Generally when we talk about nalbinding from the Southwest United States, we are talking about socks or shoe-socks or possibly leggings. This week’s Nalbound Object of the Week is unusual in that it is a cap. When the excavations were published in 1919, it was the only textile cap to have been found in the Southwest.
Description: A natural colored cap worked from the center down.
Dated to: No date provided, but the Cliff-dweller culture is believed to come after the Basket-maker culture. Estimate Pueblo III (1150–1350).
Find location: Cliffhouse 22 / Ruin 2 in Sayodneechee Canyon (“Where the red rocks run under” in Navajo)3
“At g, just outside one of the rooms and beneath 8 inches of closely packed rubbish, lay a cap of yucca yarn.”4
Material: Sometimes referred to as made of yucca cord5 (narrow leaf yucca), but there is also a mention that the cap is likely apocynum (Dogbane/Indian Hemp) fiber6
Stitch(es) used: Z-crossed Simple Looping7 called coiled work without foundation8 in the excavation report. “Near the edge there are 9 coils and 5 loops to the inch, the stitches nearer the top are deeper and wider spaced.”9
Some sources in which more information can be found:
Kidder, Alfred Vincent, and Samuel J. Guernsey. Archeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Smithsonian institution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 65. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1919. https://repository.si.edu/items/14df4b65-e141-4ea1-b541-3b2ac24e7fdf Accessed 13 November 2025.
Photographs (if permissions allow): There is a nice color photo of the cap on the Peabody Museum’s site.
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
Kidder, Alfred Vincent, and Samuel J. Guernsey. Archeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Smithsonian institution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 65. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1919. https://repository.si.edu/items/14df4b65-e141-4ea1-b541-3b2ac24e7fdf pg. 94 ↩︎
Kidder, Alfred Vincent, and Samuel J. Guernsey. Archeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Smithsonian institution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 65. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1919. https://repository.si.edu/items/14df4b65-e141-4ea1-b541-3b2ac24e7fdf pg. 19 ↩︎
As determined by Anne Marie Decker based on the diagram in Kidder & Guernsey’s explorations and examination of the picture provided. ↩︎
Kidder, Alfred Vincent, and Samuel J. Guernsey. Archeological Explorations in Northeastern Arizona. Smithsonian institution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 65. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1919. https://repository.si.edu/items/14df4b65-e141-4ea1-b541-3b2ac24e7fdf pg. 100 ↩︎
This week’s Nalbound Object of the Week is a beautiful cross-knit looping example. A border of warriors and their sacrifice, originally intended to be attached to a piece of fabric. If you go to the The Art Institute of Chicago’s website there is a very good zoom function and some close-ups showing the underlying support worked in Simple Looping.
Nazca. Warrior Fragments, 100 BCE-200 CE. The Art Institute of Chicago® CC0 Public Domain
Object: Border of warriors
Description: A border of warriors and a sacrifice. The figures are about 2.5 inches tall. More details on The Art Institute of Chicago’s website.
Some sources in which more information can be found:
Sawyer, Alan R. Early Nasca Needlework. London: Laurence King Publishing, 1997. pg. 148, color fig. 117.
Photographs (if permissions allow):
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
For this week’s Nalbound Object of the Week, I’m delighted to be able to bring you evidence of the current tradition of nalbinding in Northern Ghana. I’d had hints that the technique might be found in West Africa, but nothing Ghanaian specific. Thus, imagine my excitement when I came across an example in the Accra Arts Center. I was initially concerned it might be an import, but seeing several others in Cape Coast and with some additional information obtained during bargaining, we’ve confirmed they are a product of Northern Ghana.
Object: Ghanaian bag with coiled base
Description: A cross-body bag with a solid bottom. All the versions I saw were various stripes of natural color, deep purple, and dark blue. This one had some purple going around the mouth and up the strap.
Dated to: 2024. Collected on 21 October, 2024 in the Accra Art Center
Find location: Accra Arts Center, in a stall selling goods from Northern Ghana. The sellers spoke Degaare, which indicates they are of the Dagaaba/Dagaati people. Additional examples were also spotted in a market stall in Cape Coast.
