See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280575950

Speciality fibres for special textiles.

Chapter · January 2014

CITATION READS

1 2,734

1 author:

Antoinette Rast-Eicher
Universität Bern
49 PUBLICATIONS 555 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Antoinette Rast-Eicher on 13 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The pdf of your paper in A Stitch in Time: Essays in Honour of Lise Bender Jørgensen may
not be published on the Internet until three years from publication (June 2017), unless the site
is a limited access intranet (password protected).
 A Stitch in Time

Essays in Honour of Lise Bender Jørgensen

i
GOTHENBURG UNIVERSITY
Department of Historical Studies
GOTARC SERIES A. GOTHENBURG ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES
ISSN1403-8293

No 4. A Stitch in Time: Essays in Honour of Lise Bender Jørgensen

Red. Sophie Bergerbrant and Sølvi Helene Fossøy
Printing: Reprocentralen, Humanities Department, Gothenburg University, 2014
Layout: Rich Potter
Cover: Rich Potter
ISBN 978-91-85245-56-9

ii
 Contents
A Stitch in Time vii
Sophie Bergerbrant

The red thread xi

Lotte Hedeager

Lise Bender Jørgensen: research in textiles xv

Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Bibliography of Lise Bender Jørgensen’s publications xix

Antoinette Rast-Eicher and Sølvi Helene Fossøy

Science, Theory, Methodology and Prehistoric Textiles

Experimental soil burial studies for archaeological textile preservation and research 1
– a review
Elizabeth E. Peacock

Implications of a web - considerations of a craft-oriented research perspective 23

Ulla Isabel Zagal-Mach Wolfe

Speciality fibres for special textiles 43

Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Prehistoric textile patterns: transfer with obstruction 63

Johanna Banck-Burgess

A rich seam: stitching as a means of interpreting Bronze Age textile fragments 77

Sølvi Helene Fossøy

Tacit knowledge and the interpretation of archaeological tablet-woven textiles 91

Lise Ræder Knudsen

The holistic nature of textile knowledge: fulling cloth in the sea 111
Carol Christiansen & Lena Hammarlund

Social Aspects of Prehistoric Textiles

Out of the dark… New textile finds from Hallstatt 129

Karina Grömer, Helga Rösel-Mautendorfer and Hans Reschreiter

v
 Italian textiles from prehistory to Late Antique times 145
Margarita Gleba

Wool fabrics from Arditurri Roman mines, Oiartzun (Basque Country, Spain) 171
C. Alfaro Giner

A well-preserved household textile from Roman Egypt 189

Hero Granger-Taylor and Karen Finch

Through Roman eyes: cotton textiles from Early Historic India 209
John-Peter Wild and Felicity Wild

Tools of textile production in Roman Iron Age burials and settlements on Funen, 237
Denmark
Sophie Bergerbrant

Cloth, clothing and Anglo-Saxon women 253

Penelope Walton Rogers

The textile interior in the Oseberg burial chamber 281

Marianne Vedeler

An exceptional woman from Birka 301

Eva Andersson Strand and Ulla Mannering

2/2 Herringbone twill fabrics in Early Medieval Poland: Imports or local production? 317
Maria Cybulska and Jerzy Maik

Textiles of fifteenth- to seventeenth-century layers from Heidelberg and Kempten, 331

Germany
Klaus Tidow, Textilingenieur, Boostedt
1

vi
 Speciality fibres for special textiles
Antoinette Rast-Eicher, ArcheoTex

Introduction
Today, if we think of speciality fibres, we think of exotic imports. Such fibres
include rabbit fibres, cashmere, mohair and camel (Haigh 1946). These fibres
are important in the textile industry, and they are used for exclusive and high-
priced textiles or garments (Vineis et al. 2011). Historically, other fibres have
been used, but industrial production reduced the palette as they were too
difficult to process by machines or too expensive, or else problematic because
the animals, such as the Tibetan antelope, are rare and protected (Vineis et al.
2011). Nevertheless, even fibres of animals like the arctic fox are now tested for
underwear (Sun Pei et al. 2007) or marten hair might be blended with cotton
and Tencel for a fancy yarn (Yang et al. 2011).

