Talk:Cloak

From Cunnan
Revision as of 13:51, 23 January 2006 by Tiff (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Detached hoods? Shouldn't that be separate hoods? I can't think of any period examples of hooded cloaks off hand, especially not early medieval.

Yes seperate hoods is better - changed. I'm a 12th C specialist. I used to think hooded cloaks was only a late period thing too. But I'm gathering a growing pile of evidence for hooded cloaks in the 12th C. They were travelling and peasant garments, some were just hoods with an overlarge cape section, others a full rain cloak with hood, and as many didn't have attached hoods as did. Because they were not the kind of garment the nobility wore at court, they leave a lot less evidence in the pictorial and arcaeological record than the fany ceremonial mantles of the nobility. It's taken me quite a few years to find these. (the important part of the evidence came out of the literature) I don't know about truly early period, but I suspect these hoods didn't come out of nowhere. They could come out of a tradition of hooded monks robes (I can certainly show you evidence of those a few centuries earlier than 1100), but most people wouldn't call a monks robe a cloak. I suspect that with careful searching earlier examples would be found, even if rare. Tiff