Print

Print


     Is it possible -- if "ape skins" is the right reading of this passage
-- that apeskin is simply the name of a kind of pelt, unrelated to actual
apes, on the analogy of moleskin, which is certainly not made from moles?
The passage in question suggests that the apeskin goes over the hose, so
it's not likely a full-body garment, as some have been suggesting.