Among archaeological textiles, speciality fibres and blended yarns are rare; the
ancients used imported fibres such as silk or cotton, but also fibres of common
animals to produce – to our understanding – quite exotic textiles. Some textile
types made with speciality fibres are named e.g. in the price edict of Diocletian,
around AD 300 (Lauffer 1971). But the analysis of the archaeological textiles
is sometimes difficult depending on the preservation and the fibre type. Very
fine fibres of sheep wool, cashmere and mohair are difficult to differentiate by
microscopy. Furthermore, the bad preservation of many archaeological fibres
does not leave enough structure to be determined. Then, very often, light
microscopy is not sufficient or not possible because of the preservation. Scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) opened up the world of the different fibres (and
other organic remains such as feathers), making possible their determination
in many cases. Cashmere, for example, has been identified in southern France
in a prehistoric textile dated to the fifth century BC (Moulhérat & Vial 2000),
as well as in material of the Roman period found in Palmyra, Syria (Schmidt-
Colinet et al. 2000). In Palmyra, very fine animal fibres have been found, but
not clearly recognized. The textile catalogue no. 420 is an extremely fine twill
z/z, 26/1601 threads per centimetre; another textile, catalogue no. 490, is a fine
mixed tabby, woven in silk and wool/cashmere (22/36 threads per centimetre).

Classical texts can give some clues to the fibres or yarns which have been used
(e.g. the tariffs of Diocletian, see Lauffer 1971). But in most of the cases we
do not know what type of textile is connected to a Greek or Latin term. And,
if ever the quality becomes clear, we do not know anything about the pattern
and the quality of such a textile. Associated finds are needed to provide clues
to connect the textile with a function or a garment, and eventually a name of a
1 160 threads per centimetre seems quite a lot, and not even woven with silk.

43
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

specific textile. Some fibres named in texts also seemed so exotic (such as the
‘vestis fibrinae’ in Isodor‘s Ethymology, see Table 2), that they have not really
been discussed in connection with textiles types of the ancient periods.2 It is
not astonishing, then, that textile types which were already known according
to written sources of the Roman period have been found among early medieval
finds (sixth-seventh century). The flow of tradition and knowledge obviously
did not stop in AD 450. The inhumations dated to the sixth-seventh century
in Central and Western Europe are usually rich, the deceased accompanied by
metal objects belonging to their outfit, and because of the metal predisposed to
preserve mineralized organic remains – textiles and leather, but also feathers,
grass, wood etc. In such inhumations different traditions can find their place:
e.g. late antique Roman textile technology combined with the Germanic
tradition of tablet woven borders (Desrosiers & Rast-Eicher 2013).

The aim of this article is to show how the choice of fibres in the early stages
of the chaîne opératoire of textile production influences the final outcome. The
focus will be on special, high-quality textile finds. These textiles can consist of
specially treated or selected fibres, or may include fibres from different animals
in the warp and weft, or may be of blended yarns. A key find is always needed to
be aware of such textiles with unusual fibres. Two such finds have been chosen
here. Each dates to the Early Medieval period and each represents the subject
of special fibres: the rabbit and the beaver fibre. The key finds are discussed
in detail because they are important to understanding the textile type. Both
fibres are well-known in the Roman period. The choice of fibre is important
for production, selection, dye technique and for spinning. The results will be
compared with early written sources.

Evidence of different specific fibres in the archaeological

material
Rabbit or hare ? (Oryctolagus cuniculus or Lepus europaeus?)
History
Today, three lagomorphs are living in Europe: the rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus,
and two species, Lepus europaeus and Lepus timidus. DNA analyses revealed that
the rabbit originated from Spain; two lineages are the only survivors found in
Western Europe (Monnerot et al. 1994; Hardy et al. 1995; Lopez-Martinez 2008).
The wild rabbit was hunted during European prehistory from the Palaeolithic to
the Neolithic (Schmitzberger 2009). Until Classical Antiquity it was limited to
Spain and southern France, where it had retreated during glaciation in the early
2 In a new publication of Isidor’s Etymology, the differentiation between the terms vestis and
pellis, which were used by the ancient writers to distinguish a garment with a special fibre from
a fur, has not been clearly discussed (Müller et al. 2013:322).

