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.

 

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.

 I have friends who joke about me counting threads in cloth.  I can readily laugh with them about it because textiles are a passion for me.  In part, because the historic construction of cloth fascinates me, but in part also because this is one of the few facets of Viking costume for which we have a definitive model.  Most of us who recreate these ancient bits of clothing know that we do so with great limitations regarding what patterning, cut and construction was used (particularly when it comes to women's dress).  There is always a great deal of guesswork involved on part of the costumer.

The cloth itself, however, we have thousands of examples of.  We know what this cloth looked like, we can see, even today, the texture and quality of textiles that the early Norse women crafted.  My patterning of garments is largely guesswork, but the cloth itself I can at least analyze and try to attempt to find textiles that bear similar visual qualities, including thread count.  Of course, one can bring up the argument that there are still faults with this (such as wrong breed of sheep or improper width of yarn leading to a more dense or loose cloth than that of a specific period example).  I still believe that studying the fabric yields us a wealth of information about dress in the past and can help us better reach the goal of more faithfully reproducing it.

One of the hardest things that I had to overcome (and I have mentioned this in past entries), is that notion that the Viking Era Norse were barbarians, that their craft was crude and clumsy.  While that might be true in some areas, the wealth of extant textiles does not bear this out.  There were fabrics, of wool, that had thread counts in excess of 150 threads per inch in the warp.  That cloth was exceptionally fine, even by today's standard.  A person of some status, who wore metal brooches and a string of beads, certainly did not garb herself in cloth as coarse as burlap.

Breaking those stereotypes should not stop with the fabric.  Another example (again, something that I have discussed at length in this forum, in online groups and in my classes) is that other elements could, perhaps, reflect the same sort of refinement and quality as did the cloth.

Long have I pondered how the large, open, and often poorly wrought (I have too many examples of this on my own costume) Herringbone Stitch has made itself so prevalent in Viking costume. 

I think part of this, has to do with some modern mentality of equating over-embellished design elements with wealth and status.  We love to see miles of trim or stitching on costume, and see it as a perfected work, rather than one that is over-wrought.  Interesting, I think, given that one of the staples of a modern woman's wardrobe is the rather understated, but always elegant, "Little Black Dress".  Simplicity can often speak volumes in the modern wardrobe, but we often bypass that concept in costuming because it, like the concept of fine wool fabric, does not fit with our own internal visualization of the past.

To look again at the scant evidence for the Herringbone stitch, see below:

• Hedeby harbor has a textile fragment that is hemmed using a herringbone stitch.  However, the herringbone is over the edge of the hem, and hence, that the part of the stitch we consider decorative was on the inside of the garment, with what would look like parallel rows of running stitch on the outside.  (As described by Inga Hagg)
• The find 6-8 Pavement at York has a fragment of a hemmed garment that is worked in Herringbone.  As with the Hedeby find, the herringbone is on the inside of the garment.  (Cordage and Fiber from 16-22 Coppergate, by Penelope Walton Rogers)
• The Mammen cushion has a complex variant of very closely worked herringbone over a seam (you can see that here http://www.cs.vassar.edu/~capriest/vikembroid.html).

• The Skjoldehamn tunic has a stitch similar to that used at Mammen at the neckline.  The issue with this one is that this find may or may not even be Viking and if it is, it seems to reflect a very different type of fashion than we find further south and that alone makes me leery of using it as a basis for embellishment on a Viking kit without further substantiating evidence.  Beyond that, the tunic itself is dated post-Viking era.  As with Mammen, this stitch is still much more narrow than reenactors use, and, again, it is more filled in.  (http://www.ceilingpress.com/Resources/Nye%20tanker%20om%20Skjoldehamnfunnet.pdf )

Breaking the Myth

So where did we go wrong with this?

I think the first fault lies in our own taste.  In our own desire to make something "rustic" that fits in with our own misconceptions of the capabilities of these people, we opt for things that fit in with this ideal, but also that are simple enough for anyone to add to their attire.  We also have this concept that "more stuff" means higher status.

The second issue is with the evidence, or rather, our misinterpretation of it.  One of the most circulated articles online is one entitled "Viking Embroidery" by Mistress Thora Sharptooth.  She has been a powerful inspiration in the SCA for digging deeper into Viking costume and textiles.  She has a series of works posted on-line that I think most of us would give credit as the best aids we had when starting out.  In her embroidery work there is a paragraph concerning the ornamentation of seams.

