Thursday, November 01, 2018

Stitch variants among Egyptian nalbound socks


So, in speaking with people (both online and IRL) about the nalbound socks from Egypt, there seems to be a lot of interest in the different stitch types that were used. While I did discuss the different types of stitches a bit in my previous post (here) I didn't really explore in detail all the different types of stitches that have been documented in detail.

The text that I used as the basis for that post was part of the explanatory material of a poster-style display I put together. The display included samples of all the different stitch types. I still feel that being able to feel the differences in texture and thickness makes a huge difference in appreciating the variety that can be achieved with different nalbinding techniques. However, a lot of information can be gleaned from pictures. So, I'm putting up some photos of my stitch samples. Hopefully, this will be of interest to someone other than me. :- )

All of the samples in this post were done with a commercial yarn in worsted weight. (Brown Sheep's Nature Spun, for those who are interested) This is much coarser than the yarn in any of the surviving socks from the post-Roman era. But, I felt that it was useful to use a larger yarn in these samples.



Coptic stitch and its variant

The most common stitch found among the Egyptian socks is referred to by most nalbinders as the 'Coptic stitch'. It is also sometimes called the 'Tarim stitch' in reference to a very old hat found in the Tarim basin of western China. The vast majority of the Roman-era and post-Roman socks from Egypt are made in the Coptic stitch. This is the stitch that very closely resembles knitting. Here are photos of my Coptic stitch sample:
Front side of the Coptic stitch. This is held in the orientation in which it was worked. I usually work my stitches crossed in the S-direction because this seems to be the most common in the surviving textiles. 
Reverse side of the Coptic stitch. This looks exactly like the reverse side of knitting. 

There is one sock in a variant of Coptic stitch. I have not seen any published analysis of this stitch, but Dorothy Burnham, in her seminal article on these socks (Burnham, Dorothy. “Coptic Knitting: an ancient technique.” Textile History. vol. 3, No. 1, Dec 1972. pp 116-124.) refers to one sock which "departs from the normal type". Having tracked down her reference to a publication from the Victoria & Albert Museum, it seems that she was referring to THIS child's sock. There is a stripe of 3 or 4 rows in the standard Coptic stitch across the instep. However, the majority of the sock is done in a different, but related stitch. Based on analysis of the museum's photos, I am highly confident that the sock is worked in what Ulrike Claßen-Büttner describes in her book (Nalbinding – What in the World Is That?, Books on Demand, 2012.) as "pierced looping". In the Coptic stitch (which Claßen-Büttner calls "encircled looping") one passes the needle behind the crossed legs of a stitch in the row below the one being worked. In "pierced looping" the needle passes through the loop of a stitch in the previous row. Here is my sample of pierced looping.

Pierced looping outside 
Pierced looping reverse side (looks the same, essentially) 

I am not aware of any other surviving Egyptian socks in pierced looping. It's tempting to speculate that the maker of this sock was attempting to work the Coptic stitch, but was mistaken as to how to make it properly. However, the presence of the band of true Coptic stitch in this sock refutes that idea, since the maker then resumed the pierced looping technique again. You may also have noticed that my sample included several rows of true Coptic stitch. This does not seem to affect the drape or elasticity of the fabric. So, I must assume that it was included purely as a decorative element.



Complex nalbinding stitches

As I mentioned in my previous post, there exists a sizable number of socks from Egypt in more complex nalbinding stitches. For my purposes, I am using the term 'complex stitch' to refer to any nalbinding stitch where stitches are interlinked within the same row as well as linking to the rows above and below. Gudrun Böttcher analyzed a large collection of socks from the Museum der Kulturen in Basel, Switzerland (Böttcher, Gudrun. “Nadelbindung – Koptische Textilien im Museum der Kulturen Basel und im Städtischen Museum Simeonstift, Trier” Archaeological Textiles Newsletter. No. 39, Autumn 2004.) and found 9 different stitch types. There are a small number of socks in complex stitches held elsewhere. I have not found any detailed analysis of the stitch type in these, but visual analysis of the available photos suggests that they are in the same stitch families that Böttcher found.

The most common stitches in Böttcher's analysis were variants of the Mammen or Korgen stitch (UOO/UUOO). There were 3 different connection stitches used with this stitch, which create slightly different looks. The first set use an F1 or F2 join. These are the most basic type of connection stitch. The needle passes through either 1 or 2 loops on the edge of the previous row, from the front.

Front side of Mammen stitch with F1 and with F2 join 
Reverse side of Mammen stitch with F1 and with F2 join
There are also examples of a joining stitch that picks up stitches from the middle of the row below. I have used a more common notation of M1 - meaning that 1 loop was picked up from the middle of the previous row. However, Böttcher uses a more precise abbreviation F(L) 2.1 - to indicate that on the front side, from the left edge of the previous row 1 stitch is picked up from the second rank of loops. (note that my photos have a sample with an M2 join, but this is not attested in the surviving examples) By joining into the middle of the previous row, the bypassed edge forms a ridge on the reverse side of the work. The surviving socks in this stitch seem to have been worked inside-out so that these ridges are on the outside.