44
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

Holocene. According to Ancient Greek sources, it is not always clear if the Greeks
meant rabbit or hare, as biological distinctions are mixed up (Aristotle, Hist. An.,
III, 10, 13; VI, 28, 3). Polybios (c. 204 BC) records in the description of Corsica
that there are foxes, wild sheep and rabbits (κυνικλοι). He distinguishes between
rabbit and hare: ‘At a distance it looks like a small hare, but when you take it in
your hands, there is a great difference between the two, both in appearance and in
flavour; it lives for the most part underground’ (Polybios Hist. XII, 2). According
to Caesar, domesticated rabbits were farmed (for fun according to Caesar) in
Britain, but not eaten (De bell. gall. V, 12). The Romans kept rabbits and hares in
leporariae, in large enclosures (Varro, De re rustica, 3, 2). There, they lived partly
tamed, but were not domesticated. Plinius writes that rabbit fibres are difficult
to spin for textiles (he talks of ‘vestes’ - garments), because of the short staple
(Plinius Nat. Hist. VIII, 81, 55). In the price edict of Diocletian (c. AD 300),
rabbit/hare garments are noted, all of them belonging to costly textiles and fibre
(Table 1). ‘Strictoria’ were long and tight undergarments. According to Blümner‘s
comment, ‘Dursualis’ refers to the fibres from the back of the animal (Mommsen
& Blümner 1893: 156), which correspond to the early modern quality distinction
used for beaver fibres as well (see below). ‘Dalmaticamafortium’ was a short mantle
originating from the eastern Adriatic region.

During the ninth-twelfth centuries, rabbits had their most important expansion
– essentially by man (Monnerot 1994). They were kept in warrens for hunting
by nobles, diffused as gifts. They were also kept in medieval monasteries, this
time not free as for hunting (wild population), but in hutches which enabled
breeding to be controlled; the rabbit was now certainly domesticated and
definitely became an important food supply. It was one of the rare mammals
which has been domesticated in Western Europe (Salaschek 2009).
Plinius, N.H. 23–79 AD VIII, 219 vestes leporino pilo

Edict of Diocletian ca. 300 AD 19.73a strictoria leporina durs[ulalis] un[ncias ...

19.73c dalmaticamafortium leporinum clavans [purpurae] po.unum

semis

25.11 ἐρέας λαγείαϛ μιγῆϛ (lana leporina)

Table 1 Rabbit garments or fibres listed in the price edict of Diocletian (Lauffer 1971) and Plinius.
Fibre properties
Rabbit and hare fibres are the warmest fibre with the best insulation for a
minimum weight (Haigh 1946; Junges 1955). Felt textiles with rabbit fibres
are warmer, smoother and softer than the ones with camel hair or wool
(Shakyawar et al. 2008). Rabbit fibre is usually medullated; only today‘s Angora
breeds have no medulla in fibres below 10μm3. Medullated fibres keep a lot
of air and therefore have very good thermal properties. On the other hand,
3 Today, fine sheep wool has an avarage of 20 μm.

45
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

medulla weakens the stability of the fibre (Junges 1955; Herrmann et al. 1996).
Today, angora fibres are often used in blends with wool, but with cotton as well
(Oglakcioglu et al. 2009).

Rabbit and hare fibres are very difficult to distinguish by the scale pattern (Fig.
1). The scales are similar, but the medulla structure shows a little difference: the
structure looks like added cubes for the rabbit leaving a nearly continuous line
on the side, while for the hare the medulla structure consists of disks with gaps
in between (Fig. 2).

Key find
The cemetery of Kallnach-Bergweg (canton of Bern/Switzerland) was excavated
in 1988/89. The place is situated in the Swiss plateau, about 20 km north of
Bern, in antiquity next to the Roman traffic axis from western to eastern
Switzerland. The early medieval cemetery comprises 150 graves, dated from AD
sixth to eleventh centuries, 46 of which contained objects. Textiles preserved
by metal-replacement have been found on objects in ten graves. The catalogue
of the textiles has been put together by Christiane Kissling (Kissling & Ulrich-
Bochsler 2006: 80), added to later by the results of SEM analyses from the
samples analysed in 1994 by the author (Rast-Eicher 1996: fig. 1).

