Saturday, November 23, 2019

Experimental Archaeology and Textile Studies: Part 1

This post is part of a series and I'm breaking it into sections for easier reading. If you have questions about a specific aspect, it'll also be easier to spot the information you want to know more about in a comment.

First, there are some important differences between the way I do experiments for Expertly Dyed and the way I must do experiments in academia. I'll get into the reasons why in a later episode and will post a video/blog explaining those differences specifically.

For now, I wanted to share Phase 1 of a two phase experiment I conducted during late August and part of September this year. Normally when I setup an experiment for Expertly Dyed, I apply a lot of craft knowledge and intuition and do a fair amount of 'let's see if this works'. I think many fellow crafters (of any sort, not just those who like textiles) will agree that this is often a legitimate way of exploring a craft. In fact, it is also a way that we explore the world as infants. We do this casually as we create recipes while standing at the stove and when we reach for the garlic granules, on a whim, we might substitute onion granules to see what that's like. We do these things naturally and implicitly and rarely do we ever consider our actions in a meta sort of way. 

Experimental archaeology in academia is not done this way. It has to be very well researched and there needs to be a lot of setup before you begin, or else you wind up digging yourself into a hole without a ladder and an imminent flood quickly approaches. Variables must be isolated and controlled so you can ensure that you can investigate the relationship between your independent and dependent variables. So, in my Phase 1, I produced a very skinny strip of linen fabric using heavy loomweights on my supervisor's warp-weighted loom. It is seemingly a silly step from a crafter's perspective because it seems completely irrelevant to your overarching goal, which is simply to weave something. I know that weavers will do tests to check their setup before they embark on a large project, just the same as a knitter will check their gauge before knitting a pattern that relies on fit. 

However, the nature of my experiments (which I will describe in a continuation of this series) required that I test my experiment parameters before I actually began the experiment. It was designed to be overly cautious because I did not have the luxury of time and I had my finances to consider as part of the experimental design. I used the case study sites that I’m researching as part of my PhD, which are Danebury and the Environs Sites. I selected these sites because they were all excavated by the same principle investigator (Barry Cunliffe) and well archived, and they could give me a sense of the ways textile tools were used and treated upon deposition within a small bounded landscape.

Here are a few considerations that I made for the initial design:

1.     I wanted to use the heavier loomweights from my dataset, which hovered around the 2000g mark. I am not aware of any published experiments where loomweights of this magnitude are used; many non-textile scholars have questioned whether such heavy loomweights could perform as such. Further, I opted to use a clay weight as my model since I had access to air dry clay, a suitable proxy, rather than chalk (which is the predominant material use for Danebury loomweights). I modelled the shape to be triangular, in part because this shape has been contested as whether it was suitable as a loomweight or as oven architecture. To be brief, clay triangular weights at the Danebury sites are sometimes found associated with collapsed ovens, leading to the contestation that they were originally used as loomweights. In reality, these objects (and other textile tools) are found in a variety of contexts so it isn't a very clear distinction. A previous proof-of-concept experiment I conducted at the start of 2018 suggested their utility on the warp-weighted loom. Taking this idea further, I reasoned that it would be appropriate to use this shape on the loom to determine its suitability for this function.
2.     As quick as it may be to spin yarn with a wheel, it is not as fast to spin with a spindle—at least for me. Because spinning wheels are a more modern invention, I had to use more simple methods. Instead of spinning a thousand yards or more of yarn with a spindle, I opted to use another proxy. My lovely Golding ring spindle is approximately the same size, shape, and mass as a Danebury spindle whorl. Then came the question of material choice. I settled on flax for two reasons: 1) it hasn’t been investigated as a fiber source for Iron Age Britain—because wool is often the only fiber sufficiently discussed for textile use during this period—and was likely still important in select cases during the Iron Age; and 2) it can tolerate approximately double the amount of tension that wool can support before breaking—this is important if I’m investigating new territory with heavy loomweights. So I spent about 15 hours spinning flax with my proxy spindle. I found a comparable unbleached, wet spun flax yarn of similar gauge online and used that as my test yarn.
3.     It is uncertain whether a long-handled comb was used during the process of weaving, and we have next-to-no evidence of a weaving sword during this time. However, any weaver will tell you that you need some way of packing the weft. For my Stage 1, I only used a weaving sword to pack the weft, but I did commission an antler comb that was modeled from a Danebury example for the Stage 2 experiment.
4.     Needles, again, are a complicated matter. Needles can be used for a variety of tasks and there is no clear evidence of their use at Danebury for textile production. Some look like they would be great for sewing or darning, while others are certainly not. I did use a steel needle that was of a similar length and width (a typical darning needle) to attach the warp threads to the loom and for experimenting with hemming techniques.

Here is one of the air dried clay loomweights that I modeled from an Iron Age equivalent.

With that, I had my basic setup for the Stage 1 part of my experiment. I am gliding over some of the reasons I chose what I did and why I think my decisions are valid for the point of my experiment, which is this: Can flax yarns spun with Danebury spindles be tensioned with heavy loomweights without breaking?

Continued in Part 2!

2 comments:

  1. Very interesting. Is the loom a vertical standing loom? Is this why you use a needle to warp the loom?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, it was a vertical standing loom. It is often placed at an angle to the wall which forms a natural shed. I was using an archaeologically inaccurate loom but it was modeled from existing imagery. There are probably other methods of attaching the warp threads, but only one obvious method in my case.

    ReplyDelete