One thing I love about the SCA is that it is full of communities of all sorts.  I think very few of us only fit in in one spot, but rather, have a wealth of “micro communities” within the Society that have different roles in our lives at different times.
 
I fall into the community of my household, Shire and Kingdom.  I have tangential households that I do not belong to but I know that will always welcome me.  Likewise there are other regional groups in which lived in the past (or have never lived, lol), where I know many people and feel “at home” with them.  I belong to an incredible group that is headed by my Laurel that includes her apprentices, as well as those of us who have been elevated and our apprentices and students.
 
There are also groups that have focuses on certain areas or topics.  Things like guilds fall under this, where there might be experienced folks helping newer people better their skills with a certain craft (such as a spinning guild or cooking guild).  We also have people who flock to the fighting field or the archery range and participate heavily in those communities at events.  I will migrate to costumers, weavers, spinners at events, as well as those who are dressed in early period clothing, because we all share a common interest.
 
e-SCA, with all of its imperfections, is also full of communities.  I will be honest that I largely find the bigger, more general Facebook groups, to have more than their share lurking trolls and malcontents that are just there to stir up drama.  Over time, I find less and less value in these avenues (though can still be amazing resources for newcomers looking for advice on how to get started with various things).  Where online communities really shine for the SCA is the niche groups. 
 
I belong to a number of Facebook groups for Viking clothing and material culture, bead making, weaving, and other interests that closely match mine.  Many of these are not SCA specific, but I think that is a good thing as we can sometimes get too easily caught up in our own ideas that get circulated around the SCA and it is good to see what discoveries other reenactors have made.  I even belong to some groups, like one for Elizabethan Clothing, even though I will never make an Elizabethan dress, just because the group is well managed and I enjoy seeing the content that comes through my feed on Facebook.
 
I have also seen groups that get some occasional activity, but there are days between posts (or weeks), and in a couple of cases the group admin said they wanted to shut the group down because of lack of activity.  People often do not realize you have to “grow” a group, and feeding and nurturing it is part of that.  Rarely will you be able to start up a group and have it take off and flourish without at least some work.

If you are considering starting a new group, consider first whether there is a need for it.  I started my Viking groups on Facebook because one of the popular groups had a few nasty people in it that the mods rarely did anything about, and the other rocked back and forth between two wishy-washy and too strict for my tastes.  The subject matter is wildly popular right now, so there was definitely “room” online for another in this field.
 
It is also a good idea to frame out the purpose of the group from the start.  There are groups for Viking clothing and groups for weapons and other gear.  Many of those interested in textiles and sewing techniques do not want to drown in miles of posts about sword types, so the division makes perfect sense.  Do understand that the narrower the subject matter, the fewer people will likely find it suits their interest (and that is really ok, quality engagement with like-minded individuals is far better than trying to collect overall audience numbers).
 
Consider also if you know enough about the topic yourself to provide assistance for others if they need it (or do you at least know where or to whom to point them).  A bunch of unanswered questions day-after-day will cause the group to falter.  You do not need to be an expert, and it is totally ok to start a group with the intent of learning about a topic _with_ others, just make that clear that that is the purpose of the outlet. 
 
Hopefully you know several others who either share your field of interest that you can invite to the group from the start.  If you do, strike up a conversation and invite them to share their work, research or expertise there.  If you do not personally know anyone, seek out those that you see in related forums and invite them to participate.  Not everyone will have time to join every group invite they get, but it never hurts to have that conversation.  You do not want the group to become an echo chamber of your own ideas.  We can best learn by sharing our ideas, getting feedback, and listening to the views of others.
 
I would also recommend that in addition to being clear about defining your group parameters (historic time and place, culture, craft, etc.), that you develop a set of clear rules for group behavior.  One of my groups is very clear that if you post a photo of your work that it is open for commentary (the purpose of the group is not to blindly say “oooo pretty shiny thing”, there are other outlets for a stream of constant feedback of that sort).  It is also clear in the rules that if you give feedback it must be kind and constructive.  If someone questions your comments, you better be prepared to back it up with a source (and “I read it somewhere” is not a source).
 
Finally, be prepared to feed content into your own group.  This is where the earlier examples lapsed before they complained about their groups failing.  This also helps to illustrate the type of content you hope others will share there.

