Some accounts are just malicious. Labelling people as “jealous” just because people had English translation tissues is the most amusing thing I’ve encountered today, lmao.
Love how people can fool their way through analyzing historical clothing now… The 䯼髻 (pic 2, 3) was originally round shaped and was descended from the classic Song dynasty headgears (pic 4). Its shape did NOT become pointy until much later.
Lmao did this person seriously say that 貉袖 (hexiu) was pronounced maeksoo/moxiu and was the precursor of Qing dynasty’s magua? Honestly I don’t quite understand what accounts for their pride of citing outdated sources from the 1980s smh
Did you just learn a new word and apply it to every single Song headwear out there? This is NOT 山口冠 at all. Also you should not be blocking people if you wanna discuss and reply.
It’s 䯼髻 not 狄髻. Also Di was NEVER a name for the Jurchens. honestly where did you even get this from?
It’s not “up to the viewers to decide”
When you literally made up false meanings of Chinese characters.
My biggest pet peeve is when historical accounts couldn’t tell between imported artefacts and domestically produced ones.
People should honestly apologize to Qing artisans for misidentifying their work.
I really hope this bit gets updated because 1, Chinese skirts were super A-line as well during that time period and 2, Men’s robes shouldn’t have a central opening - it was just the artistic trend to draw it that way but they weren’t actually like that irl.