Another type of nalbound objects we see quite frequently in museums are wig caps from Inca era Peru. Thus, this week’s Nalbound Object of the Week is an Inca wig cap. The skull cap portion is made using S-crossed Simple Looping.
Object: Inca Wig Cap
Description: A light colored skull cap with a narrower dark brown and a larger brown stripe around it with around 120 braids hanging from the lower edge. These 3 strand braids have multicolored, red, green, blue, white, brown, wrappings on their bottom half. Overall dimensions are 37 x 9 7/16 in. (94 x 24 cm).
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.
The Nazca were masters of figural nalbinding. Today’s Nalbound Object of the Week is a fragment of a brightly colored band with birds alternating with flowers coming out of it and flowers growing out of both sides as well. I had the honor of examining this one in person in October of 2019.
Description: Starting with a red band worked in the round that is approximately 1 inch (2.5 cm) wide, with the tails and wings of the bird integral on both sides, the breast, head, and beaks of the birds are worked out of the center of one side. There is a flower worked out of the center of the band for each bird to sip from between each bird. Flowers also extend from both sides of the band making the total width just under 3 inches (just under 8 cm) on average. Putting the pieces together, I measured the central band as 37 cm long.1
Material: 2 ply Z-spun S-plied Camelid wool.4 Further investigation may reveal that some of the yarns or plies of yarns come from other sources as they do not have the same texture as the majority.
Stitch(es) used: Z-crossed Cross-knit Looping5 (specific crossing determined by Anne Marie Decker during examination in October 2019)
Gauge: Approximately 19 stitches to the inch and 28 rows to the inch (approx 8 stitches and 11 rows per cm)
The fragment in the British Museum may have been part of a larger piece similar to this 2nd century BCE Nazca Border Fragment Accession Number: 31.20.1 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.
For this Nalbound Object of the Week, we look to the Pech people of Northeastern Honduras. Now in the Ethnographic collections of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, we find this lovely open worked nalbound bag in alternating light and darker brown stripes.
Description: The bag starts at the base in the lighter brown and is worked for three rows with some increases visible. Followed by two rows of the darker brown and then three, three, three, and two alternating. The bag is recorded as being 19 5/16 inches high by 14 15/16 inches wide with a thickness of 1 5/16 inches (49 x 38 x 3.4cm). The opening shows no signs of decreasing the row height or otherwise finishing the mouth of the bag. The fabric builds in an clockwise S type spiral implying it was likely worked with the fabric suspended above while being worked.
Dated to: No date provided.1 The bag is part of the Ethnographic collections, so possibly collected sometime within the last one hundred and fifty years.
Find location (Continent, current country, original culture): Plaintain River, Honduras3
Material: The online catalog only describes the material as fiber.4 It may possibly Maguey (Agave sisalana f. armata) or Aechmea as both are noted as being used by the Pech to make bags.5
Stitch(es) used: B2 U/OU as read from the technical front of the work with crosses up. (Stitch determination by Anne Marie Decker based on .TIFF photograph provided by the museum for research purposes.) Given that the clockwise S type spiral direction of work reads right to left in that orientation combined with the B2 connection, this bag was likely worked with the fabric above the hands instead of suspended below. (If worked dependent (unlikely), then this would likely be indicative of being worked left-handed.) So in working, with the fabric suspended and growing down, the direction of work would read left to right, as is most frequent and the stitch would be worked as F2 O/UO crosses down.
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.
Sometimes I know very little about an object. This week’s Nalbound Object of the Week appeared in news articles about شهر سوخته Shahr-e-Sookhteh, Iran’s “Burnt City” published in January of 2022. I also discovered that in 2018 there was a multidisciplinary project run by the Iranian Archaeological team during which there was conservation and micro analysis of the textile collection in Shahr i Sokhta. I’d be very interested in learning about the results of those examinations. Periodically I do another search on these fragments to see if more information pops up. Last July a new article turned up on the web with some very interesting references to try to track down.
