Abstract
Bulleid and Gray cemented the association of long-handled combs from Iron Age contexts with weaving in the early twentieth century. Since then, the long-handled comb has been generally included as part of the weaving chaîne opératoire. Early attempts were made to assess use-wear; however, it was not until the 1970s and 1980s that wear patterns were critically examined. Building on a century of research, Tina Tuohy’s doctoral project further examined wear patterns and offered an alternative proposal, citing use-wear as evidence. In archaeological research, combs are frequently associated with other known textile production tools, which has embedded their place in the prehistoric textile toolkit for Britain. Although this notion is generally agreed, their utility within the textile production sequence remains questionable. In illustrations, combs are usually depicted with the warp-weighted loom, despite Tuohy’s proposition to the contrary. Analyzing the history of long-handled comb research revealed the necessity for re-evaluation This chapter presents preliminary data on a recording rubric and methodology for assessing utilitarian comb function from the archaeological evidence from Danebury hillfort (Hampshire, UK).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Though MacGregor (1985: 189) mentioned that these combs might be residual or else Anglo-Saxon or Viking in date.
- 2.
Anderson (1871: 553–557) offers several sources that cite a description which matches the long-handled comb. He notes from Rous, Archaeologica Attica that a “χερχίδ [sic], or pecten or the sley, like a comb” is operating as a way to beat weft into place (emphasis in original). A note from Juvenal’s Satires (9.30) illustrates a disgruntled man who complains of an improperly woven garment: “Et male percussas textoris pectine Galli…and insufficiently struck with a comb of a Gaulish weaver” (emphasis in original). These explanations, and the others he cites which are not printed here, are enough for Anderson to draw the conclusion that a comb was used as a beater on Greek and Roman looms, and that if Iron Age weavers in Gaul are using the same warp-weighted loom technology, then the long-handled combs from Iron Age Britain were the pecten textoris.
- 3.
They also reference modern Scandinavian weavers who use the spatha or ‘weaving sword’.
- 4.
Cunnington (1923) also doubted their suitability for weaving.
- 5.
Use-wear is the accumulation of physical friction on the surface of a material that may be from manufacture or use. See Marreiros et al. (2015) for an historical account of use-wear studies.
- 6.
Tuohy (1995) mentioned conducting experiments with warp-weighted loom weaving which led her to suspect that the use-wear observed did not match the evidence on the archaeological samples. The parameters of her experiments were not published.
- 7.
A processed of controlled rotting.
- 8.
Early Pre-Roman Iron Age (800–500 BC): 3, Middle Pre-Roman Iron Age (500–100 BC): 3; Late Pre-Roman Iron Age (100 BC–43 AD): 16; unphased (1).
References
Anderson J (1871) Notes on the evidence of spinning and weaving in the brochs or pictish towers supplied by the stone whorls and the long-handled ‘broch combs’ found in them. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 9:548–561.
Anderson J (1883) Scotland in pagan times: The Iron Age, Vol. 1. David Douglas, Edinburgh.
Bailey R (1999) Those weaving combs – yet again. Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 28:5–9.
Bradfield J (2018) Some thoughts on bone artefact discoloration at archaeological sites. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 17:500–509.
Bulleid A, Gray HSG (1911) The Glastonbury lake village: A full description of the excavations and the relics discovered, 1892–1907, Vol. 1. Glastonbury Antiquarian Society, Somerset.
Bulleid A, Gray HSG, Munro R, Dawkins WB, Jackson JW, Andrews CW, Reid C (1917) The Glastonbury Lake Village, Vol. II. Glastonbury Antiquarian Society, Somerset.
Bulleid A, Gray HSG (1948) The Meare Lake Village. A full description of the excavations and the relics from the eastern half of the West Village, 1910–1933, Vol. 1. Taunton Castle, Somerset.
Chittock H (2014) Arts and crafts in Iron Age Britain: Reconsidering the aesthetic effects of weaving combs. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 33(3):313–326.
