gregory23b wrote:I don't need to find evidence against as you made a clear statement, and it is only fair to ask the basis for that.
No boot as it is your footwear and foot, as you are the proposer, so, with that in mind, what is the basis for your assertion that modesty issues are a myth? you must have some reasoning for that, otherwise it is somewhat hollow.
I postulate there is no evidence for it in this specific historical context.
In similar arguments you have challenged people to find proof for their re-enactorisms. I claim that the modesty explanation is a re-enactorism.
Without evidence to support it I suggest we shouldn't say it; but I have, on may occasions, heard it said.
You did not feel the need to prove that the foxtails were a re-enactorism, you simply said: No supporting evidence and left it ot others to prove you wrong; likewise....
Jenn wrote:Fox - it was interest rather than anything else that caused me to ask .. there is of course St paul's letter to the corinthians which is the key new testament basis for head covering. With the exception of our Lady (and St Anne in specific contexts) you very rarely see an image of an adult woman with her head uncovered.
St. Paul is hardly a reason to suppose medieval attitudes.
Women almost always wore headgear of some sort; I agree.
I don't think there's any reason to suppose modesty is the cause.
As ever, I'm happy for someone prove me wrong, but I think evidence will be tenuous, if it exists at all.
By Jorge's usual rules, I'd like the evidence to date from 1450-1490, and be in an English context.