Group members might not have time (or confidence in some cases) to contribute original posts, but love to read posts or look at pictures.  This is especially useful in niche groups for things that are less commonly studied.  This is the type of thing that can inspire someone with a mild interest in your field to dive in completely.  There is a wealth of things that can be shared such as artifact photos, amazing recreations, links to academic articles, lectures or publications, the list is really as endless as the internet is.

And that last actually leads me to another thought I want to share.  For a couple of years I saw one person complaining over and over online that there wasn’t a Laurel in their Kingdom to talk to about their specific area of interest.  There actually were a few, and there were also loads of other non-Laurels with excellent work or research in that specific field as well (plus many more with over-lapping fields), but this person was so hung up on their desire to have a direct-dial connection to a Peer that they were missing opportunity to try to BUILD a community of like-minded individuals.  As artisans and researchers, networking is very, very important.  Our work does not exist in a vacuum and you never know who can help you fill in pieces of your interest’s specific puzzles.  Building framework for a specific community is a great way to do this.  It can generate more interest in your area, which creates (eventually) more subject matter experts, and the result is that we can all exponentially grow from those connections.  It also better rounds out the knowledge base in an area.  The more people involved also mean that there will eventually be more classes on topics and hopefully judges better equipped to handle entries from this field in competitions.  (Laurel hint here – being able to connect people with like interests is actually part of the job as I see it.  As you grow as an artisan or researcher, you meet people in your field, but also those in tangential fields.  You learn who does what in that way and then when someone comes to you with questions you cannot answer, you know exactly where to send them.)
 
My final comment here is one of thanks to those who, over the years, have helped groups online succeed, both the groups I run and those in which I love to participate.  Those who answer question, provide content, who call in the admins when trolls go wild, every one of those people contribute to the overall success of an online community and I absolutely appreciate their work and inspiration.

Whether or not one is a Laurel in the SCA, there needs to be a clear understanding that the research is never really done.  Modern science provides a rapidly moving target in some fields, with newer, better, research being added daily to our understanding of the past.  We have to be willing to flex with new methods of research and reframe our understanding with each new discovery.

Do you remember the time when we thought that the aprondress was a ubiquitous female Viking garment that was essentially a tabard type thing?​  Yes, I am talking about the "tea towel" version of the aprondress that is two rectangular panels with straps and brooches.  This garment is far from functional and, honestly, makes little sense.

Now the reigning theories point towards closed garments (rather than flaps or wraps), with narrow looped straps for the most part.  

We also now understand that the aprondress might not have been worn by all women, or in all locations, or at all periods of time in the Viking Age.  The garment fell out of fashion earlier in some areas, such as Denmark.  In other areas it might only have been for the wealthy (those who could afford brooches).  And my personal opinion is that it was also not a work garment, but something for more special occasions (again, making it a status garment).  (I talk a bit about these ideas in my article HERE.) 

These are not the only ways in which research changes.  You can look at my Egtved bibliography HERE and see that new ideas about her origins were published, but there was a rebuttal to that science shortly after.  

When starting a new endeavor, it is critical that we look for current information as one could easily waste time with decades old ideas that have been pretty well debunked.  That being said, it is also often well worth the time to read older works as well, because there might be other details in those pages that are not included in a more specific modern article.

Another very recent examples of this is one that a friend (Countess Gwendolen in the SCA) alerted me to the fact that the most recent issue of ATN (Issue 62, available HERE) is now available.  Here Karina Grömer has an article that re-examines two formerly-though-to-be Bronze Age linen twills from Hallstatt.  They have been carbon dated now to the 15th-17th century CE.  

This knowledge drastically changes our view of Bronze Age Hallstatt textiles. These were the only linen examples we had (there is one disintegrated blob that possibly contains wool and a bast fibre, but this removes two of the three twills from the catalog of Bronze Age Hallstatt textiles (the third is wool).  This means that tabby weave really is your best choice in fabric for the period.  It also removes the only example of stem stitch from the period (which means sticking with hem/overcast and buttonhole are still your best options for sewing).

​Sometimes we think we have the academic article that will help prove a point we want to make, provide the perfect foundation from which to expand our work, or just help fill in the gaps the way other things have not previously done so.  We might get lucky and have this item show up on a service like Academia.edu in all of its intellectual glory, just waiting for us to hit ‘download’ but sometimes it is not that easy at all. 

Academia.edu is a fantastic start, but not everything is posted there in full (or at all).  You can also try services such as ResearchGate, Google Scholar, or JStor as well.  If that fails, look for the author’s site (or their page of an institution site) online as sometimes they have links there for their articles.  If the article is older, sometimes writing to them will also help, as they can sometimes freely send out a PDF for the piece.  (Note that if you do not pay for Academia.edu you cannot fully search the site, but you can often get to the thing you need by using the researchers name, or the name of the paper, and "academia.edu" in a google search.)
 
You can also search the publisher’s website.  Sometimes they offer things for free (occasionally even whole books), or at least for a reasonable fee for a chance to read it for 24 hours.  If the article is part of an academic book rather than a journal, you might even find it accessible, at least in part, via Google Books.  (Hint, if you cannot view all of the pages for something, grab a sentence from the last page you could view and search for it again in a different browser or on a different device.  Sometimes that will let you see more of the document.)
 
Sometimes, just typing in the title of the article and “PDF” will take you to a page that has a download for the item.  Be careful here though in making sure that this is a legitimate source as there are sometimes sites, often foreign, that are just looking to hijack your computer with malware or a virus. 
 
If you have access to a university library, they can usually source needed items for you as well (and sometimes that can even happen through your local library, especially using ILL for books that are not journals).
 
Another option is to try to search for other items by the same author.  Often, as part of their body of work on a subject, a researcher will write about the topic from several different directions, or include various parts of the information in short articles.  You might even try looking for that person's dissertation or thesis online if it was on the same subject.  It is possible that the knowledge you seek is located in more than one place, in more than just that one article that you think you need.  It is also quite likely that you will learn something you didn’t even know you wanted to know by looking at the bigger picture.
 
Also, do not hesitate to network with others who share your interest.  Often it is likely that someone else has already pulled that piece and they might be willing to send you a copy.  Fellow researchers tend to love to geek out when others share their interests and there is so much more we can learn together!

Did you ever have a project that you were SO geeked up about that you were working and working on it and waiting until you were totally finished to share it?  But then, life happens, and it still isn't done?  Well this post is about one of those projects.  I started this a year and a half ago, but it was taking so long I had to stop to do Pennsic prep and then got side tracked with life.  The project recently resurfaced because I had questions about something tangental to it, and so I am going to go ahead and talk about it here.

​Munsell's system for coding colors is a little like Pantone (something with which people are often more familiar, especially given the popular media stir created annually when they announce the Color of the Year).  Munsell's was developed nearly a decade ago to create a guide to help classify soil samples by color.  It takes into account hue (color), chroma (how intense it is) and value (how light or dark the color is).  It is used in a variety of applications, but there are specific field guides that relate to archaeology, including the aforementioned guide for soils, and one for ceramics and one for glass beads.  The last is the one that I find most interesting.

I learned about the guide when I was doing Viking Age bead research and stumbled across Matthew Delveaux's blog https://textandtrowel.wordpress.com/  He has a specific article about Viking Age glass colors (HERE) and wrote a piece housed on the Munsell site (HERE). 

So this is all super cool, right?  I personally love it, but there are some issues I have discovered:

• The book is insanely expensive.  It IS available via ILL as I mentioned, but you would need to have all of your samples ready before getting it, I would think.
• Not everyone uses this system for categorizing colors.  Delveaux did amazing work with the Viking Age beads he worked with (and also, if you want to totally freak out over an incredible data set, check this out.... https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/RODUZG ). I think his work is the only Viking Age work I have seen.  I have some English beads categorized like this and a few other papers here and there, but I really wish there were more that were relevant to my interests.
• Vision and color are funny things.  Some people have a very limited range for color vision, while others can determine different colors in a similar set more readily.  Education and understanding of color (which I fortunately have) also helps better interpret results.  I feel it still give a good base starting place for my selecting colors.
• Certain glass colors can change over time (or being buried in certain conditions), so results can sometimes be off despite best efforts unless there happens to be a more recently broken sample where the inside can be categorized.
• Glass changes depending on the temperature at which you work it, how long you work it, how it is annealed, etc.  Even buying standard glass colors can have a broad range between batches (the image to the right are all Effetre #444).

