|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Hi, several of us are trying to organize the various "history of clothing" categories into a coherent framework, and we'd like to replace Category:Roman era clothing with Category:History of clothing (ancient Rome).. Is that OK with you all? Please add your comments and suggestions here and I'll check back here in a few days -- thanks muchly! :) WillowW 15:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
"Tunic" is used to describe a number of unfitted garments from ancient civilzations to the present day. Should those other uses be added here, or should we make a different article "Tunic (clothing)" or something like that and leave this as the ancient garment? - PKM 06:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- They're fairly similar in idea ... if any historical garment has a modern equivalent, we've covered both in the same article. Daniel Case 14:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to historical note here, the tunic was used in ancient Middle east. Even in the Bible, Exodus 28:39, 40 uses the Hebrew term: Kut·to′neth which a type of robe, linked or corresponds to the Greek word: khi·ton′. Both the Greek khi·ton′ and the Hebrew Kut·to′neth tunic item, usually reached to the about or at the knees level or sometimes the ankles. - Thank-you! --Anaccuratesource (talk) 19:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
The first sentence in this article states that tunics have NO sleeve whatsoever yet EVERY picture on this page shows tunics with sleeves. I believe that the first sentence needs to be modified to not mention the sleeve. I would say that the feature which makes tunics a unique style of garment has more to do with the fact that they extend below the waistline. I would guess that any garment which actually went as low as the shin or ankle would more appropriately be classified as a robe. But whatever the ruling is on that, to say that they have no sleeves is a MAJOR mistake in this article and that needs to be cleared up immediately (by someone with a greater understanding than I have). --188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. The European section even mentions sleeves. It may have been that Greco-Roman tunics were sleeveless, but as it is quite certain that later tunics often had sleeves (sleeved tunics have been found preserved, such as the Bocksten tunic), that line does not belong. If Greco-Roman tunics had no sleeves, then that can be noted in their specific sections, but I don't know enough about them to make that change. If anyone more qualified would like to clear that up, it would be great. --Longpatrol42 (talk) 01:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- I think almost everyone in the world has worn a tunic at one point or another. I know emos like to feel special but this would not make them unique. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 20:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The Legend of Zelda?
- Seriously, I think that's why -everyone- came to this page. Not even being sarcastic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sure many would look fine in it, but I've added a sentence Johnbod (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
"Tunics are commonly worn in Middle-Eastern cultures to this day."
I'm guessing this was an attempt to refer to the salwar kameez type tops that South Asians and Afghans wear, NOT Middle Eastern people:
Distinction between tunic and tunica
The distinguish at the top of the page, "not to be confused with Tunica", leads to a disambiguation page upon which the only relevant article is this one. It appears that the Roman tunica is described in this article, and I'm therefore curious as to why that link is there. Was tunica ever a seperate article, and what distinguishes it from a tunic? As far as I can tell it is simply the Latin name from which tunic is derived. --Longpatrol42 (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)