not
      >women's. ;)

      Well...  you are partly correct.  It's true in the sense that, while men would show varying lengths of trouser-covered legs, women's legs were always covered to the ankle.  But not in the sense that every single garment that women wore was the same length.

      In fact, this is obviously untrue - women in Rus often layered shorter garments of seemingly infinite variety over longer garments.  The calf-length "dalmatica" and letnik vs. the knee-length or longer navershnik, the zapona, the poneva, the various lengths of jackets, shubas, svitas, sarafans, etc. etc. etc.

      Sofya



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