Grave 42, a female grave dated to the seventh century, contained an iron buckle
with silver inlaid and earrings made of bronze (Kissling & Ulrich-Bochsler
2006: 97). Textile remains have been documented on the upper side of the
buckle. On top of a balanced linen tabby (z/z, 14 threads per centimetre) was
another tabby which at first sight did not seem very special (Fig. 3), but fibre
analysis showed it was a mixed textile with wool (probably warp) and rabbit
hair (probably weft). The cross section of these textiles shows the difference of
the fibres very well (Fig. 4). On Figure 4, on top of the linen tabby, a thread with
coarse fibres is visible (upper left corner), then also one with distinctly finer
fibres. The scale pattern of this fine fibre can be determined as rabbit or hare,
while the coarse fibre is sheep wool (Fig. 5). Luckily, in one fibre the medulla
structure was still visible, even if the epidermis had gone and the fibre was in
fact metal-replaced; under this structure the mineralized scales are visible (Fig.
6). The medulla consists of added cubes like a chain. It is most comparable to
the modern wild rabbit medulla and not to the hare (see Fig. 2). Therefore, we
can assume, that the textile had been woven with rabbit fibre. It does not seem
to be a fibre blend, but according to the softness of the fibre, it must be the weft
thread. Written sources, especially the edict of Diocletian, make it possible to
interpret the garment as a dalmaticamafortium.

46
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

Fig. 1 Scale pattern of hare (a) and rabbit (b). SEM-photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 2 Shape of the medulla, (a) rabbit and (b) hare, seen by light microscopy. Photograph: A.
Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 3 Kallnach-Bergweg, grave 42, tabby woven with sheep and rabbit wool. Photograph:
Archäologischer Dienst Bern, Badri Redha.

47
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Fig. 4 Kallnach-Bergweg, cross section of the two textiles of grave 42, the mixed textile being on
top of a linen tabby. SEM-photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 5 Kallnach-Bergweg, grave 42, mineralized rabbit fibre with typical scale pattern. SEM-
photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

48
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

Fig. 6 Kallnach-Bergweg, grave 42, mineralized rabbit fibre with visible medulla structure. SEM-
photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Other finds
John Peter Wild mentions rabbit hair from Basel (CH), an insole sock (Wild 1970:
19). In a grave from Bülach (seventh century, canton of Zürich/Switzerland), a
rich woman buried in the church of this village (in a grave probably belonging to
the founder family) and therefore part the local elite, a fibre of rabbit or hare has
been found in a textile. The textile, a 2/2 twill, was found under the disk from
the girdle and on the legging fastener, and was interpreted as a cover (Amrein
et al. 1999: 92-93). The typical diagonal scale pattern is visible. Unfortunately,
the fibres are not well preserved and are full of an old conservation product, so
that the analysis was limited.

Rabbit has of course not only been used as textile fibre, but also as fur: a skin
has been documented in a seventh-century grave of Flurlingen (Switzerland);
it was found under a girdle plate which was deposited between the legs of the
deceased. The SEM picture shows the diagonal scale pattern (Rast-Eicher 2008:
108, fig. 30a).

A medieval textile found in Greenland (DK) has been made of blended yarns of
goat hair and arctic hare fibre, Lepus timidus (Walton Rogers 2009: 82f.).

One important later find is the lining of the garment (‘surcot‘) of Leonor of
Castille (died in 1244) which was made of rabbit skin (Kania 2010: 426).

49
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Beaver (Castor fiber)

History
Beavers have been hunted for meat and fur. The Etruscans engaged in
specialized hunts for beavers (Wilkens 1999: 144). During the Middle Ages and
Early Modern period, beaver fur was classified as one of the best fur qualities.
Beaver hunting took place in December and January (for the best pelt and for
the oil peak). They were shot with blunt arrowheads so that the fur was not
damaged (Kovalev 2002: 148ff.), or caught with dig, net or steel traps (19. Jh.).
Beaver became rare animals in the Late Medieval period and were imported in
great quantities from North America, especially for the production of hats in
Europe (Varekamp 2006).

Since antiquity, there have been several mentions of the beaver as fur or
textile fibre, in Latin named either ‘fiber’ or ‘castor’ (see Table 2). According
to Claudianus the beaver fibre was woven as ‘birrus’, the gallic coat – a special
variant with a special fibre:

Claudianus, Carm. min. 10

De birro castoreo

Nominis umbra manet veteris; nam dicere birrum,

si Castor iuret, castoreum nequeo.