Mammen stitch with joins to the middle of row 
Reverse side of the Mammen stitch with middle joins, showing the ridges characteristic of this connection type. 
The next group of samples are variations on the Oslo stitch (UO/UOO). This is closely related to the Mammen stitch and is often the first stitch that beginner nalbinders learn. As with the Mammen stitch, it can be done with either an F1 or F2 join. Also, like the Mammen stitch, the appearance of these two are very similar. The connection between the rows is a bit thicker with the F2 join, but otherwise they look the same. The other variation (lower left in the photos) is UO/UUO - it is a bit more awkward to do, as one loop is bypassed when making the stitch. However, as you can see, the final appearance on the front is very similar to the others (but the reverse is different).
Oslo stitch variants - front side
Oslo stitch variants - reverse side
Three of the socks in the Basel collection use a single-phase stitch - that is, one where the needle passes through all loops in the same direction, rather than weaving in and out. These are related to the stitch used in the famous Coppergate sock found in York. The York or Coppergate stitch is UU/OOO F2. The variants described by Böttcher are UU/OOO F3 and UUU/OOOO F4. The appearance of all is basically the same. However, the difference is more apparent when the work is held in the hand. This stitch basically creates a spiral of yarn for each row. The joining stitches travel through the center of this spiral. So, when an F4 join is used, there are 4 yarns in the middle of the spiral at any given point. This results in very pronounced ridges. The sample with an F3 join has less pronounced ridges, as there are only 3 yarns in the center of each row's spiral. The York stitch (not shown here) is smoother, as there are only 2 yarns in the center of each row's spiral.

Single phase stitches - front side
Single phase stitches - reverse side (same appearance)

The last stitch is highly unusual. In fact, it is almost impossible to describe with Hansen's notation. The basic stitch is simple enough - it is the Danish stitch, one of the most simple types of nalbinding stitches. Böttcher's attempt to describe it is B(L) 2.2 U/OU. By this she means that the connection stitch is made from the back of the work, taking 2 loops in the second rank from the left (or top) edge of the previous row. As always, a picture is worth a thousand words.

This is Böttcher's diagram of the stitch. The left side is showing the front (outside) and the right side shows from the reverse. I made my sample before I had gotten a photo of the sock itself. My sample has a much higher tension than the museum's sock, creating a very dense, almost double-thickness fabric. The actual sock is kind of lacy and looks more like these diagrams.

Front side 
Reverse side
I have my doubts as to whether this sock is actually nalbound. None of the items in the Basel collection have been carbon-dated. A few items have the specific location where they were found listed, but in general the museum's records generally just state "Egypt, nalbinding" with no further information on provenance. It is possible that these socks were acquired as a lot. The appearance of the sock itself is strikingly similar to crochet and the structure, as diagrammed by Böttcher, can be produced in more than one way. For more details on the ways in which different yarn-looping techniques can produce identical structures, I highly recommend the Loopholes blog which explores various yarn-looping techniques. The specific post linked to here contains a diagram of asymmetrical chain loops that looks a lot like the diagram above.

So, those are all the stitch variants I have found attested in surviving nalbound socks from Egypt. It's important to note that the Mammen F2 and Mammen M1 stitches are the only ones for which more than one or two examples are attested. Whether this relates to the actual frequency of use in the period is an open question, since it's almost impossible for us to know how representative a sample the surviving socks are. Additionally, the number of socks in the Coptic stitch is far greater than the number in complex stitches. Again, it is impossible to know how accurately this reflects the relative frequency of production in the period. But, it is quite likely that socks in the Coptic stitch were significantly more common than those in complex stitches.

Lastly, for more details on how to make these stitches, including videos, I highly recommend the marvelous Neulakintaat website. Happy stitching!













4 comments:

  1. Böttcher also describes the structure of the 16705 sock in her analyses of two 19th-century caps. It is identical to a basic form of slip stitch crochet — an obvious production technique for the later objects — but she dismisses the possibility of it being anything other than nalbinding out of hand. I've been working toward a closer examination of this in my own blog and the latest post is directly relevant to it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, thanks. I had noticed that your recent series of posts was heading in this direction.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi, I'm interested in the pierced looping stitch you mentioned. I've hunted everywhere trying to find some information how to do it but I don't understand your description. Is there a diagram somewhere I could look at, please? I tried googling but all I find is people mentioning it, but nothing about how to do it.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi, Reyth. I think I ought to do a new post on the pierced looping; it's generated more questions than just about anything else I have written.
    Unfortunately, I don't see a way to put an image into a comment. However, there is a photo and a diagram of the pierced looping structure in _Nalbinding - What in the World Is That?_ by Ulrike Classen-Buttner. She has a very nice, concise description of the structures seen in the simplest nalbinding variants.

    ReplyDelete