I feel the need to further elaborate on the statements contained in this measure, and help to provide context (as it is researching these items that helped me to better trace the origins of the myth).

1. Sutton Hoo - The author used this as a way to show possible evidence of a practice in Europe.  Note though, that this is not evidence of Vikings doing this (it is not Norse and it is too early).
2. Oseberg - The ring motif was used on a garment from the grave, but it does not, to me, appear to follow along a structural seam.  Perhaps it followed the edge of a neckline?  It is very unlikely that this followed something like the vertical seam of an aprondress (and even so, it is entirely unlike a herringbone stitch, in both form an execution for it to be considered valid evidence of that practice).  The rings are delicate and well formed, not something I would class in the same category with an oversized herringbone stitch.  I will note here that there is another small sample of embroidery from this grave that looks as though it could have followed a seam edge (or not), but it looks to be more akin to the type of work used at Mammen as it appears part of a larger decorative effort.  Regardless, this item again, does not cover a seam, but might have followed a line of the garment if the shape of the fragment represents a shaped piece of cloth (rather than something that degraded into this shape over time).
3. Hedeby and Birka - mentions cord and braid applied over a seam.  Unfortunately, I cannot actually find anything that really shows cord applied over a joining seam.  Rather, I have cataloged a number of uses of cord, braid or stitching used at the edges of a garment (where it can also serve an additional functional purpose of saving the edges from wear). The closest thing here that I see to our "seam embellishments" would be the braid laid over the darts at Hedeby. Once again, these are very different treatments than a herringbone worked over a joining seam (or on the outside of a garment in any fashion).  The edge treatments can all be found at the site here.  http://awanderingelf.weebly.com/blog-my-journey/viking-clothing-a-deeper-look-at-edges
4. Mammen cushion - Finally, we see an actual seam treatment from the Viking age.  This find is somewhat contested, as some researchers believe it to be an import (perhaps Saxon and from the same tradition as the Sutton Hoo cushion), while others see it as a local product.  There are also small hats from the Netherlands that have similar stitching that are dated to the same time period.  It has also been suggested that these hats might also be imported goods from the British Isles.
   

Context

Putting the evidence into context is of paramount importance.  Understanding something being referenced in that article is not necessarily proof that all of our notions of "seam embellishments" are documentable.  It is absolutely not documentation that a standard Herringbone, or catch stitch, was ever used in such a manner either.

Looking deeper at the sources and meanings of each item is valuable as we move beyond beginner and progress on a journey as a costumer who is attempting to recreate the past. 

My own opinion is that seams were likely not embellished.  Not only due to lack of archaeological proof, but because of the time it would take to craft something that would make reuse of a textile less likely.  It would be hard to take in that garment if it were so embellished.  I often also see people citing that it "reinforces" the seams.  Why then would you need to reinforce the seam of an aprondress (a garment that Hagg describes as only "slightly fitted"), when you are not taking time to sew that stitch around an armhole of a dress, or down the seam in the back of the sleeve at the elbow.  Both of those areas are far more likely to break from stress than a side seam of a slightly fitted dress.  Why not instead use these complex stitches (and the stitch from Mammen is indeed time consuming) on a functional textile such as the cushion cover that you will not need to alter, and that might possibly need the strength from the applied needlework?

Scale

And finally, I need to mention Scale, because I think a lack of understanding regarding scale is one of the main contributors to the reenactorism of "decorative herringbone".  As I mentioned above, the only thing close to the reenactor's use of herringbone is the Mammen cushion cover.  It is important to view that piece in proper perspective.

What we typically see of this find is the diagram in the lower right corner.  This usually appears on our screen at a size of about a half an inch wide.  The weave of the needlework for the diagram is open, to better show how the stitches interlace.  What many people have not seen, is the actual photos of the cushion, which I have included here.  Note that the stitch is tightly worked, with no negative space visible to the eye.  In fact, it looks at first like applied braid.  And perhaps the most important thing here is to consider the scale of the piece.  That line of braid is a mere 3mm wide.

I think the single biggest perpetrator of the "herringbone seam embellishment" myth is a misunderstanding of that diagram (or rather, lack of understanding about its context).  If indeed you were to opt to use this type of stitching, I think the only credible way to do so would be to apply it in the same manner of the original.  While I personally do not think it would have been used over a dress seam, I can at least understand where the tradition stands historically and it reads as something that might be plausible for the Viking age.

