Studying this newfangled form of leg coverings - certainly these couldn't nearly be as good as the current fashion - which has been in use for many centuries now!
Several contemporary writings seem to specifically note Viking Age and later Scandinavians' views toward certain styles of trousers, and how the traditional norm was likely footed trousers akin to the Thorsberg style, so when separate-leg Hosen were introduced via outside influences, some pushback would have likely occurred within the more traditional branches of Danish society. Haithabu, Current-Day Germany ; Latter half of the 10th Century. Location: Haithabu, Current-Day Germany Date: Approx. 10th Century Culture: Viking Age Danish Estimated Social Class: Possibly Middle Class Garment Type: Hood Probably one of the most hotly-debated pieces of clothing recovered from the now extinct settlement of Haithabu is that of the supposed hood. While it is no mystery hoods played a large role in Medieval society, the fact that there is a large gap in the textile record during the Viking Age for such a garment has led to much speculation and debate within the archaeological and living history communities. We know hood-like garments had been in use since at least the Roman Age with finds such as the Orkney hood and artwork depicting the Cucullus, with the former being one of the first examples we see of a proper hood-like garment in Europe, and a piece which dates to anywhere between the 3rd and 7th centuries. Something we do know is that during this time hoods seem to have been a culture-specific item, rather than something seen as commonplace across all of Early Medieval Europe. For example, most all early hood examples we have come from Scottish and Scandinavian regions, with little to none being seen in Anglo-Saxon, Frankish, and other contemporary art from the time - something which falls in direct conflict with later Medieval fashion sense in which hoods abound in nearly every work. This means it is likely they started in more Northern sections of Europe and gradually worked their way South as the period progressed. Obviously our most complete example of a "Viking Age" hood is that of the Skjoldehamn hood, which I have done an article on in the past. The hood was nearly complete and features a rather simple construction, with a rectangular body that folds over the top of the head, and two square gores that open up the front and back. This seems to be the common formula used in most Viking Age hood reconstructions, however, this poses another issue - how likely is it that a hood from the very late years of the Viking Age, and from a culture that likely wasn't even a Viking-related one at that, was widespread enough to justify being shown as the quintessential hood for the period? The short answer is that, while a very welcome item in our understanding of early Medieval fashion and textile culture, it is not a good example of a true "Viking Age" hood. In my article on the hood I explain the intricacies that I won't get into in this article, however, given its date range, location, likely cultural assignment, and the fact we do not know if it came from a man or woman, a clear picture as to why this theory sits should become evident. So what then should we present as an accurate design for the period? Are there any true "Viking Age" hoods that exist? That is where the Hedeby hood fragments come in, and also where the true debate starts. The Original Fragments In her works, Inga Hägg notes an assemblage of seams and wool as being that of the remains of a hood, however, unlike many of her other assessments of textiles from Haithabu, this one has been much less clear in what it may have actually been, which has led to much uncertainty and confusion. The piece consists of three pieces of 2/2 wool wadmal (a thick, shaggy wool with heavy felting), which are still roughly assembled. The first, and largest piece, is the main "body" of the lot, and is likely the body of the hood itself. The second piece is joined with a seam that runs up one side and down the other at the top, and then juts outward where it terminates in a tear, likely the remains of the 'liripipe' tail. The third, and final piece, is a triangular-shaped piece flanked by two seams on either side, likely a gore to open up the bottom. There is also a row of stitching at the "front" of the main body, which has also added to the confusion. Now, since this piece's discovery and subsequent cataloging as that of a hood, a second theory has arisen: that is not in fact a hood at all, but rather the remains of a child's tunic. Looking at the piece with this in mind, one can easily see how the top left piece is the shoulder and sleeve area, the bottom is a small gore, and the right-hand row of stitching is the hemming of a keyhole neckline, and all of this makes perfect sense. Many have speculated that the sizes of the assembled pieces could in no way make a hood for a grown adult, and they would be right. Many extra pieces would need to be added to make this a wearable hood for an adult, even one of the period with a stature slightly smaller than our own. So with this in mind, we are going to look at this with the mindset that it is, in fact, that of a hood, and what would it take to fill in the blanks to make this a completed, wearable garment. The Reconstruction For the reconstruction, I was able to track down some green 2/2 twill wadmal. While the original fragments are brown in color, no dye analysis has been done to determine whether this is normal age oxidation, or if the pieces were dyed this way, so it could be anyone's guess at this point as to what color they were originally. As such, I went with a natural green which I determined to be easily obtained through natural dyes, as well as one that may actually turn brown with age. Something I noticed almost immediately, however, is that very little is actually needed to complete the hood, despite the fragments' relative lack of any solid features. Through my own understanding of later Medieval hoods, as well as studying stone carvings from the Viking Age, the complete design of the hood seemed almost intuitive. While many have struggled with the extremely small size of the gore fragment at the bottom, and have tried adding more of the same size to make the opening larger, I determined that the front and what we will call "outer back" gores were likely identical in size, with the latter being accompanied not by more of the same size, but by two "inner back" gores that were somewhat trapezoidal in shape. Not only did this make the size of the hood's back nearly perfect for an adult fit, but also makes an overall larger triangular gore opening that is very similar in shape to that of later hoods from the Medieval Period. Once the mystery of the hood's gore arrangement had been solved, the next was the liripipe. While extremely common in later Medieval works of art, if Hägg is to believed, and this is, in fact, a hood, it would seem the fashion of the "tail" trailing off the back of the hood started in Early Medieval Scandinavian fashion, and the fragment here is a direct extant example of the supposed liripiped hoods seen on some stone carvings from the period. The tail itself does seems to have been quite wide and likewise was probably not very long. Since we have no idea how long it really was, I made my reconstruction approximately waist-length. This way it still gives a good effect, but is not so long that it gets in the way of combat, manual labor, or cloak function. It is made as a single piece that is sewn up the bottom and to the upper back of the hood's body. For the hood's main body, I simply made a long rectangle that folds over the top of the head - much in the same way as the Skjoldehamn and later Medieval examples do, and since there does not appear to be any seam running along the top of the existing fragment, this was likely how it was made. For the width, I simply went with a basic size to fit from the front to the back of my head - ignoring the stitching on the original fragment's "front" and chalking that up to likely being a repair and not the supposed front hem as some have suggested. The hood should be narrow enough to not obstruct too much vision or be too tight around the face, yet wide enough that one can pull their head and face back into the hood for protection from the elements.
In later Medieval art this was taken to the extreme and the hood openings projected way past the face and were rolled back, however, there is no evidence to suggest this was done during the Viking Age. In Conclusion Overall, I am quite pleased with how the hood turned out, and I feel it gives a good representation of what the original may have looked like given Hägg's description. While we may truly never know if this was in fact a hood, or that of a child's tunic, part of the joys of reconstructive archaeology is finding what works and what doesn't - and this certainly works! Until we can effectively prove one way or another the true lineage of the fragments recovered, I am firmly convinced through my own study, reconstruction, and application that the remains are from that of a hood of the type seen within this article, and it shall serve as a good example in filling in the blanks where the missing links of Early Medieval hood development are concerned. Photo & Information Sources
|
AboutThis part of the site will look at the various aspects of life on Viking Age Danish people. From what they ate, to how they may have fought. Archives
July 2021
Categories
All
|