Object: Fragment from شهر سوخته Shahr-e-Sookhteh
Description: There are apparently several fragments of Simple Looping with large multi-row bands of alternating color, light (cream) and dark (brown). The third & fourth articles linked below show the one fragment that first brought my attention to this artifact. The first and second links, one from the multidisciplinary project, include a photo that looks to be different fragments and a larger section of the same textile. These are some of around 47 fabrics (techniques unspecified but clearly including more than just the nalbound fragments), consisting of 265 fragments, that were found in Shahr-e-Sookhteh.1
Dated to: Shahr-e-Sookhteh was occupied between 3200-1700 BCE (early articles indicated the city was abandoned in 2100 BCE2, but later articles indicate the city was last occupied in 1700 BCE3)
Find location: شهر سوخته Shahr-e-Sookhteh, Iran’s “Burnt City.” شهر سوخته is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.4
Material: unspecified
Stitch(es) used: Z-crossed Simple Looping (analysis based on photograph by AnneMarieDecker), F1 O
Inventory number: unspecified
Current location: likely at the Iranian Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization (ICHHTO) multi-disciplinary Base at Shahr-i Sokhta
Link to museum catalog or other data: unknown
Some sources in which more information can be found:
1. https://amordadnews.com/172355 This is the most recent article released and it lists several references that look to be very interesting.
The web pages on which the earlier news articles were published are no longer live. The Internet Archive did save copies as part of their Wayback Machine project.
Photographs: There are a couple of interesting photos that were published, but as I don’t have contacts to request permissions, you’ll need to explore the links above to see them.
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.
Our next Nalbound Object of the Week can be found on display in the V&A Museum in London. A rare example of a complete pair of Late Roman Era1 (formerly dated to the Coptic Era2) nalbound socks from the burial grounds of the Greek colony of Oxryhyncus in Egypt. By the 5th century, Oxryhyncus was a notable monastic center.3
Description: A complete pair of red socks on red conservation mounts. The socks have split toes to accommodate wearing with thonged sandals. The ankles have an overlapping slit and the remains of attached ties for closure.
The conservation mounts and foreshortening of photographs tend to cause these socks to look much thinner and longer than they actually are. The conservation mounts are rounder than a foot which narrows the profile. They are intended to be supportive of the fabric more than providing a foot shape that would stress the fabric. As can be seen in the photographs prior to conservation, the proportions are well within the average ratios for this type of sock and would have fit a normal human foot quite nicely.
Nalbinding Stitch(es) used: S-crossed8 Cross-knit Looping, F1B1 U (specific determination confirmed by Anne Marie Decker)
A pair of madder red socks confirming a theory regarding a particular construction detail on the Oxryhyncus socks. Completed by Anne Maire Decker on 17 August 2020. Not to gauge.
Some sources in which more information can be found:
Burnham, Dorothy K. “Coptic Knitting: An Ancient Technique” in Textile History, Vol. 3 December 1972. edited by K. G. Ponting and Dr S. D. Chapman. The Pasold Research Fund LTD, England, 1972; pgs. 116-124. No ISBN/ISSN provided. DOI: 10.1179/004049672793692237
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.
Kendrick, A. F. Catalogue of Textiles From Burying-Grounds in Egypt: Vol. II. Period of Transition and of Christian Emblems. Victoria and Albert Museum, Department of Textiles. London: Publ. under the Authority of His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1921. No ISBN.
Köstner, Barbara. “Roman and Late Roman nalbinding socks from Egypt: Bringing ‘Egyptian fashion’ to the North” in Excavating, analysing, reconstructing: Textiles of the first millennium AD from Egypt and neighbouring countries. Proceedings of the 9th conference of the research group ‘Textiles from the Nile Valley’, Antwerp, 27-29 November 2015. ed. by Antoine De Moor, Cäcilia Fluck, and Petra Linscheid. Tielt: Lannoo Publishers, 2017. ISBN 9789401443999.
Köstner, Barbara. “Wearing socks in sandals: The height of Roman fashion?” in Small Finds & Ancient Social Practices in the Northwest Provinces of the Roman Empire edited by Stefanie Hoss and Alissa Whitmore. Oxford & Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 2016. Pages 16-27. ISBN 978-1-78570-256-3.