Coles J, Minnitt S (1995) ‘Industrious and Fairly Civilized’: The Glastonbury Lake village. Somerset Levels Project and Somerset County Council Museums Service, Somerset.
Coughtrey M (1871) Notes on materials found in a kitchen midden at Hillswick, Shetland, with special reference to long-handled combs. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 9:118–151.
Crowfoot G (1945) The bone ‘gouges’ of Maiden Castle and other sites. Antiquity 19(75):157–158.
Cunliffe B (1984) Danebury: An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 2: The finds. Council for British Archaeology, London.
Cunliffe B (1991) Danebury: An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 4: The site. Council for British Archaeology, London.
Cunliffe B (1995) Danebury Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 6: A hillfort community in perspective. CBA Research Report 102. Council for British Archaeology, London.
Cunnington ME (1923) The Early Iron Age inhabited site at All Cannings Cross farm Wiltshire: A description of the excavations, and objects found, by Mr. and Mrs. BH Cunnington, 1911–1922. George Simpson & Company, Devizes.
Davis O (2013) Re-interpreting the Danebury assemblage: houses, households, and community. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 79:353–375. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/ppr.2013.16.
DeRoche CD (1995) Textile production in Britain during the first millennium B.C. Unpublished dissertation, University of Cambridge.
DeRoche D (2012) England: Bronze and Iron Ages. In: Gleba M, Mannering U (eds) Textiles and textile production in Europe from Prehistory to AD 400. Ancient Textiles Series 11. Oxbow Books, Oxford and Oakville, p 444–450.
Dupras T, Schultz J (2013) Taphonomic bone staining and color changes in forensic contexts. In: Pokines J, Symes SA (eds) Manual of forensic taphonomy. Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, p 315–340.
Fitzpatrick AP (2020) A face from the British Iron Age: A decorated Iron Age weaving comb from Harwell, Oxfordshire. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 39(2):177–188.
Fox AL (1881) XXI. – Excavations at Mount Caburn Camp, near Lewes, conducted in September and October, 1877, and July, 1878. Archaeologia 46(2):423–495.
Gleba M, Harris S (2019) The first plant bast fibre technology: Identifying splicing in archaeological textiles. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 11(5):2329–2346.
Griffitts J (2001) Bone tools from Los Pozos. In: Choyke AM, Bartosiewicz L (eds) Crafting bone – skeletal technologies through time and space: Proceedings from the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) worked bone research group. BAR 937. Archaeopress, Oxford, p 185–196.
Grömer K (2016) The art of prehistoric textile making. Veröffentlichungen der Prähistorischen Abteilung 5. Natural History Museum Vienna, Vienna.
Hallén Y, O’Neill M (1994) The use of bone and antler at Foshigarry and Bac Mhic Connain, two Iron Age sites on North Uist, Western Isles. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 124:189–231
Haselgrove C, Armit I, Champion TC, Creighton J, Gwilt A, Hill JD, Hunter F, Woodward A (2001) Understanding the British Iron Age: An agenda for action. Trust for Wessex Archaeology, Salisbury.
Hedges JW (1973) Textiles and textile production in Prehistoric Britain. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Sheffield.
Henshall AS (1950) Textiles and weaving appliances in Prehistoric Britain. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 16:130–162.
Hodder I and Hedges JW (1977) Weaving combs: Their typology and distribution with some introductory remarks on date and function. In: Collis J (ed.) The Iron Age in Britain – a review. Sheffield University Press, Sheffield, p 17–28.
Hodson F (1964) Cultural Grouping within the British pre-Roman Iron Age. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 30, 99–110.
Jones AM, Diaz-Guardamino M, Crellin RJ (2016) From artefact biographies to ‘multiple objects’: A new analysis of the decorated plaques of the Irish Sea region. Norwegian Archaeological Review 49(2):113–133.