I have made some updates to my Viking Textiles - A Deeper Look at Plaids, Stripes and Checks article.  Added in a bit more information I got about several pieces, as well as some possible weaving drafts of those for which I did not have images. 

Additionally, there is now a downloadable PDF at the end of the document that can be printed out to give a a rough sense of the scale for these plaids (since all monitors will show items differently, and many of the photos from the academic works are enlarged already).

http://awanderingelf.weebly.com/blog-my-journey/viking-textiles-a-deeper-look-at-plaids-stripes-and-checks

Silks were expensive imports and reflected the wealth and status of the wearer.  Many of these silks were cut into very narrow strips and applied as bindings or trim to garments.  The silks used in this manner were typically cut .5-1.9 cm wide (some were cut in the warp direction, some weft).  They were applied to both wool and linen garments. 

Some silk strips, as shown at Birka and with the Pskov cuffs, were used as a narrow binding on the edge of the fabric, while others were used flat against a garment (many of the stripes from Oseberg show this type of use).  In addition to these these sites, graves at Mammen, Haugen Rolvsoy, Tuna and Turinge also have silk strips.  (Vedeler, p7)

Both plain weave and samite silks were found in graves, with the latter being elaborately patterned.

Birka
Graves 464, 834 and 835 all have fragments of silk that were possibly attached to the tops of wool smokkrs.  464 is described as a narrow binding of silk with straps also made of silk twill attached to a dark blue-green wool smokkr.  834 had a scrap of silk binding that might have been attached to the dress or that might have been used as a strap to hold tools.  835 had a wool smokkr with linen loop.  A silk band was found there that might have been on the smokkr or might have been used to hang tools.

Birka III, p29, p78-79, p158-159;  Kvinnodräkten i Birka, p69.  Image from Kvinnodräkten i Birka and photo from Birka III (shows fragment from 834)

Oseberg
This rich grave yielded numerous narrow bands of silk samite that were cut into long strips.  These strips have the long edges folded in and there are needle holes show that they were once applied to fabric (traces of both wool and linen have been found on the bands).

Vedeler, p7.  Photos from Unimus.no.

Pskov
This Viking age grave contained both a dress and an underdress.  The over dress (referred to sometimes as a sarafan, and sometimes as a smokkr) had strips of silk applied in bands to the top.  That decorative portion of the dress was then trimmed with a very narrow, blue silk binding.  The binding was .7cm wide.

The underdress had wide silk cuffs and narrow bands of silk at the bottom edge of those (and potentially a band of silk at the hem as well).  The band used to form the hem was 3cm wide and folded around the edge as in the diagram below.  The sewn edge was only .5cm wide.

Reference and photos: Zubkova, et. Al.

York - High Ousegate
A sleeve cuff of chevron twill wool has Osenstitch applied to the very edge.  The yarn used is glossy, smoothly spun wool, plied Z2S.

Resource and image: Archaeology of York, Web Series, No. 3, The Textiles by Penelope Walton Rogers

Christensen, Arne Emil and Nockert, Margareta. Osebergfunnet: bind iv, Tekstilene (Universitetet i Oslo), 2006.

Geijer, Agnes.  Birka III, Die Textilefunde aus Den Grabern.  Uppsala,1938.

Hägg, Inga.  Die Textilefunde aus dem Hafen von Haithabu (Karl Wachlotz Verlag). 1984.

Hägg, Inga.  Die Textilefunde aus der Siedlung und us den Gräbern von Haithabu (Karl Wachlotz Verlag). 1991.

Historiska museet 2011.

Holm-Olsen, Inger Marie.  “Noen Gravfunn Fra Vestlandet Some Kaster Lys Over Vikingtidens Kvinnedrakt,” Viking Bind XXXIX, 1976.

Ingstad, Anne Stein.  "The Textiles in the Oseberg Ship". http://forest.gen.nz/Medieval/articles/Oseberg/textiles/TEXTILE.HTM

Ingstad, Anne Stein. “Two Women’s Graves with Textiles from Kaupang”

Jones, Heather Rose. "Archeological Sewing". 2004.  http://heatherrosejones.com/archaeologicalsewing/wool.html

Skre, Dagfinn.  Things from the Town: Artefacts and Inhabitants in Viking-Age Kaupang (Aarhus University Press), 2011.