Levey, S. M. “Illustrations of the History of Knitting Selected from the Collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum” in Textile History, Vol. I No. 2 (December 1969): pgs. 183-205. ed. by K. G. Ponting. Great Britain: David & Charles Ltd., 1969. Also available in the combined Vol 1. Nos 1-3 set published in 1971 as ISBN 0-7153-5166-4.
Turnau, Irena. History of Knitting Before Mass Production. Translated by and Agnieszka Szonert. Warsaw: Institute of the Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, 1991. ISBN 83-900213-2-3.
Photographs:
The socks on display in the V&A. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker 15 October 2019A view of the toes and slits. Also note how the angle at which the photos are taken affects the perception of length. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker 15 October 2019.A side view showing better proportions. Photo credit: Anne Marie Decker 15 October 2019.Anne Marie Decker taking photographs of the pair of red socks. Photo credit: Ruth Decker 15 October 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.
De Moor et. al. “Radiocarbon dating of Late Roman woolen socks from Egypt,” 2015. Pg. 136 ↩︎
The dating to Coptic Era was based on older art historical dating methods. It generally referred to what are now defined as Late Roman Egypt (3rd−4th centuries) and Byzantine Egypt (4th−7th centuries), but differed in exact dating by author. While still used colloquially, the term has lost favor in academia in large part due to its imprecision. ↩︎
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O107787/pair-of-socks-unknown/ Accessed 21 January 2024. The museum record only states “Nålbindning (sewing stitches)” “sometimes called knotless netting or single needle knitting.” It does not specify the specific stitch variant used. Barbara Köstner does specify S crossed in “Roman and Late Roman nalbinding socks from Egypt: Bringing ‘Egyptian fashion’ to the North” 2017, pg. 193. ↩︎
From 1872 CE we get this week’s Nalbound Object sewn by P. Nilsson’s daughter in Äspö in Skåne Sweden:1 the remains of a beautifully colored singlad ball.
Description: Not much of the nalbound exterior remains, but what does remain shows colorwork in multiple patterns involving two colors being used in the same row in several places. The ball is 6.5 cm in diameter2; divided into 8 sections, each worked from the edges into the center. The center is presumed to be cork, wrapped with possibly flax cord.3 It was then covered in course cloth, partitioned into eights and then the Simple Looping outer layer was applied.
Material: The nalbinding was worked in multiple colors of wool.5
Stitch(es) used: Z-crossed Simple Looping, F1 O (determination from photo by Anne Marie Decker) called “langettstygn”6 [langett stitch] in Swedish
Singlade balls are very similar in concept and style to Temari balls from Japan. However, Temari balls primarily use wrapped patterns, while Singlade balls are worked in the Simple Looping structure that can be considered a variant of Nalbinding when creating a fabric, but embroidery when worked into the ball base as seen in some of the more complicated modern designs.
In 1932 Mina Lundberg of Gävle, Uppland, Sweden gave this ball she used in her childhood in the 2nd half of the 19th century to the Upplandsmuseet. It is made with a center made of a broken celluloid ball with peas in it. It otherwise made in the same way as the old catalogue records that peas would be put in a goose’s throat, one end stuck in the other, that was then wrapped in yarn and the singlade cover worked over it in buttonhole stitches. https://digitaltmuseum.se/011023861906/boll
Some of the wide variety of patterns that can be worked in Simple Looping on Singlade balls. Photo from a class that was taught at Brodericaféet på Regionmuseet i Skåne in 2018.
A pair of Singlad boll by Zadig Art purchased in the Kulturen gift shop while I was in Lund in 2023 to examine the mitten. I was so excited to find traditional nalbinding available. I had heard of the Skånsk tradition of singlad balls, but hadn’t seen them in person. The yellow and brown one on the left rattles. Photo: Anne Marie Decker
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.
Anne Marie Decker with the Tarim beret as it was taken out of the display case for her to examine in order to determine the stitch used. 21 June 2000.
The Tarim Beret is a beautifully fine example of what kinds of designs are possible using even the simplest variants of nalbinding. This hat was on display in 2000.