Material: a plant fiber, possibly jute, in natural, purple, and deep blue. The purple is water soluble and can transfer.
Stitch(es) used: Main body is Z-crossed Simple Looping, F1 O. There’s a bit of Cross-knit Looping at the center base and Coiling: Z-crossed Simple Looping around a bundle of carried sticks. Further examination is needed for the stitch around the mouth. (Stitch determinations by Anne Marie Decker)
Inventory number: N/A
Current location: Anne Marie Decker’s personal collection
Photographs:
View of the stripes and connections. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerCloseup of the base showing the carried stiffener material. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerThe base of the bag is stiffened. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerAdditional details of the bag in Anne Marie Decker’s collection. Another bag seen in Cape Coast. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerMore bags seen in Cape Coast. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerThe handles of the bags in Cape Coast. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerThe cross-knit looping start before the stiffened section. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerMouth and handle attachment. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerDetails of the four similar bags seen in a market stall in Cape Coast.
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests. They also support explorations to find nalbinding around the world.
After a brief hiatus due to surgery, I bring you another Nalbound Object of the Week. This artifact was mentioned as an aside in an article about Pierre de Courpalay’s gloves (which will be a later post) and for the longest time I could find no more information about it other than it was supposedly an early 14th century green silk reliquary pouch from Namur, Belgium worked in space patterned Simple Looping with a carried thread. There was a stitch diagram, but no picture. My friend Ann Moreau took up the quest to track down more information and was able to provide me with a photograph and a couple of very interesting sources: a master’s thesis and the conservation report.
Photo credit: Bazzo, Stéphane, IRPA CC BY 4.0 KIK-IRPA, Brussels (Belgium), cliché X142949
Object: Namur Reliquary Purse
Description: The purse measures approximately 6.5 inches by 6.3 inches (16.5 x 16cm) not inclusive of the tassels or ties.1 The main body is worked in a pattern of diamonds enclosing four smaller diamonds that is regular on the face, but shows an error in the pattern at the top of the reverse turning it into chevrons.2 There’s a strip of plain green on each side and a green eyelet band at the opening.
The pictures show that the main body of the purse was not worked in the round. Had it been worked around the purse, the slits in the space patterned Simple Looping would have been horizontal like those seen making eyelets on the green eyelet band. However, the slits in the main body are vertical, indicating that the fabric orientation has the base row along the right side of the face (left side of the reverse) and the fabric was built up to the left side. There is no noticeable seam showing at the bottom. All of which may indicate that the face and reverse were worked as one rectangle, sewn up the sides, and then the eyelet band worked around the opening.
The relic purse was classified as a Treasure by the Commission consultative du Patrimoine culturel mobilier [Consultative Commission for Movable Cultural Heritage] on October 4, 2021.3
Dated to: radiocarbon dated to ca 1260-1390 CE4 (77.4% certainty between 1260 and 1310)5
Find location: prieuré de Hastière [Priory of Hastière], Belgium.6 Donated in 1885 by M. Perpète Sarton and recorded as register number 16166 along with another purse.7
Material: Silk. The tassels include gilded silver metallic threads.8 “The beige and pink threads of the lining are colored with safflower and a dye containing traces of flavonoids, the green thread of the fringes with woad or indigo, and the beige thread of the boucle network with red wood.”9
Stitch(es) used: le réseau bouclé simple10 The opening is worked horizontally in Z-crossed Simple Looping, F1 O, with a carried thread leaving holes for the drawstring. The main body is worked vertically, also in Z-crossed Simple Looping, F1 O, with a carried thread worked with space patterning to make the diamond/chevron pattern of holes. (Stitch determination verified via photograph by Anne Marie Decker)
Inventory number: 229F
Current location: Owned by the Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN). Exhibited in the Musée Provincial des Arts Anciens Namurois (TreM.a).11
Some sources in which more information can be found:
Damen, Emma, Griet Kockelkoren, Judith Goris, Ina Vanden Berghe, Marina Van Bos, and Mathieu Boudin. “Étude technico-matérielle et traitement de conservation, préservation et présentation de 7 bourses à reliques de la Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN).” Report on IRPS dossier 2017.13760 dated 9 September 2021.
