Capturing Our Cultural Intangible Textile Heritage, MoCap and Craft Technology
Textile craft and textile design have always had an important social, cultural and economic impact on both individuals and societies. The cultural heritage of textiles does not end with the preservation and collection of costumes and other textiles in museums. It also includes living traditions inherited from our ancestors. Furthermore, understanding craft and craft processes are crucial when considering both past societies and the cultural heritage of humankind. The study of intangible processes, hidden within archaeological objects, crafts, action and activities as well as cognitive processes, involves both practical and theoretical considerations. Today, computer applications such as Motion Capture can enhance our knowledge of the complexity and variety of artifacts, their production, and how various craft traditions develop over time, yielding new insights and perspectives applicable to ancient societies as well as to traditional craft today.
KeywordsCraft Textile processes Motion capture Archaeology Theories of practices
This project is a collaboration between Lund University Humanities Lab Sweden, the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research and the Archaeological department, SAXO Institute, University of Copenhagen. The recordings were made at Lund University Humanities Lab Sweden. The article is written with the support of DNRF64 and Lund University Humanities Lab.
- Andersen, E., Nørgård, A.: Et uldsejl til Oselven. Vikingeskibsmuseet, Roskilde (2009)Google Scholar
- Andersson, E.: Tools for Textile Production – From Birka and Hedeby (Birka Studies 8). Stockholm (2003)Google Scholar
- Belanová-Štolcova, T., Grömer, K.: Loom weights, spindles and textiles - textile production in central Europe from the Bronze and Iron age. In: NESAT X, pp. 9–20. Oxbow, Oxford (2010)Google Scholar
- Bender Jørgensen, L.: Introduction to part II: technology as practice and spinning faith. In: Sørensen, M.L.S., Rebay-Salisbury, K. (eds.) Embodied Knowledge: Perspectives on Belief and Technology, pp. 91–94 and 128–136. Oxbow Books, Oxford (2012)Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P.: Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1977)Google Scholar
- Costin, C.L.: Thinking about production: phenomenological classification and lexical semantics. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 17(1), 143–162 (2007)Google Scholar
- Ingold, T.: The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge, London, New York (2000)Google Scholar
- Latour, B.: Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
- Olofsson, L., Andersson Strand, E., Nosch, M.-L.: Experimental testing of Bronze age textile tools. In: Andersson Strand, E., Nosch, M.-L. (eds.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts: Investigating Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, pp. 75–100. Oxbow Books, Oxford (2015)Google Scholar
- Renfrew, C., Bahn, P.: Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Thames & Hudson Ltd., New York (2004)Google Scholar
- Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Maurice Temple Smith, London (1983)Google Scholar
- Sutton, J., Keene, N.: Cognitive history and material culture. In: Gaimster, D., Hamling, T., Richardson, C. (eds.) The Ashgate Research Companion to Material Culture in Early Modern Europe (2015)Google Scholar