« Posts about documentation | Main | More trim questions »

February 02, 2009



Your entry was amazing. Can't wait to see where it keeps going.

And you completely deserved every award you received. Especially the MC. That particular medallion is perfect for you.

Jerusha Kilgore

Greet, I didn't take pictures of the whole setup, but I've got pictures of some of the individual pieces parts -- you're welcome to use them if you want to!

Iofa merch Macsen

I was absolutely fascinated by your entry. What a terrific concept, and the execution was marvelous. Since I was one of the shadow judges on the piece and my embroidery was right next to you I found myself explaining your entry to people when they came by. I got so excited about what you were doing it must have sounded like it was my entry. LOL!

-Iofa merch Macsen

Franklin Slaton

I hope you don't mind, I cross-posted your primer on a thread I've been nursing over at romanarmytalk.com. It started this time last year as I was preparing to teach my own Coptic decoration class at Convivium Collegialis X. I'm anxious to see what the guys think of your method. Probably horrified at the labor commitment, as any sane person would be. Feel free to check it out.


I know you'll be too busy chasing her majesty around to teach any classes, but I hope you'll at least bring your samples to show me. I'm eager to learn. And by eager to learn I mean insanely jealous and envious that I didn't think of it first. None of this cheering on your fellow artisan claptrap.



Hi Cynred!

I am bringing my A&S board to Gulf Wars - hopefully I'll have time to put some better captions on the samples...

My work is TOTALLY about "how to get the most accurate result, by a careful and patient but not slave-owning re-enactor", so I'm trying to develop methods that anybody could do. Provided they have ten years to finish something. Sooo, post this stuff anywhere you like.

Since the gloves are off, so to speak (evil grin)...

Whaddya mean by your posts from the above forum, Fri 15 Feb, "never" have straight wefts? And also:

"but also in the later centuries there grew up a whole industry of "specialist weavers" who only wove the intricate decorations, which were then sewn onto plain tunics. This allowed highly skilled weavers to do the master work at their own pace while novices did the grunt labor. So in the 6th century where you play a tunic with sewn on decorations might actually be a sign of wealth!"

Where do you get this? We have some books to share, boy-o! Bring yours and I'll bring mine. I'll be at War on Sunday, at the royal condo, chained to a (whisper) sewing machine. Otherwise seen following the cute blonde with the gold hat.


Actually, I looked at your biblio and we're working from a lot of the same texts. I have:

Looms & Textiles of the Copts - Carroll
Coptic Fabrics - Rutschowscaya
Coptic Textiles Designs - Gerspach
Textiles from Egypt: 4th-13th centuries - Baginski/Tidhar
Tapestry Weaving - Harvey

The use of 'never' was a poor choice on my part. I just meant that the samples these women from England are reproducing are coming out blocky and straight, as opposed to the curvilinier lines shown in your vine sample, which much more closely resemble the originals. A better choice may have been to say that Coptic weavers never 'limited' themselves to straight lines only.

The argument for specialization comes from Carroll, pg 42, which I think you have. I think it's even attested to in the Diocletian Edict that she loves to reference so much. There's also a shout out on pg 9 of Baginski/Tidhar, where they reference D.G. Shepherd 'Alexander, The Victorious Emperor' 1971, pg 244.

By the way, out of all these, Carroll is my FAVORITE. SO comprehensive, but also accessible. Freaking fascinating.

I will admit with some horror that I bought Harvey's book and built a 2'x2' nail loom in a misguided attempt to teach myself tapestry weaving. Either I am simply one who cannot learn by reading instructions, or I'm just a lost cause altogether. I pray for the former. I think if I could just SEE somebody do it it would all make sense to me. My guess is it's like chess, five minutes to learn the rules and a lifetime to master.


Hmm, I'll have to go back to Carroll...unfortunately, I ILLed Baginski/Tidhar, I think, and did not scan what you reference. Must check.

You really want to get a copy of Pritchard, she's just as accessible as Carroll, but looks at the weavings as part of garments which are then put together with other textiles as costume. She's the one who says, "hey, the three pieced tunics are also 'woven to shape', the seam is at the waist." And I have a new one, "Rich Life and the Dance" or some such, which is the first place I've found that called out specifically "slantwarp" and non, which built upon the realization I'd made in my A&S study, "hey, some of these allow me to 'draw' with the warp, and others are sort of pixelated, what's up with that?"

I'm bringing the new one with me to War, because it also has drawloom patterned weavings, lumped in with the other 4th-6thc fragments*, and Asta is interested in this incredibly early evidence.

*But are they carbon-dated? Noooo. Not most of them, anyway. Sigh.

I have Plans to learn tapestry weaving better, and teach it kindergarten-style, with big fat yarn. But that won't happen until at least RUM.


Don't worry about the Baginksi/Tidhar reference. It's a one liner that just repeats exactly what I said. "Some of these decorations were woven separately...blah, blah, blah...DG Shepherd reference...blah, blah."

Kindergarten-style, NOW you're speaking my language.

So I'm all official now with my TypePad account, but it's not sending me updates when you reply. Boo hiss.

The comments to this entry are closed.