Object: Tarim Beret
Description: A finely nalbound brown wool beret stretched over a felt roll. The stitch patterning leaves a visual impression of four striped quarters, but it is worked in the round.
Dated to: ca. 1000 BC (wood of the tomb calibrated C14 results date to 2960 ±115 years Before Present* (published 1999))
Find location: Zaghunluq Cemetery, Chärchän/Qiemo County, Tarim Basin (central southern edge thereof), Xinjiang, China
Material: Wool
Stitch(es) used: Space patterned Z-crossed Simple Looping, F1 O (as determined by Anne Marie Decker 2000)
Current location: 新疆维吾尔自治区博物馆 Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Museum, 581 Xibei Rd, Saybag District, Ürümqi, Xinjiang, China, 830000
*王炳华 = Wang, Binghua. 新疆古尸 : 古代新疆居民及其文化 = Xinjiang gu shi: gu dai Xinjiang ju min ji qi wen hua = The ancient corpses of Xinjiang : the peoples of ancient Xinjiang and their cvlture [i.e. culture]. Wulumuqi-shi: Xinjiang ren min chu ban she, 2001. ISBN 7-228-05161-0
Festive Koteka from Papua New Guinea on display in The Icelandic Phallological Museum in Reykjavik, Iceland. Photo taken by Anne Marie Decker August 30, 2022.
Traditional forms of nalbinding are used for a wide variety of purposes around the world. One area with a strong continuous tradition of nalbinding is the highlands of Papua New Guinea and West Papua, Indonesia. While one is most likely to be familiar with the Bilums from the region, another usage of nalbinding is found covering some Koteka.
A Koteka is a traditional penis sheath worn by some ethnic groups of Papua; mainly in the highlands. One may also see the koteka referred to as a horim. While often made of a particular gourd, the ones of most interest to this blog are the ones that have an outer layer of nalbound textile.
I have not yet had the opportunity to travel to Papua to see the amazing amount and variety of nalbinding that their traditions have and continue to produce. I do hope to make it to their annual Bilum Festival and Gala someday. And yet, Papuan nalbinding has been collected by colonizers and purchased by modern tourists for centuries and thus found its way into some of the most unexpected places. So much so, that when I once again find nalbinding where I didn’t expect it, I’m not surprised to often find that the example in question is Papuan.
On my most recent trip to Iceland, where I was honored to be able to examine the mitten from Arneiðarstaðir in Iceland, I also took the opportunity to go to several other museums. I picked up a new nalbinding needle at the Saga Museum. But having entirely forgotten about nalbound koteka covers, I was rather pleased and surprised to find nalbinding in The Icelandic Phallological Museum. Probably the last place I expected to find nalbinding. Even more so than finding nalbinding in a Ripley’s Believe it or Not.
The Festive Koteka in The Icelandic Phallological Museum uses both the Simple Looping variant (often called Blanket or Buttonhole Stitch) and a spaced and staggered Cross-Knit Looping variant. The Danai tribe Koteka shown in the Ripley’s Believe it or Not! video has the Simple Looping variant on the sheath itself and what looks like a compound variant (undetermined) in the strap.
I’m excited to announce the publication of the peer reviewed article, “Three objects catalogued as vantsöm in the collections of the Museum der Kulturen in Basel, Switzerland,” in Archaeological Textiles Review No. 64 (2022).
I had the distinct pleasure of collaborating with my friend Cary Karp to write this article after we were allowed the opportunity to jointly examine the items in question at the museum storehouse in January of 2019. I posted about that visit here (where you can see a few extra photos). Cary will be making a corresponding announcement on his blog, Loopholes; which has lots of additional information on the technique.
ATR is now Open Access and so you can freely download the complete volume, including our article, by following the instructions at: https://www.atnfriends.com/. If you’d like a hard copy of the issue, you can purchase a print on demand copy from the University of Copenhagen’s Campus Print Webshop here. You can now also download or purchase all of the back issues as well if you like. An offprint of the article itself can be found here.
