Are Mens Sock Garters Wrong?

ttaskmaster said:
[..]
Roughly the same number of centuries ago, they also figured out how to make a pair of hose into a single garment, probably to hide your dirty braies.
But many other cultures had normal trousers long before, especially those that rode animals a lot. The Romans actually considered trousers barbaric and indicative of uncivilised tribes.
Click to expand...

Until they moved far enough north to encounter weather that showed them the practicality of trousers. Still associated with uncivilised tribes (specifically Gauls) to begin with, but useful.

It was also gendered - covering your legs was a feminine thing in ancient Rome. Men's dresses were almost always above the knee. Since it was mostly Roman soldiers who started wearing trousers, that wasn't much of a problem. Saying that legionnaries were effeminate wouldn't have ended well.
 
ttaskmaster said:
A popular misconception, confused by the term 'feminalia' (sometimes femoralia) which partners with 'tibialia' referring to the upper and lower leg, and so indicating either short breeches or full length leggings respectively. Braccae, another latin term referring to the aforementioned garment adopted from the Gauls, is where the term 'breeches' came from.
Click to expand...

But I wasn't talking about leggings. I was talking about a more traditional Roman garment - the tunica.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom