Annotations and comments

Louise Hudson has posted 435 annotations/comments since 9 November 2013.

The most recent…


Comments

About Friday 7 September 1666

Louise Hudson  •  Link

CGS wondered if Sam’s “drawers” were like today’s Boxers.

You won’t see men today wearing anything like the voluminous drawers worn in the 1600s. No elastic, either.

“Underneath their shirt or tunic they clothed their legs in braies or breeches. Braies were a loose fitting drawer-like garment which was attached at the waist with a drawstring and varied in length from upper-thigh to below the knee.”

See photos and more text here. http://www.fashionintime.org/history-mens-underga…

From what I hear, they were laundered once a year, whether they needed it or not.

About Tuesday 17 July 1666

Louise Hudson  •  Link

Sam’s physical problems brings it home how it was to live with almost no effective diagnosis or medicine at all, not even aspirin or Pepto Bismol. You just suffered until it passed—or you got worse and sometimes died. But there were plenty of old wives takes, then as now. We’re supposed to know better now, but it turns out we don’t know much better.

About Sunday 15 July 1666

Louise Hudson  •  Link

Michael Robinson:

" ... to my washing my feet the night before."

It's the unnecessary bathing that will get you every time!

—-
I’ll bet Sam washed his feet once a month whether they needed it or not.

As for pasteurized milk, as we all know, nobody in 1666 could have known what pasteurization was, since it wasn’t to be discovered until nearly 200 years later. But before then plenty if people drank unpasteurized milk throughout their lives and lived to tell about it, just as plenty if people did even after pasteurization was discovered to the present day.

About Tuesday 19 June 1666

Louise Hudson  •  Link

At one time it was the fashion for women to tightly bind their breasts. Now I see why. Maybe Mercer will get smart.

About Tuesday 12 June 1666

Louise Hudson  •  Link

“. . . Whereof the Dutch annotators, as several fathers did long before them, on 1 Cor. 11:14, make men’s nourishing and wearing of long hair to be some degree, it being given to women, not only for an ornament and covering, but also in part for distinction of the female sex from the male."

Who is it who’s having a problem with the “distinction of the female sex from the male”? Certainly not the women! Isn’t this is one more example of the “superior” sex, expecting the world to conform to male needs and desires—then as now. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.