De Ceuninck, Emmeline. “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1 et 2.”Master en Histoire de l’Art et Archéologie Mémoire [Master’s thesis], Université Libre de Bruxelles, Année académique 2022-2023.
Desrosiers, Sophie, Patricia Dal-Pra, and Isabelle Bédat. “On medieval pontifical gloves and glove medallions and wristbands found in France,” In [Archäologische Textilfunde/Archaeological Textiles] NESAT IX. ed. Antoinette Rast-Eicher and Renata Windler, p. 159-165. Ennenda: Archeo Tex, 2007. ISBN 978-3-033-01267-7.
Gagneux-Granade, Marguerite. L’Homme et les Mailles: histoire critique des mailles textiles : filets, réseaux, tricot, crochet. Bordeaux: Éditions INsensées, 2016. ISBN 978-2-9558095-0-1.
Photographs:
Cropped close up of eyelet band and body. Photo credit: Bazzo, Stéphane, IRPA CC BY 4.0 KIK-IRPA, Brussels (Belgium), cliché X142949Cropped to show chevron pattern on reverse top. Photo credit: Bazzo, Stéphane, IRPA CC BY 4.0 KIK-IRPA, Brussels (Belgium), cliché X142950Photo credit: Bazzo, Stéphane, IRPA CC BY 4.0 KIK-IRPA, Brussels (Belgium), cliché X142950
Desrosiers’ “On medieval pontifical gloves and glove medallions and wristbands found in France” has a diagram of the stitches making the pattern of a portion of the diamond in Fig. 2b on page 160. The diagram is flawed as it shows a whip stitch instead of the Z-crossed Simple Looping. It is showing a B1 O which makes a whip stitch instead of the F1 O that makes Z-crossed Simple Looping. The loops have also been regularized to the top which does not match the direction of work.
De Ceuninck’s “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 2.” includes some lovely photos and schematics of the purse in Figs. 11, 12, 80 & Schéma 33, 34, 35, 36, 37.
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
Emmeline De Ceuninck,”Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 2.” (Master en Histoire de l’Art et Archéologie Mémoire [Master’s thesis], Université Libre de Bruxelles, Année académique 2022-2023), pg. 1. and Damen, Emma, et al. “Étude technico-matérielle et traitement de conservation, préservation et présentation de 7 bourses à reliques de la Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN).” Report on IRPS dossier 2017.13760 dated 9 September 2021. Pg. 10. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 76. and Damen, Emma, et al. “Étude technico-matérielle et traitement de conservation, préservation et présentation de 7 bourses à reliques de la Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN).” Report on IRPS dossier 2017.13760 dated 9 September 2021. Pg. 10. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 2,” pg. 108. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 74. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 28. See also page 79. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 28. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 76. ↩︎
Translated from De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 74. See also pages 78-79. ↩︎
De Ceuninck, “Étude historique, artistique et technologique de sept bourses conservées à la Société archéologique de Namur (SAN) et récemment restaurées à l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique (IRPA). Volume 1,” pg. 75. and Damen, Emma, et al. “Étude technico-matérielle et traitement de conservation, préservation et présentation de 7 bourses à reliques de la Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN).” Report on IRPS dossier 2017.13760 dated 9 September 2021. Pg. 10. ↩︎
Damen, Emma, et al. “Étude technico-matérielle et traitement de conservation, préservation et présentation de 7 bourses à reliques de la Société Archéologique de Namur (SAN).” Report on IRPS dossier 2017.13760 dated 9 September 2021. Pg. 3. ↩︎
For the Nalbound Object of the Week, we head to Australia where there is a strong nalbinding tradition amongst the aboriginal peoples. Most commonly we see this in their string bags. This bag was collected in 1896 and is now in the Ethnographic collections of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.
Description: A rectangular bag with alternating light and darker brown stripes. Not quite 11 1/2 inches tall and 6 1/2 inches wide (29 x 16.5 cm)1 The body of the bag and string around the mouth are both Z twist. The carrying string is S-twist.
