In this guide, we will look at the basic "reenactor-level" details on various Viking Age items. This particular example will focus on the supposed pillbox hat fragment from Hedeby (Haithabu).
The reconstruction here is made from a brown 2/2 wool twill, and features a very basic design; it has an oval crown on top with a slightly curved band to form the lower body. While the almost complete pillbox hat of Carolingian origins - recovered from Leens, Netherlands - bears a seam down the middle of the crown, as well as decorative reinforcement stitching where the crown and band are sewn together, the Haithabu example seems to lack this, so we opted to omit it for this reproduction, as well. The seams are all sewn via a double running stitch and the allowances and lower hems are roll-hemmed down and whip-stitched into place. Due to the period of time this style of hat was worn (roughly from the Late Imperial Roman period to the Renaissance), this hat is correct for any period within the Viking Age, though should only be limited to Danish or Continental European representations until more evidence for their use in Britain or the rest of Scandinavia arises. Below are photos of the reproduction, as well as the original fragments upon which it is based. (On a personal note, I do take commissions for these, so any living historians [or just historical clothing buffs] who may want one, feel free to contact me via email or Facebook! Every piece is hand-sewn with the most accurate materials available, so you can ensure you are getting tip-top quality!) Location: Haithabu, Current-Day Germany & Leens, Netherlands Date: Approx. Late 10th Century Culture: Late Viking Age Danish Estimated Social Class: Unknown Garment Type: Hat To date, no complete hats have been recovered from the harbor at Haithabu, so much of what we have to go from is conjecture and a good deal of reconstructive archaeology. Although no complete find has been recovered (nor are the forms of headwear worn by Viking Age Danes mentioned in any of the literary works from the time), we can still assume that in Haithabu’s 200+ year run that many hats – and many styles of hats – were probably worn. So what style of hats were probably worn? In short, the most probable was that of a pillbox design such as those worn by the Romans, and later, by the Carolingians in what is now the Netherlands and central Europe. This article will focus primarily on this style of hat, as the most evidence for its use exists when compared to other styles from the period. To start, a pillbox hat is a hat with a flat top (made from one or two pieces) and rounded sides, which means, as its namesake implies, it comes in a pillbox shape. What the Viking Age Danes called the hat is unknown to us, or if the hat even had a separate name and wouldn’t have been referred to as nothing more than a “hat,” with nothing to denote a specific style. As stated above, few, if any, literary sources from the time refer to the headgear worn by Danes during this period, so those are unfortunately not of much use when determining a proper name for the hat, and as such, the term “pillbox hat” will be used for the duration of this article. So why is this style the most probable candidate to have been worn in Viking Age Haithabu? The answers are numerous. The first and foremost being the textile fragment recovered from Haithabu. The fragment, catalogued as piece S35, was recovered is what is believed to have been the upper sections of a well, and was most likely disposed of once it because too worn to continue use. It is thought to date to around the late 9th Century and is made from a 2/2 wool twill. The piece itself is rather ambiguous, being merely two pieces of wool textile sewn together with a seam down the middle. To many experts, however, the shape of the seam, and the fact that the piece appears to have been heavily worn, indicates that it most likely fits the shape of that of a pillbox hat design. When one compares the fragment’s shape to that of a reconstructed pillbox, the resemblance is uncanny. Despite the piece dating to the 9th Century, the style itself very well could have continued its use well through the fall of Haithabu in the early 11th, as this type of hat had already been in use since at least the 3rd Century (perhaps even earlier), and saw use well into the Renaissance. The second reason is the near-complete find from the Netherlands and its proximity to Haithabu and Denmark. The hat in question, numbered as find b1930/12.34/1, was recovered from Leens, Netherlands and is a near-complete extant find. It was constructed from diamond twill wool and is made from three pieces, two for the top and one that goes around the main body, and is a textbook example of a pillbox design. So why would a hat from the Netherlands be grounds for one to present it as an example of those worn in Denmark? The answer is simple: Location and commerce. We know this particular style of hat was a rather prolific design, after all, it began its life as a Roman design and lasted well into the Medieval Period and Renaissance, and was used all throughout Europe during its lifespan. The close proximity of the Netherlands, and Carolingian Dynasty as a whole, to