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).
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).
|
|
I added a sticky note to these entries in my copy of Grömer's book (which is still one of the BEST textile catalogs I have ever come across and I highly recommend it to those interested in this time period). When I have my printer hooked up later I will print the article and just fold it up and slip it in there as well so that I do not have to go looking for the information later. Research is definitely an every changing science, and we need to be willing to adapt as the field does. While it can be frustrating sometimes to have to revise your earlier projects (ugh... all that herringbone stitching on which I wasted countless hours for my Viking kit!!!), it can also be incredibly exciting as we see more and more pieces of the puzzle falling into place. |
RSS Feed