Thunem, Hilde.  "Viking Women: Aprondress."  January 2011. http://urd.priv.no/viking/smokkr.html

“Universitetsmuseenes Fotoportal,” 2013.  http://www.unimus.no/foto/

Walton, P. "Textile Production at 16-22 Coppergate." The Archaeology of York Volume 17: The Small Finds.  1977.

Zubkova, E.S, Orinskaya, O.V, and Mikhailov, K.A. “Studies of the Textiles from the Excavation of Pskov in 2006,” NESAT X, 2009.

Zubkova, E.S, Orinskaya, O.V., and Likhachev, D.  “New Discovery of Viking Age Clothing from Pskon, Russia.”  (Notes and summary by Perer Beatson) http://members.ozemail.com.au/~chrisandpeter/sarafan/sarafan.htm

Walton Rogers, Penelope. “The Textiles,” Archaeology of York (28-29 High Ousegate), Web Series, No. 3.

As I stated some time ago, I recently started looking deeper at certain items that I see in proliferation in the reenacting community.  While many of these treatments are lovely they seem to have little evidence among archaeological finds.  An example of this is the herringbone stitch that we commonly see decorating every seam of a garment (you can see the results of that research HERE).  While on my mission to find use of that stitch, I came across several fantastic ways to embellish or strengthen garments that are, in fact, well documented to the Viking age.  This article is to share my discoveries in this area.

For this research project, the use of cord, braid or binding on garment edges, I chose to look at how often certain things we do know of occur in extant objects.  The criteria I used to weed through my data is as follows:

• Dated between 800-1050AD
• Location had to be Scandinavia or areas that had Viking settlements such as Dublin and York
• Use of textile material only (metal thread work and possaments are not included in this survey)
• The fragments have to be from a garment or that are assumed to be part of a garment by the professionals that surveyed them
• This survey does not include tablet weaving applied as trim at the edge of a garment

Types of edges included:

• Cord/braid applied to the edge, or near the edge, of a garment
• Binding
• Stitching

This survey is, of course, a work-in-progress.  I will be adding items to it as learn about them and as I have a chance to experiment with these finishing treatments myself.   If you have additions, comments or questions, please drop me a note so that I can look into the sources!

Cord or braid was applied at the edge of several extant items including caps from Dublin and smokkrs (aprondresses) from several sites.  In the article ““Two Women’s Graves with Textiles from Kaupang”, author Anne Stein Ingstad stated that she believed that a fragment of cloth from Kaupang that had brocaded tablet weaving at one edge and a cord sewn to the outside of that edge was likely the hem of the garment because of the applied cord would take the wear from use and thereby protect the more painstakingly wrought woven trim.

While I find it more likely that such an item was at the top of the garment (as is also evidenced at Birka), I still see value in cord used at any garment opening to protect the edges of the woven textile from wear.

One common factor in these finds is that the cords or braids are quite narrow in diameter or width.  Many of the cords or braids from Birka are noted for being constructed of very delicate or fine cords.  I believe that those used at the edges of garments would have been of a sturdy wool, and well spun, even if the yarn diameter is thin.  The exception to this is one of the Dublin caps that had string applied to the edge that was described as being wooly and produced from yarn that was not combed.  This edge would have been purely decorative, and it makes sense given that there would be no wear on the edge of a cap.

Only a few finds have comments on how the braid or cord was attached to the garment.  The pants from the Hedeby settlement, the caps from Dublin and the smokkr from Kaupang all employ an overcast stitch as a means of attachment.  One of the two Dublin caps was noted as using longer stitches (6mm) set a steep angle to create a more decorative effect.

Unfortunately many of the reports just list that woolen string or cord was applied to a garment, and they give little details on the actual type of cord it actually was.  A few, however, offer clues and those are listed below.  One thing to note is that all corded edgings made use of very narrow cord only (only a few millimeters) and not coarse, chunky yarns.

Braids

• Birka Grave 465 there was a braid with a triangular cross section that was 2-3mm wide.  Three additional graves list similar cord that is 3-4mm wide.
• At Hedeby there was a six strand braid of of 2-ply wool dyed red and yellow (three strands of each).  This was applied over a dart on a smokkr/aprondress, but because of its use on a garment I am including it here.  1-2mm wide.
• Birka Grave 466 lists a cord or braid with a triangular cross section.  It is listed as similar to other examples or possibly made with a fork (I assume this is a reference to lucet, but the author said it is impossible to tell how it was made).

