On Thu, 10 May 2007, E House wrote:
My thought (on the February image) was always that it was due to lice or the
like...
-E House
Actually I think it's just artistic conventions--they just didn't draw the
pubic hair. You see this in the depictions of the human body in 12th and
13th centur
html shouldn't matter.
-Original Message-
But I've always sent my h-costume messages in HTML. I leave that as my
standard e-mail setting and only change to plain text when I post to 1
particular list.
Janet
>
>Had a quick look on Google - maybe it's been sent in HTML rather than plain
But I've always sent my h-costume messages in HTML. I leave that as my
standard e-mail setting and only change to plain text when I post to 1
particular list.
Janet
Had a quick look on Google - maybe it's been sent in HTML rather than plain
text?
Glenda
-Original Message-
I've
My thought (on the February image) was always that it was due to lice or the
like...
-E House
___
h-costume mailing list
h-costume@mail.indra.com
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Hi Janet,
Had a quick look on Google - maybe it's been sent in HTML rather than plain
text?
Glenda
-Original Message-
I've been trying to post to this thread and I keep getting this message
back. What's the problem?
Janet
>The message's content type was not explicitly allowed
>
__
I've been trying to post to this thread and I keep getting this message
back. What's the problem?
Janet
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 16:57:28 -0600
The message's content type was
My husband has now suggested something more reasonable - they could be
children! As perspective wasn't used in artworks as yet, children were
usually pictured as small adults, so it could well be the two kids of the
house warming themselves by the fire.
Glenda.
-Original Message-
My hus
My husband wondered it it was because they had stood to close to the fire
...
Glenda.
-Original Message-
Well, the Roman look is back in these days, so maybe it was enjoying
a revival in the middle ages.
Ed Walton
___
h-costume mailing li
On May 10, 2007, at 10:24, Suzi Clarke wrote:
Did they not have - errm - furry bits or hair then? They look
"added on" to me, but then what do I know?
Suzi
Well, the Roman look is back in these days, so maybe it was enjoying
a revival in the middle ages.
Ed Walton
Lost Battalions Mi
At 15:45 10/05/2007, you wrote:
Quoting Glenda Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Don't ask why, but I looked for a good close-up pic:
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/berry/DB-f2v-d3l.jpg (No blurring here...)
However, it does show that the woman to the left of the man is showing all
as well.
L
Quoting Glenda Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Don't ask why, but I looked for a good close-up pic:
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/berry/DB-f2v-d3l.jpg (No blurring here...)
However, it does show that the woman to the left of the man is showing all
as well.
LOL! I'd never noticed the woman
007 11:53 PM
Subject: RE: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Don't ask why, but I looked for a good close-up pic:
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/berry/DB-f2v-d3l.jpg<http://www.christusrex.org/www2/berry/DB-f2v-d3l.jpg>
(No blurring here...)
Don't ask why, but I looked for a good close-up pic:
http://www.christusrex.org/www2/berry/DB-f2v-d3l.jpg (No blurring here...)
However, it does show that the woman to the left of the man is showing all
as well.
I can understand though - it's quite cold outside, and I've done similar
(however,
Quoting Kate M Bunting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It's well known that 18th century sideboards had a cupboard for a
chamber-pot, to be used by the gentlemen after the ladies had retired to
the drawing-room. No doubt in the more robust 17th century it was
considerd OK to do so in mixed company.
On the
ate M Bunting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 2:06 AM
Subject: Re: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
> On the subject of bowdlerised paintings - isn't there a medieval scene
> (I think in the Tres Riches Heures) showing peop
It's well known that 18th century sideboards had a cupboard for a
chamber-pot, to be used by the gentlemen after the ladies had retired to
the drawing-room. No doubt in the more robust 17th century it was
considerd OK to do so in mixed company.
