Recently on the Viking Clothing forum on Facebook (the rather "hardcore" forum I have mentioned before in some of my posts), there was a discussion about necklines on women's Viking Age caftans/coats.  Quite often I see coats with a very deep U shaped cut out.  There is no real evidence for that cut, though I do understand why reenactors opt for that shaping.  It allows for one to see the impressive brooches and bling.  

There is some scant evidence of a straight edge opening, so when I made my own coat, I opted for something between the two.  I choose a deep V neck that has only the very slightest curve to it.  Unfortunately, my entire coat came out too large, so that neckline opens up too much and the whole thing wants to slide off my shoulders.  (Fortunately, I already have cloth with which to craft a new outergarment at some point.)

I think the most brilliant reconstruction I have seen so far is offered by a reenactor named Louise Archer.  She gave me permission to share her work here.  Her coat is which is made from a Herdwick diamondtwill wool and in her detail photos you can see she has a Dublin scarf.  That is made from Manx Loghtan wool!  (I cannot express how much I love her choices, and how lucky I think she is to find these wools to work with.) Her coat comes to the neckline, as would a straight-opening male caftan.  She can fasten it at the top for warmth, OR just use the brooch further down, which allows it to open at the top around her brooches and bling.  This is practical the similarities to the proposed male garment make it make a great deal of sense.  Beyond that, this construction (or anything with a straight edged front) also makes it somewhat similar to items from nearby cultures (such as Frankish or Saxon women's coats).

Beyond her wonderful coat, I also wanted to point out the photo of her Dublin style cap.  This very will illustrates one of the points I made a few days ago in my article on the facts we have about headcoverings from the Viking Age (that being that all of the extant examples are actually very, very tiny).

I really love this work and look forward to seeing more from Louise.

, If you have stopped by here before, you likely know that I try to leave the Woulda/Coulda/Shoulda’s out of my work.  Those phrases tend to lead down long and winding roads into fantasyland.  The other thing I strongly dislike is absolutes.  The idea that something was always one way is rather off-putting (especially when it is something readily disproven).  There is this balance that must be achieved when looking at what bits of evidence we have, while still applying some creativity to sort things out into a reasonable approximation of what is historically plausible.
 
With that in mind, I want to talk a little about some research I am doing on women’s caps from the Viking Age.  There is evidence of an assortment of interesting headcovering possibilities, including the caps, as well as some narrow cloth bands, small scarves and veils.  I think that, over all, the caps seem to be the most common item I see among reenactors, and are one of the first that I personally used.  I will eventually expand on this post, with full citations and the like, but I wanted to toss what is going through my head out there now.
 
To start, I will define a Viking age cap as a small item, usually square, though the top might be shaped with a dart, that typically has ties attached.  I have found mention 21 such caps/possible caps in my research.  There are additional small fragments, especially from Dublin, and one from London, that are thought to possibly be from caps, but I have left those items out for the moment, as I am trying to look few specific details that can help provide a better understanding of these items.  The items for which I compiled data range from the 9th-11th century (with 2 being listed as uncertain), with most of them falling into the 9th-10th century range.
 
Textiles
 
All of these items have one thing in common, and that is that the cloth of which they are constructed is a light weight and very fine tabby.  Most of them are even described as having deliberate space left in the warp and weft, giving them a gauzy appearance.  They are delicate and most have some level of transparency.  All of the extant items are wool or silk, though at least one of the author’s who have studied these items thinks that linen was also a possibility, and that the fiber did not survive in the ground. 
 
Fine, gauzy cloth textiles, many of which have been attributed to women’s headcoverings, have been found in a number of graves and sites, and across a range of locations, including York, Hedeby, Oslo, Hørning, London, Lincoln, Kaupang, Önsvala in Skåne, Oseberg and possibly Birka.  Each of the caps meets the criteria of being a very fine fabric.  Unfortunately, most textiles in graves are preserved by contact with metal objects, and metal near or on the head is not always common.  It is entirely possible that there were indeed caps of heavier cloth (there is one from Finland and one from the Netherlands that have some similarity to these items that were not of fine cloth), but I think there are enough caps and cloth remaining to believe that at least for certain circumstances, that there might have been a preference for fine textiles for this accessory.
 
A further complication concerning these caps is that most of the items that are actually identifiable as headcoverings do not come from graves at all.  That takes them out of context and while there is an assumption that they are indeed women’s headcoverings, they also could have belonged to children (or both women and children).
 