Cords

• Birka Grave 973 had a string consisting of fine 2-ply (Z) yarns that were then cabled to the left (S).
• Birka Grave 954 had a cord 2 mm in average, consisting of several threads around which another yarn is wound.
• Kaupang Grave B lists wool string made from twining several woollen threads together.
• The settlement at Hedeby has fragments (19E) from pants that has a doubled folded hem with a thin decorative thread whipstitched to the very edge.  Twining is mentioned in the description so it might just be a plied yarn.
• While not evidenced in seams, there are cabled cords found in York and the ends of some of the scarves from Dublin are cabled (twining plied yarns together).
• At Sadanger there was a cord with several threads as a core wrapped around with another yarn.

Birka 465
This item is a 2cm strip of braid 2-3mm wide, having a triangular cross section.  This braid is referred to as type D3 in the Birka materials and was additionally found alongside tablet woven bands in several graves. 

Birka III, p128, p159, plate 33;  Kvinnodräkten i Birka, p60.  Photo from Birka III.

Birka 466
Fine woolen cord found on a wool tabby smokkr that was triangular in cross-section.  Geijer suggests that is was manufactured as the other braids, or perhaps was made with a fork (which I presume references a lucet).  The technique, however, cannot be determined with certainty.

Birka III, p128; Thunem, Smokkr; Photo from Historiska museet 2011.

Birka 511
Diamond twill smokkr and with cord considered more coarse than similar pieces from other graves.

Birka III, p160;  Kvinnodräkten i Birka, p123.  Images from Kvinnodräkten i Birka. 

Birka 563
Linen smokkr fragment with cord applied over the seam from the hem.  Hagg suggests that the cord was used to cover the hemming stitches (stitching on wool was often invisible, but the seams show more clearly on linen). 

Thunem, Smokkr; Kvinnodräkten i Birka, p125.  Images from Kvinnodräkten i Birka.

Birka 838
This smokkr fragment There is a tabby binding 1cm wide, turned to the outside and stitched down with stem stitch.  Fine wool cord is applied to the outer edge.  The stem stitches are in a straight line and are of twisted woolen yarn (Z). - The seam goes through both layers of fabric throughout and consists of unusually long (6-7 mm) stitches on the top and almost invisible stitches on the other side.

Birka III, p25, p109, p168; Kvinnodräkten i Birka.  Image from Kvinnodräkten i Birka; Photo from Birka III.

Birka 839, 860, 1004
1004 has a wool cord is sewn to the edge of a fine, dark wool tabby garment. The cord has triangular cross-section but is more coarse than other samples(3-4 mm) and is sewn to a edge that was folded and hemmed.  The same type of cord is found in graves 839 and 860.

Birka III, p128, p173, p168; Photo from Historiska museet 2011.

Birka 954
Very dark wool tabby smokkr (likely originally lined) with woolen cord.   The cord, approximately 2 mm, consists of several threads together with another yarn wound around them.

Birka III, p128; p171; Kvinnodräkten i Birka.  Image from Kvinnodräkten i Birka, photos from Birka III and Historiska museet 2011.

Birka 973
Diamond twill wool smokkr lined with tabby.  Cord edge is described as several quite delicate, 2-ply threads (Z), which were then twisted together (S).  This would be cabled cord.

Birka III, p128; p173; Images from Kvinnodräkten i Birka, photos form Birka III and Historiska museet 2011.

Birka 1084
Wool garment with string.

Thunem, Smokkr; Image from Kvinnodräkten i Birka.

Birka 1090
Blue and maroon striped wool tabby (5mm stripes) has two cords (both the same color) that might have been applied to the garment or that might have been part of a now missing tablet woven band.

Birka III, p36; Thunem, Smokkr; Image from Kvinnodräkten i Birka.

Dublin
Two of the wool caps found at Dublin exhibit cord sewn to the edge.  DHC30 is crafted from dark reddish brown tabby with an edging cord that is made of 6 Z spun strands that are S plied and then plaited.  The cord is 3mm diameter and is sewn on with Z spun, 2 ply (S) Black wool thread, approx 1mm wide using 4 stiches per centimeter.  Yarn is wooly and not combed.

DHC33 is a dark brown wool cap with edging dark brown edging cord, 5mm wide (same color as cap).  6 strands, 1mm each with each strand being Z spun, S plied (2ply) and then Z cabled.  It is whipstitched onto hem edge with long slanting stitches (to make it more decorative).  Stitches are 6mm in length, and there are 3 stitches every centimeter.