Viking Age Denmark is also a good indicator. While the two factions had rather off-and-on relations during this period, with some areas (primarily East Francia) even being under Danish rule during the latter part of the 9th Century, when the fragment from Haithabu is believed to have been dated to, there certainly were periods where the hat could have been introduced to the Danes of the area via Carolingian influences, be it through trade and commerce, or war and occupation, that exposed the men fighting, settling, and trading to new fashions of their enemies and beneficiaries. The location and probability for trade and exposure between the two groups, coupled with the seemingly perfectly-shaped fragment from Haithabu itself seems to begin to paint a very convincing picture for this style to have been worn. The presence of items adopted through trade and/or war and occupation by Viking Age Scandinavians in gravesites and other areas of note, such as the ring uncovered in Sweden bearing Islamic inscriptions, indicates these peoples were more than willing to adopt fashions from their neighbors, business partners, and subjugated masses. What about other styles? While it is a fairly good reality that other hat styles were in use during this period of Danish history, no examples, be it literary or physical extant finds, have been found, at least where Haithabu and Denmark are concerned. We do have examples of other hats in use in other regions of Scandinavia during the Viking Age, such as the conical hat found in various sources (not least of which, the famous Icelandic bronze Thor figurine), though again, an argument for their use in Denmark is not as great as the pillbox simply due to a lack of physical evidence from the area. Paneled hats, such as those from Sweden and Moschevaya Balka, are also ambiguous options for potential styles worn in Denmark during this period due to a lack of evidence. The frequency of which hats were worn during this period is also likely unknown to us. While some artistic sources, such as the painting of Viking raiders housed in the Scandinavian School in Oslo, Norway, show nearly all the men involved wearing hats, we must also take note that sources such as this were certainly post-Viking Age and do not accurately portray the men or equipment of the time, but are probably rather an artist’s interpretation of how he thought they may have looked. One could argue that the lack of extant archaeological finds regarding hats is an indication of their rarity in-period, however, I personally do not buy this notion. There are just as few complete tunic finds from the period, so by this logic, does that mean tunics were a rarity? Hardly. Perhaps we will never truly have a complete picture on just how common hats were worn, or what myriad of fashions were in use during the Viking Age in Denmark. Photo Credit:
Location: Andøya, Norway Date: Approx. Late 10th Century or early 11th Century Culture: Late Viking Age Norwegian Estimated Social Class: Middle-to-lower Class Garment Type: Hood In 1936, a body was recovered on the Norwegian island of Andøya. Initially thought to have been a member of the Sami People, the body was given a "proper burial" before then being exhumed yet again and sent for study. In the 50+ years that followed, the body was debated as having been anywhere from only a little over 100 years old, to that of nearly 1000, and the gender and culture was still up in the air. In the 1980's carbon dating of the textiles in the body seem to determine it was at least Medieval, with further, more recent, dating putting it in the latter part of the Viking Age, or late 11th Century to be more specific. Where gender and culture are concerned, we still do not know, however, DNA tests done on the bones indicate the body lacks typical Sami genetic markers, though it has been stated the advanced deterioration of the DNA may have affected this result. A similar argument can be said for using DNA to determine whether the body was male or female. The size does not help, either, as the skeleton's remaining pieces seem to put the body directly in between male and female measurements for the time, however, it has been noted that, whatever the gender, the person did not seem to suffer the ills of hard labor (a rarity for the time), and had shoulder-length hair. In this article, we will discuss the hood recovered from this unique and interesting find. According to Dan Halvard Løvlid's master thesis, titled "Nye tanker om Skjoldehamnfunnet", or "New Thoughts On the Skjoldehamn Find", the hood is made from a 2/2 wool twill, with a slight "diagonal stripe" pattern, caused by the warp and weft being different shades of brown. The hood's quality is seen as somewhat substandard by today's sewing methods - something we will discuss later, and was likely made with some degree of leftover and scrap material. Initially thought to have been made with four pieces (two rectangular pieces for the body, two square gussets for the front and back), Løvlid was able to assess it was actually made only from three, with the body being a singular piece that had been cut up the middle, with an approximately 2.5cm piece left at the top still connected, as well