02-14-2013, 11:43 PM
Tarbicus,
Sock that may have belonged to a child does not really count as evidence for a legionary. I am sure I can find any random item and say....it existed therefore......
The other two sources mention socks....great so instead of the two I mentioned we have two more that mention socks but we have no idea what they were like unless these same socks were found. So how do we know they were not made using naalbinding? That would be great because I am having issue finding someone who can do it custom. If there is another way of making socks...I am all ears since there are many people I know that can just knit me a pair.
I just find the argument the Romans would have or the Romans would have not, ridiculous especially with respect to underclothing. Its just sense......human sense.....its cold, I am going to cover up. So this is what I say......you want socks, great!! Pick something in form and shape they may have been and use those. For someone to say that it would not have been that way or this way to me, is illogical. Then again I am a chemist and my view of evidence comes from being a scientist. This means I do not dismiss ANYTHING UNLESS ITS ABSOLUTELY PROVEN TO BE FALSE. Since this issue of socks and underclothing is NOT absolute, within reason, then its OK. It took the Romans from BC to late 1st C AD to say.....gee its freezing let me cover my feet. Come on really?????
Sock that may have belonged to a child does not really count as evidence for a legionary. I am sure I can find any random item and say....it existed therefore......
The other two sources mention socks....great so instead of the two I mentioned we have two more that mention socks but we have no idea what they were like unless these same socks were found. So how do we know they were not made using naalbinding? That would be great because I am having issue finding someone who can do it custom. If there is another way of making socks...I am all ears since there are many people I know that can just knit me a pair.
I just find the argument the Romans would have or the Romans would have not, ridiculous especially with respect to underclothing. Its just sense......human sense.....its cold, I am going to cover up. So this is what I say......you want socks, great!! Pick something in form and shape they may have been and use those. For someone to say that it would not have been that way or this way to me, is illogical. Then again I am a chemist and my view of evidence comes from being a scientist. This means I do not dismiss ANYTHING UNLESS ITS ABSOLUTELY PROVEN TO BE FALSE. Since this issue of socks and underclothing is NOT absolute, within reason, then its OK. It took the Romans from BC to late 1st C AD to say.....gee its freezing let me cover my feet. Come on really?????
"You have to laugh at life or else what are you going to laugh at?" (Joseph Rosen)
Paolo
Paolo