An additional fragment (DHC51) from Dublin has a cord inserted into a hem. The cord is 2mm wide, Z spun, 2 ply (Z), S cabled and then Z corded.

Heckett, p57.

Hedeby Settlement 
Fragment 19E is a fine wool tabby, likely originally blue or green.  This is believed to be from pants.  It has a double fold hem and with a cord attached with a whipstitch.

Photos and reference from Seidlung, p35, p108.

Hedeby Harbor
From the harbor there is a fragment of a brown wool tabby smokkr.  The applied treatment on this garment is not on the edge, but rather is sitting atop the darts that sit at the waist.  I include it here because there are decent descriptions of the braid available and it might be also suitable as an edge treatment.

The braid is made of made of six 2ply (Z spun, S ply) threads, three red and three yellow. interpret the text as describing a 6-way plait in which each thread consists of two z-spun plies which have been twisted together in s-form. The braid is only 1-2mm wide.

Instructions on how to craft a similar braid can be found here:  http://blog.eibeck.de/2014/plait-from-the-hedeby-apron-dress-fragment.html

Photos and reference from Hafen, p33-39.

Kaupang
Grave C 27997 B has a smokkr with a tablet woven band is sewn to edge of fabric with.  At the top of the edge of the band there is a firm, evenly twisted wool cord made from twining several S twisted threads together.  It is sewn on with an overcast stitch.

Thunem, Smokkr; Two Women’s Graves with Textiles from Kaupang.  Image from Two Women’s Graves with Textiles from Kaupang.

Køstrup
This find has a pleated smokkr that is accompanied by a tablet woven band with two woollen strings along each side of the band.  Unfortunately, they are uncertain as to how the cords, dress and band were attached (aside from a few whip stitches that attached the cords to the loop of the dress).

Hilde, Smokkr

Sadanger (Western Norway) Grave B 10720
This grave held remnants of a possible wool smokkr in a broken diamond twill.  There was a braided cord that is the to that found in Grave 838 in Birka. 

Birka III, p128; photo from ”Noen Gravfunn Fra Vestlandet Some Kaster Lys Over Vikingtidens Kvinnedrak”

Sadanger (Western Norway) Grave B 10722
This is a fragment of diamond twill that was edged with a cord made by twining a string around a core made from several strings. 

Thunem, Smokkr.  Photo from ”Noen Gravfunn Fra Vestlandet Some Kaster Lys Over Vikingtidens Kvinnedrak”

Christensen, Arne Emil and Nockert, Margareta. Osebergfunnet: bind iv, Tekstilene (Universitetet i Oslo), 2006.

Geijer, Agnes.  Birka III, Die Textilefunde aus Den Grabern.  Uppsala,1938.

Hägg, Inga.  Die Textilefunde aus dem Hafen von Haithabu (Karl Wachlotz Verlag). 1984.

Hägg, Inga.  Die Textilefunde aus der Siedlung und us den Gräbern von Haithabu (Karl Wachlotz Verlag). 1991.

Heckett, Elizabeth Wincott.  Viking Age Headcoverings from Dublin (Royal Irish Academy), 2003.

Historiska museet 2011.

Holm-Olsen, Inger Marie.  “Noen Gravfunn Fra Vestlandet Some Kaster Lys Over Vikingtidens Kvinnedrakt,” Viking Bind XXXIX, 1976.

Ingstad, Anne Stein.  "The Textiles in the Oseberg Ship". http://forest.gen.nz/Medieval/articles/Oseberg/textiles/TEXTILE.HTM

Ingstad, Anne Stein. “Two Women’s Graves with Textiles from Kaupang”

Jones, Heather Rose. "Archeological Sewing". 2004.  http://heatherrosejones.com/archaeologicalsewing/wool.html

Skre, Dagfinn.  Things from the Town: Artefacts and Inhabitants in Viking-Age Kaupang (Aarhus University Press), 2011.

Thunem, Hilde.  "Viking Women: Aprondress."  January 2011. http://urd.priv.no/viking/smokkr.html

“Universitetsmuseenes Fotoportal,” 2013.  http://www.unimus.no/foto/

Walton, P. "Textile Production at 16-22 Coppergate." The Archaeology of York Volume 17: The Small Finds.  1977.

Zubkova, E.S, Orinskaya, O.V, and Mikhailov, K.A. “Studies of the Textiles from the Excavation of Pskov in 2006,” NESAT X, 2009.