Sex emptus solidis! Quid sit, iam scire potestis:

Si mihi nulla fides, credite vel pretio.

Claudianus mocks about the price of a birrus castoreus, a coat - the ‘birrus’ is in
fact the gallic coat - which costs six gold coins. It is an enormous amount for
a garment, as a contemporary of Claudianus states that one solidus makes a
modest year‘s living, two solidi even a very good living (Joh. Cassianus, Coll. 9,
5, 5). In antiquity, textiles are used to show one’s social status and money. Silk
was not available for everybody, purple and gold threads were allowed for elites
only, and a coat of beaver fibre seemed out of reach as well. If we compare the
price of beaver fur (‘pellis’) in the price edict of Diocletian to other prices in this
list, it is clear that a beaver skin itself did not cost a lot, and the processing for
the textiles that made the difference (Mommsen & Blümner 1893: 124).

Ambrosius, bishop of Milan, Italy in the fourth century AD, and Isidor, bishop
of Seville, Spain at the end sixth-seventh century, talk of garments (‘vestis’)

50
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

and not fur (‘pellis’). Ambrosius uses the word ‘castor’, and Isidor, who lived in
the Gothic part of Spain, the Germanic word ‘fiber’ for the beaver (Castor fiber).
Sidonius Appollinaris, bishop of Clermond-Ferrand (France), is the only one
who probably meant skin and not a textile. He laments about the Goths, who
went to church wearing beaver skins (Ambr., De dign. sacerdot. 4; Appoll. Sid.,
Epist.,V, 7; Isid., Ethym. XIX, 12, 1-20).

Edict of Diocletian c. 300 pellis castorina

Ambrosius of Milan 339-397 De dign. sacerdot. 4 castorinas et sericas vestes

Claudianus 370-404/5 Carm. min. 10 birrus castoreus

Sidonius Appollinaris 431-479 Epist., Book V, letter VII castorinati at litanias

Isidor of Seville 560–636 Ethym. XIX, 12 (1-20) fibrinae [vestis]

Table 2 Written sources of the Roman period with beaver.

Beaver fibre has been used in later periods as well. In more recent texts, especially
of the Early Modern period, there is the explicit description of beaver fibres
used for hats and for textile (Johann Fischart, 1546–1591, Groszm. 134). It
seems, that certain fibres were dropped with the upcoming industry in the late
eighteenth century because machine spinning made their use impossible. Felt
hats made with beaver fibre were expensive, and in 1806 such a hat cost double
that of a woollen hat (Magnien & Deu 1809). There are also texts describing in
detail how beaver fibres were processed (Encyclopédie 1771, T. IX, 6ff.):

The kemp fibres are removed by the ‘coupeuses’ (the cutters).

The skin is beaten, then brushed and dried (done by a worker, ‘ouvrier’)

The skin is brought back to the ‘coupeuses’, and they make the back of the skin
humid, then cut the fine fibres with a sharp knife close to the skin.

The ‘cardeur’, the carder, takes up the next stage of work. He cards the fibres
with a fine card, the fibres being first slightly oiled to facilitate the work. The
carding is needed especially for the fibres used for felts.

According to the cited encyclopedia of 1771, beaver fibres are sold in different
qualities named according to the natural colours which depends on the place on

51
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

the body. The beaver fibres were sold for textiles as well. Such textiles are ‘draps’
(cloth, beaver fibre mixed with wool) or stockings, ‘bas’, beaver fibre mixed with
silk or wool. The processing was done by hand, and then with the hand-spindle.
1721, the processing is described the following way (De Charlevoix 1744):

... Il y a environ trente ans, un nommé Guigues, [...] imagina, pour

en faciliter la consommation, d‘en faire filer & carder avec de la
Laine, & de cette composition il fit faire des Draps, des flanelles, des
Bas au Métier, & d‘autres ouvrages semblables, mais avec peu de
succès. Cet essai fit connaître que le Poil du Castor n‘est bon qu‘à
faire des Chapeaux. Il est trop court pour pouvoir être filé seul, & il
en faut mettre beaucoup moins de la moitié avec la Laine , ainsi il
y a peu de profit à faire de cette Fabrique. On a pourtant conservé
une de ces manufactures en Hollande, où on en voit des Draps & des
droguets; mais ces étoffes sont chères, & ne sont pas d‘un bon usage.
Le poil de Castor s‘en détache bientôt, & forme à la superficie comme
un Duvet, qui leur ôte tout leur lustre. Les Bas, qu‘on en faisait en
France, avaient le même défaut. [...] 4