On the subject of bowdlerised paintings - isn't there
On May 8, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Saragrace Knauf wrote:
The only other painting I remember showing this sort of thing is a
Breughel - (a younger as I recall) of a woman squatting in the
woods. I am sure it is more common than we see. I guess on of the
big French palaces(Versailles?) didn't
Similar shoes, might be the same model.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Willem_Pietersz._Buytewech_002.jpg
similar shoes
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Willem_Pietersz._Buytewech_003.jpg
http://www.museumbredius.nl/schilders/pics/buytewech.jpg
___
A different age, to be sure! I suppose the servants would supply a
vessel and then take it off to the gardens or wherever to deal with it.
I am reminded of the Castillian (iirc) standard nativity figurine, of
the man relieving himself (don't know if those articles passed through
here this pas
On Tue, 8 May 2007, Dawn wrote:
> Or, the bowdlerized version was recently restored. That might also
> account for the brighter colors of the one version. On a quick search
> I wasn't able to find anything about the painting, though.
Oh, yes, that makes the most sense! There were many such paint
At 16:43 08/05/2007, you wrote:
As someone already pointed out, it is a William Buytewech
painting. The "orginal" (the one where if you actually look
closely, you can see the "tip of the anatomy.") is at
Kaiser-Friedrich-Museums, Berlin. The one on Bildindex attributes it
to the same artist a
quot; and I recall hearing often of folks
relieving themselves in stairways and fireplaces.
Sg
--- Original Message -
From: WickedFrau<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Historical Costume'<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 7:06 PM
Subject: [h-c
Has anyone contacted the museum?
Kate
609-570-3584
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Dawn
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 11:15 AM
To: Historical Costume
Subject: Re: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Robin Netherton wrote:
>
> The
Robin Netherton wrote:
The "clean" painting has muddy areas where the pot was, and the man's
garments are still pulled open and turned up inexplicably. The bawdy
version is the older one.
But that would suggest that the repainting was very recent -- since modern
color photography -- or we woul
Quoting Robin Netherton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, 7 May 2007, otsisto wrote:
Where did you find the first pic? as I think it is not the original
but an altered picture. Kind of like the picture of Henry VIII instead
of holding a glove is holding a roasted turkey leg or an Italian
painting
Bjarne og Leif Drews wrote:
Another note,
The young gentleman in the foreground, dressed in yellow - is he
wearing womens shoes or is it his own?
Just that i se a big difference for the other gentlemans shoes, and
the yellow gentlemans shoes, looks very like the maids shoes on the
right.
The m
Subject: Re: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Another note,
The young gentleman in the foreground, dressed in yellow - is he wearing
womens shoes or is it his own?
Just that i se a big difference for the other gentlemans shoes, and the
yellow gentlemans shoes, looks very like the maids
-
From: "Land of Oz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Historical Costume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Well for one, a man would not hold his "thang" like that to pee.
No, but a
Subject: Re: [h-cost] Ahem-something interesting
Well for one, a man would not hold his "thang" like that to pee.
No, but an artist would certainly paint it that way if he wanted to show
the act, but not the anatomy.
Denise
I've also seen men holding themselves exactly
Well for one, a man would not hold his "thang" like that to pee.
No, but an artist would certainly paint it that way if he wanted to show the
act, but not the anatomy.
Denise
___
h-costume mailing list
h-costume@mail.indra.com
http://mail.ind
Well for one, a man would not hold his "thang" like that to pee. His coat
may be turned back but his vest isn't. And the way his body is angled his
"thang" must be somewhat long. Most paintings that I have seen from this
period are more like the chair painting then the clean concise piss pot one
b
On Mon, 7 May 2007, otsisto wrote:
> Where did you find the first pic? as I think it is not the original
> but an altered picture. Kind of like the picture of Henry VIII instead
> of holding a glove is holding a roasted turkey leg or an Italian
> painting of a grandfather and grandson where the g
Where did you find the first pic? as I think it is not the original but an
altered picture. Kind of like the picture of Henry VIII instead of holding a
glove is holding a roasted turkey leg or an Italian painting of a
grandfather and grandson where the grandfather has a bulbous nose and they
put a
While poking around, I found this picture, and was a little surprised to see
what the fellow on the left was doing next to the dining room table.
http://tinyurl.com/29t36b
In an attempt to assure myself of what I thought I was seeing, I thought I
would look it up on Bildindex since sometime
34 matches
Mail list logo