Abstract The looped structure termed a slip stitch in the craft glossary of crochet can be produced both with a hook and an eyed needle. These implements are not equally amenable to working that structure into complex constructs such as the toe and heel of a sock. This article describes the examination of three objects that have been misidentified as nalbinding. Two of them are certain to have been crocheted and the third is highly likely also to instantiate that technique. The provenance of the objects is recorded as “Coptic Egyptian” on anecdotal evidence and without ascription of specific dates. If scientific dating were to establish that any of them approaches even the youngest age this might imply, the accepted date for the advent of crochet would require major revision.
As I’ve mentioned before, incorrectly co-opting slip stitch crochet structures into the nalbinding atlas of stitch variants has obscured and made difficult the study of crochet’s history and transmission. Given that nalbinding has long suffered under this same issue of miss-classification/identification obscuring its own history, it behooves us to exhibit caution when examining textiles with which we may not be as familiar to avoid doing the same to our looping cousins.
My presentation at NESAT XIV in 2021, “But it looks like… methods for differentiating non-woven looped structures,” looked to clarify some methods for recognizing ambiguous surface textures and the sometimes subtle, but distinctive, secondary structural attributes that can be used to distinguish the particular technique used to create an object.
The sock and the pouch discussed in “Three objects catalogued as vantsöm in the collections of the Museum der Kulturen in Basel, Switzerland” could very well be important early instances of the crochet technique of potentially pivotal historiographic significance, but we won’t know until they have been scientifically dated. This is an important reminder that dating crocheted objects based on the art historical dating of other nalbound items because the items were not recognized as crochet entirely obscures their potential place in crochet history and simultaneously muddies the water of nalbinding’s history, construction details, and definition.
I’m excited to be able to see this article in print and am looking forward to future projects and collaborations.
So many people have asked what the process of my research looks like. So this time I am taking notes and if this ever gets published, you’ll see the entire rough process. (Written October 2020 with edits November 2021)
Ever since I started to see the nalbinding community make its forays online, there has always been someone brave enough to make a sweater using the nalbinding technique. They are always fascinating examples of a very impressive amount of work. And yet, body garments for warmth just do not seem to show up in the archaeological contexts. We see lots of socks and mittens and some hats, lots of bags, and many many fragments whose original purpose is just unknown, but no hoods, shirts, or trousers outside of the full body ritual masque costumes of 19th & 20th century Central Africa. (Likely due to the efficiencies of woven cloth for those type garments.)
At the same time, while my most recent focus has been primarily on the Egyptian examples, I am interested in nalbinding worldwide and have been collecting interesting tidbits for a long while now. Some of those were just tantalizing glances at things I did not have ready access to at the time, but for which the world has since become more technologically savvy and interconnected. Objects for which I had perhaps only an out of focus photograph from what was likely a book in a language I didn’t read, are now having high resolution photographs uploaded online and machine translation, while not perfect, is helping to be able to get the gist of what is written about them.
Our Nalbinding Get Togethers* on Zoom, which we began as a social gathering of nalbinders around the world to help alleviate some of the isolation of the COVID-19 shutdown, have given us the chance to meet people across the world. Peruda Florit has been especially interested in Russian nalbinding given her current circumstances. When I first began researching nalbinding, getting information out of the then USSR was extremely difficult from here in the US. I could track nalbinding right up to the Karelian border from the Finnish side, but barely make any headway across. However, over time I had run into the finds from Novgorod and a few other places. Occasionally, I’d get snapshots of images from books etc. Peruda has been having me go through some of those old snapshots to try and find some pieces she may be able to go see in person.
That day, not long after talking about Yuko Hirata’s newest nalbound sweater design, all of which are amazingly beautiful, I thought I’d take a stroll through the old photo files to find some more Russian examples for Peruda. In doing so I ran across this “sweater.”