Fibre properties
Beaver skin contains about 35,000 fine fibres/cm², a number which is
only topped by the otter. The fine fibres (dm. 10μm) are round, and show a
characteristic scale pattern with small waves in the diagonal or horizontal
direction to the fibre axe (Fig. 7). Fine fibres of many animals, especially also
the ones used for blended yarns like cashmere, wool and mohair, are difficult to
differentiate - but ones of the beaver are easily recognizable. This distinct wave
structure makes it possible. Medium fibres, (dm. 60 um) have a scale pattern
with irregular waves, the large fibres are elliptical and show rippled scales (Fig.
8). The medulla is difficult to spot by light microscopy as the fibres are strongly
pigmented (brown/dark brown).

Key find
The only textile made of beaver fibre known so far has been found in the grave of
Queen Arnegundis in Saint-Denis, France (Rast-Eicher 2010). The sarcophagus
had been opened in 1959 by the French archaeologist Michel Fleury, and the
4 Translation (AR): ‘...About 30 years ago, someone named Guigues, [...] started, to make the
use/trade easier, to spin and card with wool, & had woven on the loom these blended yarns as
cloth, ‘flanelles’ and stockings, & other similar things, but with low success. This experiment
showed that the beaver fibres are only good to make hats. It is too short to spin alone, & it has
to be mixed with less than half with wool, and therefore, there is low profit from these prod-
ucts. There‘s still such a manufacture in Holland, from where we know cloth and ’droguets’
(cheaper textiles). But these textiles are expensive, & are not good when used. The beaver fibres
start quickly to stand out, & form a layer on the surface which spoils their lustre. It was the
same problem with the stockings made in France...’ [...]

52
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

organic remains analysed shortly after the excavation by Albert France-Lanord

in Nancy (Fleury & France-Lanord 1998). At that time, such analyses and
textile knowledge were new, and no modern scientific means such as SEM or
dye analysis was available.

The new analysis of the organic remains was initiated by Patrick Périn, em.
director of the MAN (Musée d’Archéologie Nationale) in Saint-Germain-en-
Laye, France, and started in 2006; a publication of all the textiles found in 28
sarcophagi is in preparation. This Merovingian queen died AD 580/81; she
had been the wife of Clotaire I (511-561 AD) and the mother of King Chilperic
(d. 584). The textile discussed here is the second from the top after the linen
shroud. It has been described by Albert France-Lanord as felt-like (pelucheux).
The textile looks felted, fine fibres cover the surface (Fig. 9). This can happen
if a garment is very much worn (as it is also told by de Charlevoix, see above
and note 3); first this did not attract special attention. No dye was detected
(dye analysis by Witold Nowik, France), but fibre analysis of six samples from
different fragments found at different places on the body showed a fine fibre
which was at first sight not known for blended yarns (see Fig. 11). The fine fibre
found through the SEM did not match to any archaeological speciality fibre
previously examined. It was not clear if the scale pattern which was seen on
the fine fibres could be due to preservation and broken, or if it was something
else. After lengthy examinations, thanks to a medium fibre, the animal was
found (Fig. 10): beaver. Fine fibres with the typical wave structure had been
observed in several samples (Fig. 11). A further question came up: was this a
fibre of a fur, which had not been seen, or was the fibre in the threads? A new
sample confirmed that the fibre was really in the threads, and that it seemed to
be a blended yarn with wool. The search went on: written sources were found,
confirming that the Romans knew this type of garment well (Table 2). One of
them, a poem written by Claudianus (Carm. min. 10), even made clear which
type of garment this must have been (see above).

The fragment of Saint-Denis is the first textile with beaver fibre so far found
in an archaeological context. The description of the excavators supports the
interpretation by the name ‘birrus’ of a coat. They state that a large amount of
this textile had been found on both sides of the body. Furthermore, during the
new analysis this textile has been documented in several contexts (on objects
or bones), always as second layer after the shroud, which confirms an outer
layer like a coat.