Width
 
Another similarity in all of these items is size.  The finished width of them is very narrow.  Of the 20 that I looked at, 14 of them have a definite width, or at least an estimated width applied to them by the researchers.  They range from 15cm to 18cm wide, with an average of 16.7cm (6.6 inches).  That is exceedingly narrow (far narrower than many reenactors make them and far more narrow than my own first attempts at recreating these items).  Simply put, these will cover only the back of the head if worn by an adult.
 
Darts
 
Of the 20 items, 10 had traces of having had a dart, following the curve of the back of the head, sewn into them.  6 were too fragmented to tell.  One of the caps from York had the point created by the dart stitched down to the side.
 
Back seam
 
While many of the caps appeared to have a back seam that went the length of the cap, one from Lincoln and two from Dublin were open below the bottom of the dart.
 
Patches
 
5 of the caps had patches applied.  Interestingly enough, one of them had a patch applied on the inside of the cap (which would leave the damaged area showing).  One had patches applied near where the ties were attached, presumably for additional strength.  One also showed signs of darning.
 
Ties
 
I think there is a reenactorism that has developed around the ties on the caps.  I have heard statements to the effect that caps have too have the ties set up into the cap (an inch or two, or more, from the bottom corner), as the example from York shows.  I have even heard that caps with ties at the bottom corners were only for small children.  I think that is odd given that we simply do not have the grave evidence to state exactly who wore these caps.  Further, 7 of the 20 examples that I used for this research have the bottom corner of the cap stretched out of alignment, as if there had been a tie there at one point.  Only 3 of the 20 show evidence of a tie set further up into the cap, and 10 of them are too fragmented or just do not have evidence of ties.  

Beyond the location of the ties, it is very hard to say where or how they were tied.  Most reenactors prefer to tie them behind the head or under the hair, but one cannot discount them being tied under the chin like a later coif either.  (The tie would be well hidden under certain styles of veil from that time period as well, and there is an image from Kiev that shows such a headcovering, tied under the chin, as well.)
 
My thoughts
 
I think that these caps (and possibly the scarves as well) were a base layer for additional headcoverings.  A cap tied in place (whether under the chin or back under the hair) makes for easy of pinning a veil in place and can help to keep hair out of the face or out of the way of tasks.  The manner in which a few of these are patched (with little care for a visible hole, in the case of one patched on the inside, or in case of a visible patch for reinforcement on another one) makes it seem as though the appearance of the item itself was not terribly relevant (even in the case of a costly import such as silk).
 
I think it possible that the cap was a common item worn daily, and perhaps a veil was donned on top of it if one was leaving home or receiving guests.  I do not consider the cap alone to be “outerwear” for harsh outdoor climates as the size of these items do not allow for much protection from the sun and the diaphanous nature of the cloth itself does little to provide warmth. I would not necessarily consider it “formal wear” at this point either.  I believe that, especially later in the Viking Age, that women were using veils as a symbol of status and that these caps might well have been worn under those.  In fact, a small wool gauze veil or scarf does a great deal to make a veil less likely to slip around on slick hair.
 
The dart itself is fascinating to me.  I find that a soft cap of wool gauze with a dart) lays exceptionally well under a veil (the peak of the dart naturally folds over, without leaving much of a point at the back of the veil.  I linen cap with no dart, tends to leave a more visible point under the veil.  I definitely plan to experiment more with a variety of options.  
​
I think that some details about the caps varied greatly, such as whether there was a dart (though I lean towards more having had them historically than not) or the location of the ties.  Those with an open back bear some similarity to the proposed uses of the scarves, in that one could wear the rectangle of cloth and tie it on back under the hair.  This type can slide further forward on the head than a cap with a back could.  It could be regional or just personal preferences when it comes down to it.  There are so many variables.    

Heckett's work with the headcoverings from Dublin includes diagrams that show ways one can wear the caps, but I think that a more recent item in an article by Penelope Walton Rogers gives a more interesting view (both can be seen below).

​References (Incomplete)

• Krag, A. H.  Finely Woven Textiles from the Danish Viking Age.
• Heckett, E. W. (1990). Some silk and wool head-coverings from Viking Dublin: uses and origins--an enquiry. NESAT 3.
• Heckett, E. W. (2002). Irish Viking Age silks and their place in Hiberno- Norse society. Textile Society of America Symposium Proceedings.
• Heckett, E. W. (2003). Viking Age Headcoverings from Dublin.
• MacGregor, Arthur.  (1982) Anglo-Scandinavian Finds from Lloyds Bank, Pavement, and Other Sites.
• Walton Rogers, P. (1989). Textiles, Cordage and Raw Fibre from 16-22 Coppergate.
• Walton Rogers, P. (1997). Textile Production at 16 – 22 Coppergate The Archaeology of York. The Archaeology of York - The Small Finds, 17, 1687–1844.
• Walton Rogers, P. Cloth, clothing and Anglo-Saxon women. In A Stitch in Time Essays in Honour of Lise Bender Jørgensen.