Once I do complete this project, I will most definitely be sharing the results here.  But while I am at it, I also want to recommend looking at Moa Råhlander's (Sigrid Beadmaker in the SCA) work, particularly her article Spår av tillverkningsmetoder i glas.  She is a researcher AND beadmaker and kindly shares her comparison to standard Effetre colors for the historic samples!

I have had several conversations lately with individuals who are starting to build out time and place specific personas (or kit) in the SCA and I wanted to put a few tips into writing for those interested in pursuing that path.  Some people are drawn to a rough time frame (i.e. 12th Century or "early Medieval Spain" or Viking Age), but even within those parameters, one is really looking at a broad scope of events and material culture and dialing into fine details can make a huge difference in how realistic a portrayal can be.

​I was looking at building a kit for a wealthy woman from Kaupang, a Viking trade centre in Norway.  The site was established around 800 CE and was abandoned in the mid-900s CE.  I specifically was looking at 850ish for my time frame.

Fortunately for me, Kaupang has a wealth of preserved material culture, including a number of textiles.  The famous grave of the "Oseberg Queen" is also not far away chronologically (834 CE) or geographically (it is within the same modern day county).  The grave provides information on shoes and textiles, as well as other material culture, and the settlement and graves give me additional textiles and a wealth of jewelry and beads to work from.  In reality, I did not have to stray too far to build out plans for moving forward.  

Were I looking for additional details, trade routes come into heavy play, and I could easily tap into Denmark (assuming I stick to 9th century), but I would most definitely avoid something like finds specific 10th Century Birka unless I had no other option for evidence.

Iron Age Celtic is much more difficult.  I am working primarily from finds from Durrnberg/Hallein.  again, I have a wealth of material goods from the numerous graves near the site, and a wealth of textiles from the salt mines.  Jewelry is dated in the archaeological reports, making it easy for me to build specific kits for various time frames.  The difficulty in this comes in piecing together clothing items.  When researchers write about Celtic clothing, the figurative sources are so few that they are often compiled within documents together, as if they form a cohesive look at a moment in time.  The reality is that they often span 4-8 centuries of material (depending on the paper).  Written history comes from other cultures (which sometimes might be written in a way to provoke a desired response in readers of that time), and again, is often compiled from documents spanning many centuries.

And entire extant garments?  We just don't them for this time+place+culture.  This begins a delicate game of research where you have to start building a puzzle with pieces that definitely do not belong together, but if you manage to chose the right ones, you can still form a plausible picture in the end.

An example is the Iron Age textiles from Vedretta di Ries in Italy.  There are shaped leggings as well as shoe linings.  These could be a basis for leg coverings, though they potentially date early for my La Tene A kit (socks date 795-466BCE; La Tene A is 450-380BCE).  They are from Italy but not horribly far from Hallein.  There are socks from Martres de Veyre in France, but these date late 2nd-early 3rd century CE, and are much, much further from Hallein.  Additionally, they are completely separated from my chosen location by the Alps.  If I were to have only these options to work from, the Italian find is much better fit for my puzzle.  (Of course, I could also analyze both and draw comparisons between the two - and any other relevant leg coverings I could track down - and possibly even make a case for similarities and possible use across a more broad span of time, if I felt like trying to go down that particular path.)  It not always easy to juggle the priority of time, place, and culture to make the best guesses we can.

I also enjoy all of this as a bit of experimental archaeology as well.  If I have several possible items, I might make them and test them out.  Do they work in reality?  Are they functional?  Do they serve a purpose or in some way pull other things together?  It is fascinating what you can learn by wearing and doing.

In the end though, we sometimes we have to use what we have until something better is found.  We go early or late, and skip across modern borders, to build out the best look that we can, while realizing all the while that it is the best we can do ​now, and the process is never truly done and we will always find more pieces to our puzzle.

There has been a great deal of discussion over the last few years in the SCA bout diversity and equality, about opening our arms and (helpfully) making others welcome.  I think that this is not only essential to the survival of the Society, but it is, honestly, the right thing to do all around.

One topic that I saw just recently is that some PoC feel uncomfortable with titles such as Master or Mistress.  I can say that I never really looked at it in that manner, but yes, I can see that being a problem.  While some are resistant to change, I have seen the vast majority my friends embracing the idea.  It is an opportunity to make a welcoming place for others, and I am very much on-board.

Yes, it is one step, a first step for many, and hopefully we will be able to work to make additional changes as needed to welcome others into this weird world of the modern Middle Ages.

