tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3542463598011355825.post1682842393306543303..comments2023-03-26T04:27:23.387-07:00Comments on Go Fug Thyself: Fugstume HistoryUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3542463598011355825.post-55778635592441458052009-04-15T22:52:00.000-07:002009-04-15T22:52:00.000-07:00I recognise that absolute historical accuracy can ...I recognise that absolute historical accuracy can really never be attained. I also realise that with new discoveries being made all the time, some of our own theories may someday seem as laughable as the odder things in this book. Viking apron dresses, for example, have recently become controversial. But I'd like to think -- or hope! -- that we're slowly refining our theories and more or less getting closer to what things really would have looked like (with, of course, the odd mistake or outright bugfuck theory thrown into the works).<br /><br />The bottom line as far as I'm concerned? You wouldn't browse 19th century texts for the latest in, say, historical theories or archaeology. So why would you do it for costume?verunielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14559328838713058577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3542463598011355825.post-21878512778070097142009-04-14T09:08:00.000-07:002009-04-14T09:08:00.000-07:00Just a point or two to add as a historian: both in...Just a point or two to add as a historian: both in history and archaeology, new finds are still being made. So a careful, good scholar can produce a study using all the material available and it may still become out-of-date.<br /><br />Also, some details of early medieval costuming are theoretical reconstructions - we only have partial evidence and must guess based on what we have. These guesses aren't WRONG, but they aren't proven either - so tread lightly.Selkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09214927031735474206noreply@blogger.com