 

(Note If you bring up wool to many people, especially in America, and the first thing they think of is the itchy sweater that their grandmother knit for them (mine was red).  These memories can often make people shy away from wool fabric for reenacting purposes, but the reality is that for most of us, that would have been the choice material for our persona.  In fact, some very strict groups have requirements that state you have to make your garments out of wool to even participate.  Inevitably, this brings up the conversation about someone's wool allergies and what to do about that.

First thing that needs to be understood is that no one is actually allergic to wool itself, unless, of course one is also allergic to the hair on their own head.  Wool is made of keratin, just like our own hair and finger nails.  There are, however, some people who have reactions to it, so understanding the actual cause of the reaction is important.  

• Scouring Agents:  When wool is processed it is "Scoured".  This is removes the lanolin (the natural oil of the sheep) before spinning.  Historically, this could be done with a variety of methods, including something as simple as repeated soaking in hot water.  In modern cloth, they use harsh chemicals to manage this work.  Some of the chemicals might be left in the material, which can cause reactions.
• Lanolin: As mentioned before, lanolin is a wax secreted by glands of the sheep.  It helps water to be shed from the wool and also helps protect the animal's skin.  Not all scouring processes remove every bit of lanolin, so it is possible to have a reaction to lanolin if you are sensitive to it.  
• Sizing: This is a chemical that is added after the cloth is made, to help best present it for commercial display.  This can also cause allergic reactions.  I know someone who will get puffy red hands after handling some types of cloth in a fabric store or even clothes hanging on racks in retail stores.
• Dye: Occasionally certain fabric dyes might cause sensitivity in some individuals.

If your reaction is caused by one of these, it might be possible to remove the problem by careful washing of your cloth.  Dharma Trading (as well as other outlets) sell detergents such as Synthrapol which is specifically designed to remove chemicals, excess dye, oils, etc, from fabrics or fibers.  While this is specifically used before dying cloth to make sure that the color takes well, it can also be used to try to remove other chemicals as well.

http://www.dharmatrading.com/chemicals/synthrapol-detergent.html

There is one other factor, and likely it is the most common one, that can make people shy away from wool.  That is the "scratchiness" of the fiber itself.  This reaction can be excessively annoying and can happen for a couple of reasons.

• Coarseness:  The wool itself might be of a low quality and thick.  The wool fiber is covered with fine, overlapping scales.  Coarse wool has more coarse scales, while fine wool has scales that lay more flat.  The former can be more irritating.
• Spinning: If yarn is loosely spun, there might be hairs that escape the shaft of the yarn and that poke out.  This creates a fuzzy look that we often associate with woolens, but these individual fibers might irritate sensitive skin in some people.

My suggestion is to test out different wools.  Look for Merino wool, which is exceptionally fine and has very fine scales.  Many people that normally dislike wool can still wear a very soft merino sweater.  Another option is to look for worsted wools.  This process of spinning keeps the hairs aligned in the shaft of the yarn, with no fuzzy bits sticking it.  It produces a very fine, smooth cloth which is quite period for many reenactors.  Some times this will be listed as "worsted" cloth, but most men's suiting wools can be in this category as well.

Also look for a more fine cloth.  Some vendors, such as Burnley & Trowbridge, sell swatch sets of their cloth.  I recommend ordering swatches from them and other outlets to see which materials might best suit your needs an level of sensitivity.  There are 100% wool fabrics out there that surprisingly don't actually "feel" like wool at all.

Another factor that comes into play is the perception that all wool will be hot and heavy.  Much of the cloth from Norse finds is exceptionally fine with very high thread counts.   They had lightweight wools!  As mentioned above, poke around online and order swatches to see the variety of cloth that really exists.  I prefer wool for my veils and headdresses.  A wool gauze is no warmer in the summer than linen and my handwoven wool dress is no warmer than a linen of the same weight.  Avoid coatings or heavily fulled materials if heat is a concern.

Another option, for those that do not have a chemical sensitivity, or who can wash out the offending chemicals, but still find wool uncomfortable, is to make sure that the wool fabric does not touch the more sensitive areas of your body, such as your neck.  For women doing Viking age, this can be simple as you can wear a wool aprondress over a linen underdress.  However, if you need a wool tunic you can wear a wool one over linen and then you can add a linen facing inside the neckline and inside the sleeves to prevent the wool from coming in contact with your skin.  Tacking it down on the inside with small stitches will leave it invisible from the outside completely and adding a wear cord at the opening edge will further remove it from your skin.