On a personal level, I never have the expectation that anyone remember my title, let be required to use it (though I am flattered if someone does).  MOST Laurels that I know feel this way.  Really.  I know newcomers can be flustered by all the coronets or regalia or titles, but it is perfectly ok to ease into the in-game culture and we ALL forget (ALL the time).  

It is OK.

So now I am actually enjoying the exploration I am seeing for alternative titles.  A few friends are going to opt for Laurel (FirstName).  That absolutely works, and might make for a safe new “general” title that anyone could use if they do not know the preferred persona-based title someone might use, but want to make a formal introduction.

For a new cultural based title I have been following conversations online, and have seen variants of teacher or professor and find that line of thought very appealing (I love teaching so very much).  I sourced Laurel Fridrikr Thomasson (I am unsure of his chosen title), as he is a student of Old Norse, and he suggested Lærimoðir, which translates as “lore mother”.  I LOVE this.  Love it so much.  I asked for the pronunciation and was told “lair-i-moth-er”, which is indeed awful close to the translation of Lore Mother that I wonder if just using that would be “ok”?  Even more exciting was my discovery that it is already on an accepted alternative title list - http://heraldry.sca.org/titles.html#Viking%20Icelandic.

So yes, I can identify with this.  

But the reality is, if you are shouting across a crowed room for me, the absolute best way to get my attention is to just call for Elf, because I will more readily respond to that than even my given name (especially in an SCA environment).

So a friend recently did an awesome thing, and I have to share it.  It is not only unique and visually quite stunning, but I absolutely love how she handled the overall process and I want to get it the bandwidth it deserves.

For those who have not met her, Hypatissa Anna Dokeianina Syrakousina, runs the blog Anna's New Rome, and is a Baroness and amazing researcher and artisan in the SCA.  She is also mundanely a historian, and that shows in her work, but I also think that this specific project really shows how others can make a step forward into new areas even without modern credentials to back them.

Her COVID project was Hittite clothing.  This is (I think) and unexplored are in the SCA and I love that people are starting to step away from the things we see at every event and digging into lesser known cultures or periods.  

Here entire thought process is part of her blog post which can be found HERE.  Please take your time to read it and check out the photos of the two outfits she presents as part of her first draft of this work.

I think it is obvious that I love to blog my own projects and experiences (even if rural internet is my downfall lately as it makes posting very difficult).  But I also love to look at the work of others and want to share some things I love about this project in particular.  If you are trying to figure out how to start something new, or want to organize it for a blog, this definitely serves as a nice example on How-to.

1. It is well, and simply, organized.  She gives a brief introduction on who the Hittites were.  This is key because it is a lesser known culture in an SCA context and this allows the reader, who might love the outfit enough to want to craft one, to be able to also relay that information when someone complements their garb.
2. She was starting fresh with this project (her area of expertise is Byzantine), so she gave a run-down of the types of sources there are, and what she knows about them. 
3. As she lists her choices, she gives the rationale behind each.  This helps others understand they why's behind what they see and also might inspire other ideas for things to try.
4. Photos!  Nice, clear photos that make the garments easily readable to others.
5. Observations - this is one of the best parts of this blog post. She already is learning what works and what might need changed, so that she (and the reader) can take the next steps better informed.

I do want to call out one additional, and very key, item.  Early in her post she makes the statement, "At this point, as the research appears to be super-new, I understand that this body of work will raise more questions than it will serve as answers, and I am willing to bring forth that needed dialogue, and accept changes will need to be made this early in the study. As far as I know, I am the first SCAdian, and possibly scholar/experimental archaeologist to try this. Please be patient with me as I iron out the kinks, and work to determine the best patterns and ideas before adding a ton of information that may not be correct. I know that some of this reads a bit choppy, I plan to flesh it out as I continue to build my arsenal of sources."

I think that sometimes we can be paralyzed with the idea of starting a new work, especially if it is something less well known.  There can be fear and trepidation of somehow doing it all wrong.  Be honest as to where you stand with the work and how far into the process.  Every single thing we do in the SCA had a start somewhere.  At one time all the Viking women were wearing two tea towels pinned at the shoulders and the more we learn, well, the more we learn.  