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
One of the best things about researching any topic is that continued research will always bring further insights; be that greater clarity on a particular detail, proof of a particular theory, proof that a particular hypothesis was wrong, correcting a technique misidentification, new design details, new stitches, new dating, and more artifacts to examine. Hypotheses get developed and sometimes they are supported and possibly proven. Sometimes they are disproved and new hypotheses are born.
Add to that, things that are true of our modern esthetics in the craft may prove to be constant throughout the historical record, or they may prove to be recent inventions. Care should always be taken to ensure that we are not making assumptions, even based on our prior knowledge, and allowing our biases to hide the new data. Insights may come from the most unexpected sources and even experts can be proven wrong. I have had thousands of theories that have been made or dashed with arrival of new data. It’s exciting!
I’ve discussed several examples of this process on this blog previously,1 but today, I’d like to add a few additional examples.
Direction of work:
Nalbinding is predominately worked left to right, regardless of whether the work is dependent from the working row or hung above. Both of which leave telltale, but different, signs in the resultant fabric. Obviously, there are exceptions: lefthanded people often work in the opposite direction, and of course, there is the option of an esthetic choice to work in the non-dominant direction for a variety of reasons; including opposing spirals or flat work for example.
So the question becomes, how often do we see nalbinding worked in the non-dominant direction, when, where, and can we tell why? This is not an easy question to answer as so little research published has included this important detail about the artifacts.
Several of the artifacts that initially appeared to be worked in the non-dominant direction have turned out to be more likely found with the technical back to the outside. For example the Egyptian sock now in the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh.2 This could be accomplished by working in the non-dominant direction, but is more likely simply a case of the creator or wearer deciding that they preferred the texture of the technical back to the outside. In the case of the sock in Edinburgh, it seems a common trait of socks made in that particular stitch. In the case of the pair of socks from Sudan,3 only one is “inside out.” This could be a case of the wearer not noticing, the person dressing the dead not noticing, or some cultural reason of which I am not aware.
In both cases, and in fact in all of the 115 or so known Egyptian socks, the socks are worked from the toe up to the ankle. The hats from the tip down. Up until very recently, all of the pre-17th century handcoverings I’ve examined have been worked from the tip of the fingers to the wrist. And yet, last year I had the opportunity to examine a beautiful glove from medieval Kalmar that surprised me in several ways. One was the particular stitch used as I had never seen its like before. And the other, was that it was clearly worked from the wrist towards the fingers. More research as to the direction of work of thumbs (and fingers on gloves), especially in relation to the associated handcovering, is desperately needed.
Wrist Bumps:
17th century mitten with a tar stain from Copenhagen . National Museum of Denmark Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerCloseup of the wrist bump on the 17th century mitten from Copenhagen. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker
I once had a idea that wrists that showed a prominent bump in the spiral might have been started at the wrist. Examinations of artifacts has consistently proven me wrong so far on that hypothesis. It was my modern esthetics that had given the the incorrect impression that the maker would always smooth out the final spiral.
Now, we do have examples where the final spiral ending is rather smooth. The Oslo mitten gives the appearance of a smooth ending. However, looking at the rows above it, one can see that it has been pulled and distorted such that the result is the edge currently looks like it was smoothly finished, but in fact it was a rather short transition that now significantly distorts the row to which it connects.
Oslo Mitten C28155 on display at the Historical Museum in Oslo Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerDetail of the Oslo Mitten C28155 showing the short transition of the final row. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker
Lace:
Another example. In 2004, I was approached by someone with a lace shawl they had that they wanted to know if it could be nalbound or not. The pictures they sent showed that an individual row had a structure we know can be produced by a particular nalbinding stitch, but the connections between rows were unclear, so we were missing important secondary construction details that can be vital to understand which particular technique produced the particular structure fabric.
I allowed as how it was possible that it might be nalbound, but that if it was that brought up many additional questions that would have to be answered. Such as, how would the connections be made in such an openwork structure without falling apart? In 2005, another was brought to my attention. My friend, Virginia Miller, became quite interested in the lace shawls and set about trying to find their source.