It’s a picture I collected sometime during or before 2011 of a photograph in a book. Probably found on VK’s nalbinding forum although I don’t remember exactly now. I believe this is the 2nd photo of it I had seen. The other being even smaller and less detailed. The image is not that clear, but the surface texture has the horizontal banding reminiscent of compound nalbound textiles. At the time, machine translation was not very good. I vaguely remember taking the time to translate the caption and look up the saint associated. As I knew that there was an extremely high likelihood of nalbinding in Russia being done at the time of the saint (15th century), I was not too surprised by the concept of it being nalbound. While I was very intrigued, my access to Russian sources was soo limited that I did not pursue it at the time.
With all the amazing sweater designs coming out of the modern nalbinding usage, and the ever present interest in history, running across this particular find again sparked a good bit of interest. My access to Russian speakers is much greater now than it was then. Machine translation, while in no way perfect, is much better and can help narrow down what pieces I want properly translated. And… there are others interested which helps motivate any search.
So step one of the search, I run across a potentially interesting photograph or tidbit of information. In this case, all the wording is in Russian and I’m on my phone (which is currently reducing my ability to find Cyrillic letters). I send the link to Peruda, who kindly transliterates it for me and runs it through the machine translation.
Saint Nilus of Sora’s hair-shirt. So we look him up. Saint Nilus, otherwise known as Nil Sorky, lived between 1433 and 1508. Very interesting. Early for a cardigan styled item of clothing, but hair-shirts don’t seem to have followed standard practices and I don’t know that much about 15th & early 16th century Russian clothing in detail.
A quick poking about by Google search of Saint Nilus of Sora’s name, revealed a new picture of the hair-shirt on display: http://cultinfo.ru/news/2008/5/1096. A bit more and I find a book reference within a Pinterest pin which also has a slightly better quality photo: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531495193517251984/ “Власяница и четки преп. Нила Сорского. Кирилло-Белозерский монастырь // Романенко Е. В. Повседневная жизнь русского средневекового монастыря”
And then, several more interesting hits. This one caused me to exclaim, “Captions, I need captions!” https://xtkani.ru/vlasyanica/ As there appears to be an additional interesting hair-shirt for which I have no date or place information. Peruda then sent me this link, with another image of the more dress-like hair-shirt: https://otzovik.com/review_5601725.html
Having not had much luck in my search using English, I shifted to the Cyrillic for St. Nilus of Sora and the word for hair-shirt. That got me the very interesting link to the Kirillo-Belozersky museum (whose name we had sussed out as likely to have it in their collection via the sources above, but had not yet reached out to) with a very nice photo of the hair-shirt in question that is of such high resolution one can zoom in to see details: https://kirmuseum.org/ru/object/vlasanica-iz-verbluzei-koricnevoi-sersti Much excitement ensued. Of interesting note, the image appears to be reversed from the printed ones above with what had appeared to be the left sleeve now on the right. (It’s not unheard of for an image to be flipped when printed.)
And at this point though, I’m questioning its designation as a nalbound textile.
Zooming into to focus on the rows reveals a texture on all but the bottom most rows that I have seen before, but in slip stitch crochet (SSC), not nalbinding. Looking closely at the neckline and cuffs and I can see loops pulled through loops. While it is possible to achieve that structure with end-led nalbinding as discussed in my NESAT presentation “But it looks like...,” the direction of work would be from the outside edge into the shirt, not working from the body out as one would with the loop-led slip stitch crochet. However, the surface texture was not an exact match for the SSC I had seen before. Both sides appeared to have the same texture, instead of dramatically differing textures, and the rows appeared to alternate between what would be produced by the technical front of back loop only (BLO) SSC and that produced on the technical back side of front loop only (FLO) SSC. It appeared to potentially be a match for working back and forth, instead of in the round or separate rows in the same direction. I immediately sent a copy of the link off to my friend Cary Karp who is researching the history of crochet and is the one that helped me learn to recognize SSC structures and surface textures. Cary tells me that this type of back and forth turned flatwork work in SSC is called a Rib Stitch in the 1840’s Victorian fancy work literature, but as a specialty stitch with nothing in any earlier literature.
Our web search did turn up some information about the provenance of this hair-shirt. It is attributed by legend to Saint Nilus of Sora. However, the first solid mentions are that it was displayed in the Tikhvin Cathedral in the 19th and 20th centuries where it was used for healing.
