It seems to be the season for CfPs - so here's some more:

The European Association of Archaeologists have extended their Call for the 30th Annual Meeting in Rome, Italy. The conference will run August 28-31, and the new deadline is February 12.  You can find out more about the conference and also the submission portal via their website.

There will surely be quite a few textile sessions there again, and one of them is Session #733, Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Archaeology of Roman Textiles. 

Happy New Year, dear readers of this blog - I hope you had a good end of the last one and a glorious start into this year! Mine was partly spent with a rather obnoxious cold, so there was a bit more sneezing and a lot more sleeping than I had planned for.

Of couse I'm well again in time to get back to work... timing, right? But it's nice and interesting work that I'm getting back to, so that is definitely on the pro side. (Well, mostly nice and interesting - I just remembered there's tax paperwork to file in the next few weeks, too...)

There's also planning for some conferences and events in the current year. I will be at the Nadelwelt again in May, and then there's the NESAT conference in May as well. The museum in Syke plans a Bronze Age weekend event in August, where I will show things... but the next thing coming up is the Knitting History Forum conference on February 3. 

I will talk about spinning, twist, and its influence on knitting at that event, and some bits for that paper are still in the works. So here's a sneak peek for you:

These are knit from the same wool, spun once in z and once in s, with two threads held together (not plied). I've done this before, the not-plied-thing, with rather... interesting results once it got washed. This time, I'm also going to see about the differences in spin direction, including the visual ones. Next up will be the same knitting, but with plied yarns instead of yarns held parallel.

(I was hoping for the two bits to turn out the same size, but alas, the threads of one were a bit thinner than the others, or else I messed up the tension. Ah well.)

If you're interested in the outcome, consider joining the conference! It's online only, so you can attend from wherever you are. More about it, including the programme and the link to get tickets, can be found on the conference website. 

NESAT will be taking place again next year - and I'm so very much looking forward to it already! It's always a wonderful opportunity to go somewhere and meet up with old and new colleagues. If you're not familiar with this conference, NESAT stands for "North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles" and was started to make textile archeologists feel less lonely once in a while.

This means every three years - last one was the virtual conference (due to Covid) in Oulu, Finland, but now we're looking to meet up in person in Poland for the next one. To my great delight, the paper about membrane gold threads that Tracy and I have proposed was accepted, so we'll be able to talk about our project there in May!

In case you're interested, you can learn more about the upcoming conference, and the past ones, on their webpage. Registration is also open now until end of February.

The dyeing instructions and experiment protocol have been successfully tested:

The results? Two beautifully dyed objects, one set of instructions with notes and corrections, and I've already managed to do the fixing-up and the instructions are sent out. 

(The result this time turned out to be a rather orangey colour, by the way. That might be due to the pre-treatment, or a different batch of madder, or the different alum, or the water, or whatever. Madder. Might drive one madder and madder...)

Now it's time for me to wait and see what will happen. I'm already looking forward to getting the first of the samples and be able to compare them to the original reference. And, well, I guess I could also think about when to start my own homework...

Here's a better picture of the outcome of our dyeing tests for the variations between different madders and different waters: 

So. Can you see differences? What do you think? 

I'm back from the Forum and my recuperation afterwards - much needed, and much appreciated, and now it's tackling all the emails that have accumulated, and sending out all the orders that came in, and then... back to normal work plus the Forum homework.

And oh, there's homework. We ran a total of four experiments and one dyeing test during the week (yes, madness indeed). One was the continuation of Micky Schoelzke's exploration of fake purple that she started last year (you can read about that on the Forum homepage). Then I had the splendid idea of trying out mordanting with horsetail (equisetum arvense), which was an experiment on its own. Then there were the dyeing tests - a first trial at reconstructing some early modern recipes for dyeing knitted caps, with the three great providers of red: madder, cochenille, and kermes. Micky had an experiment with madder as well, a spin-off from the fake purple research, using madder root that had been pre-treated in different ways.

And then, of course, there was the Madder Baselines experiment. We had the staggering number of 35 different water samples for testing the dyeing outcome and the influence of the water on the dye result... so that was huge, and ate up all the time available, and then some. Especially since the experiment went not just as planned.

It was rather clear when we were getting ready that the amount of goods was very large for our small beakers - but there's the decision to make between having very small samples (where any fluctuations in amounts of madder, or the quality of the teaspoonful you are using compared to the quality of the second teaspoonful for the next sample will make more of a difference the smaller your samples are) or having larger samples and larger amounts of dyestuff but running the risk of uneven dyeing. 

We decided to go for larger samples and the risk of spotting... which, in retrospective, was not a good decision, as spotting was very, very prominent. So we went for the afterbath - which was another mordanting run, and another dye run. That did not satisfy us with the results, so we decided to use the waters that we had more of to do a second run, with more liquid and thus less of a risk of uneven dyeing. Another batch of samples to make, another mordanting run, another dye run.

And then we had to test the different madders that we got - mordanting and dyeing in de-ionised water, to make things all even and comparable. 

Long (very long!) story short: We did get to see some differences depending on the waters used, but they were not as pronounced as we would have expected them to be. There's also a difference between the different madders. Now the last factor that would need to be checked is... the Human Factor. Because the speed with which you heat your dyebath, the temperature, they also might make a difference. 

Fortunately, most of the Forum participants volunteered in taking part of this experiment, and dyeing a sample at home. Which is why this happened today:

I harvested some more madder from the garden yesterday, and today it was dried enough (I sped the process up a bit) to be ground, and now it can finish dyeing... and then there'll be a test run of my instructions for the volunteers, and then these can be sent out. 

And then we'll see. I am very, very curious if there will be differences visible - after all, it's the same madder, the same samples, the same mordant, the same instructions, and the same water (de-ionised water for the win!). 

What's your guess? Will we have differences? Or will it all look the same? 

Well, the plan for the Madder Baselines is about done - the rest of the planning will have to be done as soon as we know how many samples there will be to handle, and then go for a last check through the long list of steps - before following them through to, hopefully, a nicely colourful end.

Meanwhile I have a second template to turn into a plan and protocol: the template for a mordanting experiment. Common Horsetail is said to contain quite a bit of alum, so it is in theory a replacement for mineral alum which may not have been available everywhere. However, it's not really clear if the horsetail is really suitable for this, mostly because there's no recipe that tells us about amounts necessary, or if there was any other preparation done before using it. Or at least I have not been able to find any...

So the idea was to try out if the plant will work as a mordant, and if yes, how much of it is needed. Because even if it's available, if you need ten times the amount of wool weight to have enough alum, well... that would mean 10 kg of the dried plant for a single kilo of wool, and if you've ever woven fabric, you know that a kilo is a puny amount.

I can think of three different methods of using the plant straight away: as it is (just dried, then soaked, and maybe boiled a bit previously to better get out the contents), fermented, or (which would also reduce the bulk of it) burnt to ashes (which should still contain the metal, though maybe in a different form). 

Obviously, the burning and the using as is do not need extra prep time, but the fermenting does. I'm happy to report that the 100 g of plant that I put into 7 litres of rain water are doing what they are supposed to be doing: Making bubbles and working on changing their smell.

It's not an unpleasant smell (at least not yet), but it is definitely much different from the smell it had at the start (like dried horsetail, but thank you, Captain Obvious). I'm very, very curious already to find out how (or if!) all this will work!