Around this time, many other examples of this particular type of shawl were apparently being examined at a variety of locations. Others were recognizing the structure of the chain as being a possible nalbound structure, but the specifics of the secondary constructions details that would reveal their true construction technique would not be recognized until the details of a related structural cross-over were discussed.4 These details show that there are a significant number of miss-identified examples in museums around the world.
Crocheted chain lace shawl from Turkey gifted to me by Virginia Miller in 2012. Photo credit: Anne Marie DeckerDetail of the chain lace shawl from Turkey showing the crocheted connection. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker
Virginia, having tracked down the origin of at least some of the shawls, kindly managed to procure one for me. Being able to examine one in detail up close has led to an understanding that allows me to understand details that while I had seen them before, had not revealed their relevance. Now, given sufficiently clear photos, it is easy to determine that these shawls are a form of crocheted chain lace. Rather similar in structure to the earliest forms of crochet that been identified.5
Another example of this structure’s construction technique being misidentified is a lovely pair of baby booties in the V&A Collection. https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O136095/pair-of-bootees-unknown/ The Simple Looping in cream on the ball at the top of the tassel at the ankles is a form of nalbinding (and also a form of needlelace), but the green lace are these open worked crocheted chains. Once again, it’s the connections between the chains that reveal the technique used.
Hypotheses come and go, but that is in many ways the fun part of research. We are always learning new things. Theories become proven. Hypotheses are dashed and formed again. All of which leads to a better understanding of the entire corpus of both nalbound textiles and related looped textiles, their origins, transmission, development, traditional uses, and influences on the modern craft.
Speaking of exciting new opportunities and artifacts to examine, I have recently learned of new excavated socks to add to the corpus of nalbinding that have never been examined before. Unfortunately, my travel budget to go see them is rather dry. If you’ve enjoyed my research and would like to be a part of my support team, I sincerely appreciate any assistance you are willing to send my way. You can use the one time donation link in the menu or become a monthly Patron. Patrons on Patreon receive priority requests, early access previews, and occasional extra details.
The Nalbound Object of the Week this week takes us back to Peru with another Simple Looping cap. However, this one is topped with feathers! With stripes reminiscent of the Omani Sand Socks and feathers like those seen on hats from Cameroon, this 10th-15th century CE Peruvian hat reminds me of both the similarities and differences of nalbinding around the world.
Peruvian Feathered Cap, Accession number 1994.35.136 Photo credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Public Domain
Object: Feathered Cap
Description: A stunning cap worked from the top in alternating three rows of cream camelid yarn with three rows of dark brown yarn. Brown feathers have been attached to the top; splaying in a bouquet like fashion.
Peruvian Feathered Cap, Accession number 1994.35.136 Photo credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Public DomainPeruvian Feathered Cap, Accession number 1994.35.136 Photo credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Public Domain
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
I’m excited to announce that the most recent issue of Hemslöjd contains the article, Strumpforskning [Stocking research] (Swedish language only), where I was interviewed about my theoretical reconstruction of the Dura-Europos patterned sock fragment. It is mentioned in the list on the cover as Sockan från romarriket [The Sock from the Roman Empire]. This issue is being mailed out to existing subscribers this week and should hit the shelves soon.
Hemslöjd is Sweden’s largest magazine about crafts, folk art, and handwork. While it is too late to get a subscription for a mailed paper copy to include this issue, there is a digital subscription option.
If you’ve enjoyed my research and would like to be a part of my support team, I sincerely appreciate any assistance you are willing to send my way. You can use the one time donation link in the menu or become a monthly Patron. Patrons on Patreon receive priority requests, early access previews, and occasional extra details.
This week’s Nalbound Object of the Week is another Incan wig Cap from Peru. Similar to the cap posted in late July, this is a stunning example with a beautiful set of braid wrapped ends that together make a zigzag pattern.