as an approximately 1cm piece left untouched between the top of the front gusset and the head-hole. The hood was then sewn up the back and top and the gussets added for fullness. . Starting at the top, the hood was sewn using four separate ways of attaching, which may at seem a bit excessive, even by today's standards. The first method of affixing the hood's seam was a simple whipstitch on the inside. This was likely done with the hood inside-out where the two raw edges were pulled and whip-stitched together. The hood was then turned right side-out and the remaining three rows were added. These run from near the top of the head-hole to the back seam, with the bottom and final row curving ever to slightly to somewhat match the curvature of the wearer's head. These all coupled together would add a degree of stiffness to the top of the hood's seam and create a distinctive "cock's comb" appearance. The head hole of the hood appears to have been roll-hemmed under (turning the edge under itself twice so the raw edge is encapsulated inside and thus not visible) and whip-stitched. Initially observed to be a sort of rudimentary decorative embroidery stitch, the hem appears to have been sewn using both red and yellow wool yarn. This is, however, been somewhat refuted in Løvlid's assessment, as he noted the stitches visible on the outside are irregular, and little effort was made to make the highly-visible on the outside, with only some showing through and others being nearly invisible. The red yarn hems the opening up the entire right side before terminating about halfway down the left where it is then replaced with yellow. It is here that Løvlid believes this was done out of necessity and the use of remaining materials, rather than any sort of conscious decision for decoration. He also notes that the knots terminating both the red and yellow yarns are visible upon inspection, as seen below. At the back of the hood, the top whip-stitched seam seems to have extended over the edge a few centimeters before terminating and meeting with the rear seam. This rear seam, also believed to have been a possible form of primitive decorative embroidery, was sewn using the same yellow yarn as part of the face opening. It meets with the top whip-stitch seam and runs for the better part of the back seam before ending about 3.7cm above the back gusset and being replaced with brown thread. One feature of this seam that is both unique, and an example of what we would see as "substandard" is the fact that this yellow seam begins on the outside of the hood, rather than the inside, with the knot being clearly visible on the outside left. The stitches themselves were noted by Løvlid as being a "small oblique basting stitch" where they enter and exit at offset angles, making them appear they are angled downward and out as the seam goes on. The front and back of the hood are affixed with two square gussets. These open up the respective areas and create not only coverage of the upper torso and shoulders, but also a fullness so the hood can be donned and worn comfortably. These are both square in nature, and extend nearly to the waist. It was noted by Løvlid that the rear gusset appears to extend further down in the back than the one in the front, however we are unsure if this was intentional or simply a warp to the garment itself over time, as when made with the correct measurements and worn, the two pieces seem to sit nearly parallel to one another on a person. These two gussets are affixed to the main body via whip-stitches. Yet another example of material conservation, these stitches seem to not only bind the seams themselves together, but also the seam allowances, which are turned under and the entirety of the seams held together with the same line of thread, as opposed to most modern seams (and even other seams from other garments at the time), where the seam itself is sewn, then the allowances are sewn separately. The bottom of the hood is then whip-stitched to prevent fraying and unraveling, however, Løvlid notes that no effort appears to have been made to turn under these edges, and rather, they were simply whip-stitched in their raw form. Lastly, and perhaps one of the most notable features of this hood, are the ties. Since the original hood was rather damaged, only one tie remains in its entirety for study. These ties, affixed to the outside just behind where the ear would sit inside the hood, and are comprised of an olive and red round braid with an olive fringe at the end. The use of such ties has been debated, with the initial theory being that they were to tie around the opening and close the hood around the face to prevent wind and snow from entering, however, test with reproductions have shown the opposite may have been the case. Due to the hood's nature of construction, it is prone to close up around the face anyway, so something was needed to open it up and expand one's peripheral vision. These ties, when tied around the back of the head, seem to do just that, and not only help with vision, but the overall comfort of the hood in general. Below is the reproduced hood in its entirety when not worn around the head. 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
|