Robes.

[GulPlum]

No: HPFGUIDX 45825

(I should ideally collect together replies to various posts on this topic 
together but I know that if I start doing that, I'll never actually get the 
post out, so I'll probably end up with several shorter posts rather than 
one long one. Apologies.)

At 03:22 26/10/02 +0000, ingachristsuperstar wrote:

>What they were wearing over the uniformish outfits _were_
>robes, not cloaks.  They were very similar to what lawyers here in
>Canada and in Britain wear to court - commonly called robes.

They might be called robes in Canada, but in the UK, they're called gowns 
(yes, I know that Canadian court attire is the same as it is in the UK).

>They are very similar to what judges wear - commonly called
>judicial robes.

Judges' robes are very different to lawyers' gowns, and that is one of the 
reasons why they're called "robes" rather than "gowns", :-)

A couple of examples on the WWW:
A BBC story from several years ago about proposals to "modernise" court dress:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/211654.stm (note specific usage of 
"gowns" and "robes")

 From the online catalogue of one of the leading UK legal outfitters:
http://www.stanley-ley.co.uk/acatalog/index.html?http%3A//www.stanley-ley.co 
.uk/acatalog/catalogbody.html&CatalogBody

>I honestly don't know where this 'cloak' thing is coming from.

The first year supplies list, which includes, and I quote:
1. Three sets of plain work robes (black)
4. One winter cloak (black, silver fastenings)

>They are robes.  Cloaks are more like capes, they wrap around a
>person.  They don't have sleeves.

Which is *exactly* my point. In TMTSNBN, the kids have cloaks. The question 
is what they wear underneath the cloaks, which in TMTSNBN as well as in the 
books, aren't worn at all times (hence "winter cloaks"). There is 
absolutely no argument that the movie cloaks have a canonical origin.

As I've said before, can we PLEASE draw the distinction between "cloak" and 
"robe(s)"!

In the supplies list, there is no mention of trousers, sweaters, shirts or 
ties. Anyone who has ever attended a British school or prepared a child's 
supplies to attend a British secondary school knows that the school uniform 
list includes specifications for these items. Such a list also includes 
specifications for a jacket or blazer; Hogwarts replaces this with a cloak, 
so it stands to reason that the shirt, trousers and tie that one would 
expect on a British supplies list has been replaced with a robe.

I have said that I do not dispute that despite canonical silence on the 
issue, Hogwarts pupils probably wear shirts and trousers under their robes 
(as do real-world priests under their cassocks, or judges under their 
robes). The point I have been making is that the shirts and trousers do not 
form part of the uniform (i.e. are not of a required colour or design).

>Whether what is in TMTMNBN are exactly what JKR envisioned
>doesn't change that they are exactly what we call robes.

Since when do you call trousers and sweaters "robes"? :-) I know there are 
some linguistic differences between Canadian and British English, but I've 
not encountered that one before. :-)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's been in English courts in a professional 
capacity often enough to know the terminology. :-)