Cap Woven with Human Hair, 1983.491.2 Photo credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Public Domain
Object: Inca Wig Cap with zigzag braid wraps
Description: A cream colored cap with a broad brown stripe around the middle from which many brown human hair braids are hung. The braid ends are wrapped tightly in brightly colored wraps that form a zigzag pattern across the braids. This cap with braids is 28 inches long.1
A black and white photo of the Cap Woven with Human Hair, 1983.491.2, laid out flat. Photo credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Public Domain
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
In 2019, my mother and I were able to travel to Leicester for a chance to see this week’s Nalbound Object of the Week; a small child’s sock from 3rd-5th century CE Antinoë/Antinoupolis. It was one of nearly a dozen found during John de Monins Johnson‘s excavations for the Egypt Exploration Fund1 in the 1913-14 season.
Leicester sock L.A63.1914.0.0 Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker 2019
Object: Leicester child’s sock
Description: Small child’s left split toed sock in many colors: green, red, purple, yellow, and blue. Comparables can be seen in my Charting the Nalbinding of the Nile presentation from 2019. At 9:39 in the recording linked in https://nalbound.com/2019/04/06/charting-the-nalbinding-of-the-nile /
Note: At the time of the excavations, the socks were presumed to be knitted as the differences between the crossed knitting and cross-knit nalbinding techniques had not yet been described.
Dated to: 300-500 CE2 (possibly earlier around the 3rd-4th centuries based on the radiocarbon dating of other socks found during the same excavation3)
Find location: Excavated from a rubbish pit at Sheikh Abada (ancient Antinoopolis), Egypt4
Leicester Museum and Art Gallery does not have an online catalog. The sock is noted in their Collections Development Policy 2019-2024, section 3.5.2. “Although intended to be a representative selection, it includes at least one rarity, a Coptic knitted sock from Antinoe, the only example in this country outside of London.” This unfortunately reflects out of date information; the technique having been recognized as nalbinding, not knitting, in the last quarter of the last century and several examples from the same excavation are located in Britain, but outside of London. This does not, however, in any way negate its rarity and importance.
Some sources in which more information can be found:
Köstner, Barbara. “Roman and Late Roman nalbinding socks from Egypt: Bringing ‘Egyptian fashion’ to the North” in Excavating, analysing, reconstructing Textiles of the 1st millennium AD from Egypt and neighbouring countries: Proceeding of the 9th conference of the research group ‘Textiles from the Nile Valley’ Antwerp, 27-29 November 2015, edited by Antoine De Moor, Cäcilia Fluck, and Petra Linscheid. Tielt, Belgium: Lannoo Publishers, 2017. ISBN 978 94 014 4399 9.
Pritchard, Frances. “A survey of textiles in the UK from the 1913-14 Egypt Exploration Fund season at Antinoupolis” in Drawing the Threads Together: Textiles and Footwear of the 1st Millenium AD from Egypt. Proceedings of the 7th Meeting of the Study Group ‘Textiles from the Nile Valley”, Antwerp, 7-9 October 2011, edited by Antoine De Moor, Cäcilia Fluck, and Petra Linscheid, 34-55. Tielt: Lannoo, 2013. ISBN 9789401410830.
Rutt, Richard. A History of Hand Knitting. London: B T Batsford Ltd, 1987 ISBN 0713451181
Anne Marie Decker taking pictures of the Leicester sock. Photo credit: Ruth Decker 2019 The display misidentifies it as a knit sock, likely due to old catalog data. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker 2019
Please note that sharing to other venues will likely be intermittent. If you wish to receive these each week, please remember to follow the blog. Patrons on Patreon receive early access previews, occasional extra details, and priority requests.
British Museum EA53913 was radiocarbon dated to between 100-350 CE. EA53913 was radiocarbon dated to 200-400 CE. ACO Tx2497 in the Royal Museums of Art and History in Brussels was dated to 240-400 CE. See De Moor, Antoine, Cäcilia Fluck, M. Van Strydonck, and M. Boudin. “Radiocarbon dating of Late Roman woolen socks from Egypt,” In Textiles, tools and techniques of the 1st millennium AD from Egypt and neighbouring countries. Proceedings of the 8th conference of the research group ‘Textiles from the Nile Valley,’ Antwerp, 4-6 October 2013,] ed. Antoine De Moor, Cäcilia Fluck, and Petra Linscheid, p. 131-136. Tielt: Lannoo Publishers, 2015. ISBN 9789401432405. ↩︎