Joy J (2015) ‘Things in process’: Biographies of British Iron Age pits. In: Hahn HP, Jung M, Kienlin T, Kreuz PA, Hofmann KP, Joy J, Wittekind S, Niehaus M, Boschung D (eds) Biography of objects. Wilhelm Fink Verlag, Paderborn, p 125–141.
Joy J (2011) Fancy objects in the British Iron Age: Why decorate? Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 77:205–229.
Keller F (1866) The lake dwellings of Switzerland and other parts of Europe. Longmans, Green & Co., London.
Ling Roth H (1918) Studies in primitive looms. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 47:113–150.
Lyman RL, Lyman C (1994) Vertebrate taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
MacGregor A (1985) Bone, antler, ivory, and horn: The technology of skeletal materials since the Roman period. Croom Helm, London and Sydney.
Marreiros J, Mazzucco N, Gibaja JF, Bicho N (2015) Macro and micro evidence from the past: The state of the art of archeological use-wear studies. In: Marreiros J, Mazzucco N, Gibaja JF, Bicho N (eds) Use-wear and residue analysis in archaeology. Springer, Cham, p 5–26.
Reynolds PJ (1972) Experimental archaeology. Worcestershire Archaeological Newsletter 9(7):1–18.
Roes A (1963) Bone and antler objects from the Frisian terp-mounds. Tjeenk Willink HD and Zoon NV, Haarlem.
Rösel-Mautendorfer H, Grömer K, Kania K (2012) Farbige Bänder aus dem prähistorischen Bergwerk von Hallstatt. Experimente zur Herstellung von Repliken, Schwerpunkt Faseraufbereitung und Spinnen. In: Weller U, Lessig-Weller T, Hanning E, Strugalla-Voltz B (eds) Experimentelle Archäologie in Europa – Bilanz 2012. Europäische Vereinigung zur Förderung der Experimentellen Archäologie, Bad Langensalza, p 190–201.
Ryder ML (1997) Fleece types and Iron Age wool textiles. Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 25:13–16.
Sellwood L (1984) Objects of bone and antler. In: Cunliffe B (ed.) Danebury: An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 2: The finds. Council for British Archaeology, London, p 371–378.
Serjeanston D (2007) Intensification of animal husbandry in the Late Bronze Age? The contribution of sheep and pigs. In: Haselgrove C, Pope R (eds) The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the near Continent. Oxbow Books, Oxford, p 80–93.
Smith RA (ed.) (1925) Guide to the Early Iron Age antiquities. British Museum, London.
Stolpe MH (1874) Sur la découvertes faites dans l’Ile de Björkö. Congrès internationale d’anthropologie et d’archaéologie préhistoriques, Session 7, Vol. 2. Stockholm, p 619–640.
Tuohy C (1992) Long-handled ‘weaving combs’ in the Netherlands. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 58: 385–387.
Tuohy C (1995) Prehistoric combs of antler and bone. Unpublished dissertation, University of Exeter.
Tuohy T (1999) Prehistoric combs of antler and bone. BAR 285. Hadrian Books Ltd, Oxford.
Tuohy T (2004) Weaving as a domestic craft at the Iron Age site of Glastonbury Lake Village in Somerset, Britain. Journal of Wetland Archaeology 4(1):97–109.
Wheeler REM (1943) Maiden Castle, Dorset. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London Number 12. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Helen Chittock and two anonymous reviewers for commenting on an earlier draft of this chapter. All errors remain my own. This research formed part of my doctoral thesis project which has re-evaluated textile tools and their depositional contexts within Iron Age Britain.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Beamer, J. (2022). Combing the Data: Re-evaluating ‘Weaving’ Combs in the Textile Production Sequence during the British Iron Age. In: Ulanowska, A., Grömer, K., Vanden Berghe, I., Öhrman, M. (eds) Ancient Textile Production from an Interdisciplinary Perspective. Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92170-5_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92170-5_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-92169-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-92170-5
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)