(Note that this post is not an insistence everyone wear wool, but I do know many people who previously shied away from the fibre by working with it and figuring out how to make it work for them.  As always, your own best comfort is important so be reasonable as you test your limits!)

I will be teaching my "Deeper Look at Textiles & Trim of Viking Age Dress" class twice this year at Pennsic.  It will be at 9am on Peace Week Friday and 9am on War Week Tuesday.  Both sessions will be in AS13.  This will be the same class as last year, but will also include a bit more information on head coverings (as well as some new samples).  This class is 2 hours long.

I also am working on finishing some research and prepping a new class on Women's Viking Age Transitional Dress.  This class will cover what happened to the aprondress as the Viking Age progressed to the Middle Ages.  This also will have information on changes in textiles during that time, as well as information on headcoverings. I am guessing this will be a one hour glass with lecture and samples.  I hope to teach that once during Pennsic, and possibly once somewhere prior to that.  

I have wonderful friends who gifted me with a copy of Bundled Up in Blue last fall.  It is a great museum exhibit book that covers many details of a Viking grave find in Iceland.  I was very happy last night to see the dress information now available online.  You can find it here!

https://northernwomen.org/project-2/

)
​

For those who might not be familiar, Gulf Wars is another large war in the SCA.  It will be from March 11-19 this year and more information on the event can be found here:  http://www.gulfwars.org/

This even is full of A&S activities and will offer a number of classes on a broad range of topics.  http://www.gulfwars.org/activities/arts-sciences-2/classes/  

In addition to that classes listed in the event materials, there are often additional classes that will be held onsite.  This year there will be a series of Viking and other early period classes held in a dedicated space set aside by the merchant Feed the Ravens. 

The class list downloadable at the link below (as the image might not be large enough to view from some devices).  I highly recommend not only checking out some of these classes, but checking out the amazing wares (often with a high level of authenticity) offered by this vendor.  They are also very nice people which loads of knowledge and experience that they love to share!

Often people ask me how to improve upon their wardrobe or over all look.  There are a million individual responses, but I think one of the most universal things one can do is to eye each component critically and ascertain exactly how "common" it might have been in period.  In my article about Viking age plaids, I talk about how small the checks were and how narrow the stripes.  What is also key about it is that in all of the materials I have, I could only find those few references.  Certainly they used this cloth, but it does not appear to have been common practice when compared to the overall number of finds.

Another example of this is in the use of tablet weaving.  In the article "Tablet Weaving on Reconstructed Viking Age Garments – and a Method to Optimise the Realism of Reconstructed Garments," by Lise Raeder Knudsen (from the book Refashioning Viking Age Garments. SAXO-Institute, University of Copenhagen), the author has a chart that shows the prevalence of tablet weaving in graves from different time periods.  During the Migration era, it ranged from 20-30% of graves in various parts of Scandinavia, but during the Viking age less than 5% of graves have evidence of this practice.  

What I take away from that is that this form of trim should be used sparingly, if at all.  Not every edge of a kit should have it, and perhaps it should be used only for high status personas.  If I use a tablet woven band, which would have been rare, then I would perhaps not also use plaid in the same kit (another less common item).

Another, earlier example of trends, is in this fantastic article on early cloth by Karina Grömer.  Textile Materials and Techniques in Central Europe in the 2nd and 1st Millennia BC.  

In this she has a fantastic chart showing how common things such as weave structure, use a dye, plaids and embroidery are.  They are displayed as being important techniques of the period down to single evidences.  It generates fantastic food for thought for the reenactor.

Those who have taken my Viking Age textiles classes know that I love to talk about scale.  Things like how tiny plaids were or how tiny the diamonds in diamond twill were.  The cloth used by high status individuals was quite fine.  It is, however, very hard to find broken diamond twill at all, let alone in a fine cloth.

Well, someone is stepping up to the plate and offering some BEAUTIFUL fabric to reenactors.  You can go directly to the Facebook post from this link, and I included images below.  https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=401269506889989&id=100010208285904

If you ask me about Viking clothing, the very first place I will recommend to you to look as Hilde Thunem's website.  She has recently done some updates to her popular Smokkr (aprondress) article and has split her own experiments with different styles onto another page.

I highly recommend checking her fantastic research out!

http://urd.priv.no/viking/