The Russian term Вязка is often translated as knitting, but in truth is a broader term that might be more appropriately translated as looping as the Russian language does not differentiate between the various looping techniques such as knitting, crochet, or nalbinding. Instead, if one is intending to be specific in Russian, a modifier is added that tells you what type of tool is used.
The Nalbinding Get Togethers (celebrating one and a half years now) are an interesting addition to my research. I used to fill that slot by reaching out to friends that had expressed interest (both casual and academic) in person or one on ones via phone or email/text/messaging. I still do reach out to certain ones specifically, though the in person option hasn’t been available. But as some of my most useful foils aren’t local anyway, those conversations have just continued as they always do.
But my usual process goes something like this: Either I find a hint or mention of a new to me find that might be applicable or I do one of my regular searches to see if something new to me shows up (or I stumble across something as I was looking for something else). I then go see what else I can find out about it. If what I stumbled on originally wasn’t a treasure trove of pictures, I go looking for images as the objects I’m interested in are not clearly and consistently described. In this process I am looking for as many images as possible. Presentation photos, documentation photos, conservation photos, right on down to someone’s terrible vacation photos as sometimes that’s all I can get and sometimes they just happen to capture something the formal ones don’t. I’m also looking for associated diagrams and any analysis that has already been performed. Mining bibliographies for previously published books and articles that relate to the object or its type.
All the while I’m comparing and contrasting with the corpus I already have. I may also start making test samples to help work out or confirm what I’m seeing on the surface structure shown. Then I start talking with others about this interesting thing. In person (my oh so patient husband who doesn’t understand the details, but loves to see me excited about a new tidbit. My mom, who does understand a good bit more) and online via messaging to my sometimes collaborator, to my mentee, to friends, to the get togethers (the group is intended to be a social space and sometimes all we do is chat and work on/show off/encourage our projects, but a big part of my projects is the research and the group is interested in the history of the craft).
Then I start working on in what format I want to share the info (and how detailed) to the broader world: blog post, popular media, peer-reviewed article, seminar presentation (academic or crafting), or multiples of varying depth. I may start formally teaching a particular craft portion at this point as an additional way to find out what words and order best express the concept. Eventually I may end up writing an instruction manual (that’s happened twice, but quite a while ago now as I had a break from the intensive analyzing part and some of the crafting part too due to health issues). And we’ll see where the whole ends up someday, because each new piece adds to the whole as well. I’m working with others on a cross technique standardization of language used to describe the specifics of structural details common across Looping techniques. Trying to see trends that can better improve the overall understanding as so many of these finds are still dated on art historical principles yet without a proper understanding of the specific corpus. Worldwide trends, both historically and where its usage has continued through to today.
Case in point, a comment on a picture that was posted in the Sprang group asking if the item was sprang work (it wasn’t) provided me with a search term that opened up a whole area of current traditional use of nalbinding in South America that I hadn’t known about which I can tie back to historical records of the region and can help with understanding working techniques, direction, etc. Very much fascinating. I’ve lost more sleep again. Bit frustrated at one of the museums because a number of great photos pop up in searches, but they don’t have an organized online search their collection function. Those photos are just from photos they’ve used in illustrating their exhibition announcements etc. A blog post has been drafted, though I don’t know when I’ll finish it. More information has been added to the corpus in my head with very interesting ties across the world.
Sometimes I get the opportunity to see the object in person which leads to object reports for the museums with my aggregated analysis of the object, what’s previously published, and how it fits into the broader corpus, and further potential publications.
I’ve had people comment on how I seem to find so many interesting artifacts. They wonder and ask how do I keep finding so much nalbinding when it is hidden, mislabeled, or in areas one just doesn’t think of nalbinding existing. The answer is quite simple. I keep looking.**
* The Nalbinding Get Togethers are currently still occurring each weekend on Zoom at 8pm Eastern Saturdays and 10am Eastern on Sundays. Sessions generally run for two hours, sometimes more. Drop me a note via the contact page for the link or find us on social media (Facebook is easiest).
** If you’d like to help support my continued search, a link to my Patreon is on the side bar menu.