Zubkova, E.S, Orinskaya, O.V., and Likhachev, D.  “New Discovery of Viking Age Clothing from Pskon, Russia.”  (Notes and summary by Perer Beatson) http://members.ozemail.com.au/~chrisandpeter/sarafan/sarafan.htm

Walton Rogers, Penelope. “The Textiles,” Archaeology of York (28-29 High Ousegate), Web Series, No. 3.

(The earlier segments of this article can be found here:  http://awanderingelf.weebly.com/blog-my-journey/viking-embellishment-and-embroidery-part-2  and here http://awanderingelf.weebly.com/blog-my-journey/viking-embellishment-and-embroidery-part-1 )

Embroidery, while evidenced, was not common, and often what we have is considered to be imported goods.

First, let me make a comment about how I differentiate types of embroidery that are often discussed among reenactors.  Often I see someone come onto a forum and ask about Viking embroidery.  Others quite often launch into long dissertations about how Vikings did not do embroidery.  What the poster sometimes means, however, is often not figurative, large-scale embroidery, but rather the seam embellishments that are frequently employed by reenactors.  For the purpose of this post I am going to categorize those three types differently as “seam embellishments”, "functional stitches" and “embroidery”.

Seam embellishment, while (in my opinion) over done by reenactors (myself included), is at least plausible and in evidence in several places.  The Hedeby Harbor aprondress fragment had a braid applied over a dart.  There is also mention of embroidery covering a seam in one of the Oseberg scraps and some of the apron dresses from Birka had narrow cording sewn to the top edge of the garment.

Functional stitches, on the other hand, are exactly what they sound like.  They are stitches that serve a purpose (to create a seam or to hold open the seam allowance) but because part of the stitch rests on the surface of the cloth, it can be quite attractive when stitched in a different color of thread. (Even something as simple as unbleached linen thread against a dark blue dyed linen garment can be striking in its simplicity.)

(Note 9/22/15: I was rereading Hilde Thunem's excellent paper on aprondresses and am really thinking hard about a remark the author made "Inga Hägg comments that the hemming stitches would usually be invisible on wool, but would show up clearly on linen. She believes that the reason that the band has been placed lower on the linen smokkr could be to cover the stitches."  I need to go back and look at Hägg's comments and some other things as well.  I want to chart out the extant seams from various finds and see what I can figure out about the visibility of the stitching and the threads used.  It could well be that they Viking era Norse preferred a very clean look, with little in the way at all of stitches showing.)

Ideas for using seam embellishment and functional stitches to create a more accurate impression:

• Dot not cover every inch of a garment with decorated seams.
• Fine cord or braided string as an edging has ample evidence (on apron dresses a string, especially if it were linen or silk, at the top might serve a functional purpose in helping the top of the garment to not stretch as much with wear).
• If the stitch serves a functional purpose, it actually makes more sense in use (example a running or overcast stitch on the surface that actually is part of a hem).  There is one example from the Hedeby Settlement (S 27) that uses buttonhole stitch to join two textiles.  Note though, that that was only one of several types of stitches used on that garment. (S 27 information added 9/30/15)
• Keep stitches narrow and compact, there is no evidence of an inch wide herringbone stitch anywhere.
• If you must add stitching, employ stitches that were used in period – examples of some stitches are running stitch, stem stitch, split stitch, herringbone, osenstitch (though most of the the extant examples of this are metalwork).  Note here that while we as reenactors love herringbone, evidence for its use in period is actually quite limited.  It was used on a pouch from York and on the INSIDE of a hem at Hedeby.  A stitch similar to herringbone was used on the Mammen cushion cover (decorative item rather than a garment) and on the collar of the Skjoldehamn tunic (which may or may not even be Viking), but it was not the sprawling herringbone seen in the reenactment community.  For a deeper look at Herringbone see my post HERE.

And now on to the controversial topic of larger, decorative embroidery. 

The examples that we have are often are thought to have been Saxon, Rus or Byzantine imports (the first is thought to be the case with the larger Oseberg pieces in particular).  It is very important to understand that some of these were also considered to likely be from decorative goods, rather than garments.  This proves that the technique of heavily filling an area with stitching existed at the time, it does not at all indicate that this was applied to garments in period.  Also worthy of note is that all of these items were very, very high status.

Mistress Þóra Sharptooth has a good article about extant embroidery here:  http://www.cs.vassar.edu/~capriest/vikembroid.html