Part of working with history in the manner in which we do is accepting that this is an ever-evolving science, in our own personal work, as a group of re-enactors as a whole, and in the broad scope of historic studies in the world today.  We all start somewhere, and it might not be right the first time around, this is why we document things, share them, discuss them, research more, and then revise the whole process. Admitting that we do not know everything there is to know about something (even if we are currently wearing it) is not something to be ashamed of, but rather it speaks to our curiosity and our willingness to keep learning.  Baroness Anna is already digging into more resources and talking to others who work in this field to help expand her work in the area, and I absolutely am looking forward to seeing more.

I love the fact that I am full-time COVIDing in Nowhere, WV, but the downside is such terrible internet that it makes it hard to upload photos to the internet.  I did post three necklace projects to the Iron Age Celtic portion of this site last night, and those can be found here:  awanderingelf.weebly.com/iron-age-celtic-studies

I am also running a short series of reviews of books I absolutely love on my Facebook page here: www.facebook.com/pg/awanderingelf/

I do need to share the new linen scarves I discovered last weekend.  I bought the olive and white striped one and it is absolutely lovely (excellent value for the price).  I know some folks here are fans of the Amazon scarves, so happy shopping!!!

I believe I have previously mentioned the massive, incredible project Fashioning the Viking Age on here before (I know I talk about it in mu classes).  

The initial report can be found here:  ctr.hum.ku.dk/nyhedsliste/fashioning-the-viking-age/

The actual site for it and the descriptions of the three parts are located here:  ​natmus.dk/organisation/forskning-samling-og-bevaring/fashioning-the-viking-age/

But mostly, you need it hit Instagram immediately.  Very specifically you need to check out this item:  https://www.instagram.com/p/CAXiWwLnX49/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

Some of you know I am in awe of the type of woven goods that were produced in period (see article here ) and I am overjoyed to see someone replicating one of these incredible, complex pieces.

The Instagram account is totally worth following, btw and the project is astonishing in its scope!

I have talked at length about the relative lack of embroidery in Viking Age finds, but I am going to summarize those earlier discussions here as a preface to some new thoughts.

Embroidery as a whole in the Viking Age is exceptionally rare, compared to the thousands of textile finds that we have.  Figurative embroidery (rather than just a line of stem stitches, such as that that covers a hem seam at Birka) is even more rare.  Of the few samples we do have, some can possibly be attributed to other cultures (such as some of the glorious work from Oseberg being possibly Saxon, Mammen has also been considered as such by some authors, the metal thread embroidery from Valsgarde is thought to either be Byzantine or Slavic, or a copy of the work of those cultures).  Even if all of these were native work, the number of these items is minuscule compared to the over all body of textile finds from the period.

It also is smaller than the number of woven patterns in period.  (I have started a collection of this evidence here:  http://awanderingelf.weebly.com/blog-my-journey/patterned-weaves-preliminary-data ).  Tablet weaving itself is rare compared to prior periods, but that too is a type of woven patterning that exceeds the number of embroidery finds.

I have often wondered why this was the case.  To a modern person, embroidery is an easier art to adopt (and certainly needs less in the way of space or equipment), but in period weaving was dominant way to decorate textiles.  I have seen it argued that this was not a culture of linear art (they were not taught to draw from a young age as we were), and that makes sense.  I also wonder if there was something symbolic in it (we know that many ancient cultures have textile arts playing a prominent role in their mythology), or perhaps ritual.

As I read more about other cultures, times and areas, I see that this lack of embroidery in Northern Europe is reflected elsewhere as well.  Johanna Banck-Burgess notes the same phenomena in Central Europe in early Celtic works as well (this shows up in both her work on the Hochdorf burial and in the article "Prehistoric textile patterns: transfer with obstruction").  There we have various types of patterned weaving that are a result of manipulation of the web on the loom (whether it be by the turn of cards in tablet weaving, or supplemental threads used in soumak-like techniques or insertion of metal rings into the the weave of the cloth).  Embroidery is completely absent in some areas in early Celtic cultures, and very rare in others.

And you know what?  It does not stop there.  In the article, "Unravelling the Tangled Threads of Ancient Embroidery" by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Annette Paetz, the idea that mistranslation might play a role in perceptions of profuse embroidery in the ancient world.  I found this rather riveting to read because it very much parallels the conclusions I have come to about later textiles as well, that the number of embroidered items are very low compared to textiles that are either undecorated or decorated by means of weaving.

And of course, now I want to know the why of this even more.