01-17-2012, 01:05 PM
Piotr Smolanski wrote:
Right, but is there any actual proof of Romans using knitting of any kind? We have some finds from Egypt, right? Were they knit, or plain fabric?
Graham, a question that's been bothering me for some time. Antique re-enactment commonly accepts nålebinding as a valid way of making socks, hats and so on. But does it have any basis in actual finds? I know a sock found after 2k years would be heavily felted, but maybe the original pattern of nålebinding would still be recognizable? What's your stance on the subject?
Hello Piotr
As I said previously there is not a lot to go on and various other scholars have already debated over these issues. Dorothy Burnam in her 1972 article, mentioned by Matt, studied the Egyptian socks and concluded they had been made by a single needle. She therefore suggested that the technique was called single needle knitting although she also suggested Naalebinding amongst a number of other terms.
Later in 1987 Richard Rutt in his book 'A history of Hand Knitting', settled on Nalbinding a terminology which seems to have caught on. Personally I prefer 'Single Needle knitting' as the other terminology is Scandinavian in origin and I know how the term 'Coptic' can be confusing and off putting to those studying 'Roman' period textiles. It certainly would not have been called nalbinding by the Romans!
Looking at some of the socks from Egypt they appear extremely well preserved so I would bow to those like Burnham who have had the opportunity to study the originals at closer quarters and admire those like Matt's wife who recreate these designs. However remember the Vindolanda sock was not made this way and there does appear to be at least one other sock from Egypt which was woven.
Graham.
Right, but is there any actual proof of Romans using knitting of any kind? We have some finds from Egypt, right? Were they knit, or plain fabric?
Graham, a question that's been bothering me for some time. Antique re-enactment commonly accepts nålebinding as a valid way of making socks, hats and so on. But does it have any basis in actual finds? I know a sock found after 2k years would be heavily felted, but maybe the original pattern of nålebinding would still be recognizable? What's your stance on the subject?
Hello Piotr
As I said previously there is not a lot to go on and various other scholars have already debated over these issues. Dorothy Burnam in her 1972 article, mentioned by Matt, studied the Egyptian socks and concluded they had been made by a single needle. She therefore suggested that the technique was called single needle knitting although she also suggested Naalebinding amongst a number of other terms.
Later in 1987 Richard Rutt in his book 'A history of Hand Knitting', settled on Nalbinding a terminology which seems to have caught on. Personally I prefer 'Single Needle knitting' as the other terminology is Scandinavian in origin and I know how the term 'Coptic' can be confusing and off putting to those studying 'Roman' period textiles. It certainly would not have been called nalbinding by the Romans!
Looking at some of the socks from Egypt they appear extremely well preserved so I would bow to those like Burnham who have had the opportunity to study the originals at closer quarters and admire those like Matt's wife who recreate these designs. However remember the Vindolanda sock was not made this way and there does appear to be at least one other sock from Egypt which was woven.
Graham.
"Is all that we see or seem but a dream within a dream" Edgar Allan Poe.
"Every brush-stroke is torn from my body" The Rebel, Tony Hancock.
"..I sweated in that damn dirty armor....TWENTY YEARS!', Charlton Heston, The Warlord.
"Every brush-stroke is torn from my body" The Rebel, Tony Hancock.
"..I sweated in that damn dirty armor....TWENTY YEARS!', Charlton Heston, The Warlord.