A small experiment with a machine-spun warp of mohair fibre and a hand-

spun yarn for the weft of beaver and wool-fibre showed how this fibre had to be
processed and what such a textile looked like (Rast-Eicher 2013; Fig. 12).

53
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Fig. 7 Scale structure of the fine beaver fibre. SEM-photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 8 Scale pattern of medium and coarse beaver fibres. SEM-photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

54
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

Fig. 9 Paris/Saint-Denis, grave 49, mixed textile with felted surface. Photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 10 Paris/Saint-Denis, grave 49, medium beaver fibre seen on one of the samples. SEM-
photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

55
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

Fig. 11 Paris/Saint-Denis, grave 49, fine beaver fibre. SEM-photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

Fig. 12 Reconstruction of the textile with wool in the warp and wool and beaver fibre in the weft.
Photograph: A. Rast-Eicher.

56
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

Other finds
Like rabbit, beaver has certainly been used as skin/fur. In the Viking settlement
of Birka, Sweden skins have been found in graves (Geijer 1938, graves 539, 619
on fibula, 968). Such skins should probably be seen in the context of the large
fur trade in Northern Europe, especially with Siberia (Kovalev 2002). Another
beaver skin, a bag in which a lyre was placed, has been reported in a ship burial
from Sutton Hoo, England (Carver 2007: 127).

Conclusions
The two textiles presented, the one from Kallnach (Switzerland) made of wool
and rabbit, and the one from Saint-Denis/Paris (France) made of blended yarn
with beaver fibre, have been woven in quite simple patterns. Unlike silk, which
can be easily spotted by the fact that silk threads are nearly not spun, these
fibres are not visible by a certain processing. On first sight – as well as under the
stereo microscope – both textiles were not recognizable as being special. The
first was mineralized on an iron girdle plate, the second preserved by drying.
Therefore, even if most of the textiles of the Early Medieval period are sheep
wool, fibre analyses are necessary, or exceptional textiles such as these will not
be found. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) has opened up this world of
speciality fibres: neither a mineralized nor a badly preserved dried fibre can be
spotted and determined by light microscopy. Other methods like FTIR (Fourier
Transformation Infrared Microscopy) or even protein analysis may assist with
the Saint-Denis piece (but reference material is needed, and therefore it is
important to know what may be expected!), but there is no other possibility
for identifying the mineralized object, as no organic material but just the fibre
casts remain.

Chronologically, the results of textile research shows that the Romans were
probably responsible for introducing a lot of new fibres to the regions of Europe
north of the Alps, as well the knowledge about how to produce yarns of these
speciality fibres or blended yarns. Rabbit hair certainly belongs to such fibres.
Earlier finds also point to speciality fibres: the textile with cashmere found in
southern France and dated to the fifth century BC (Moulhérat & Vial 2000),
or even the Bronze Age textile from Ireland (Cromaghs) woven with horse hair
(Wincott Heckett 1998). The badger hair textile from Eberdingen-Hochdorf,
Germany (Banck-Bugess 1999: 102) has to be re-visited, as badger fibres in an
Iron Age tumulus in Langenthal-Unterhard, Switzerland appear to have come
from a badger who used the Iron Age tumulus as its home and left hairs on the
deceased and his objects (Rast-Eicher 2008: 168).

The classical texts show that the ancients were well informed about speciality
fibres. Rabbit or beaver were not so exceptional to them, as seen in the fact that
several writers refer to them. Beaver was certainly very expensive and therefore
reserved for elites – such as Queen Arnegundis in Paris/Saint-Denis. The beaver

57
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

was not domesticated and was not kept in warrens like rabbits. We may even
assume that only elites may have had the right to kill them. On the other hand,
rabbit was locally available, as warrens for rabbits were probably still ‘en vogue’
after the Roman period, especially when the former Roman villa had not been
far away, as was the case in Kallnach. And the processing of rabbit fibres is not
very difficult, so local skilled spinners and weavers could handle this task.

Generally, aside from skins of different animals, we have to assume there

were textiles made of speciality fibres. Nothing is impossible! Finds from
early mediaeval graves in Western Europe opened a large field, which is not
restricted in chronology and geography. Up to now, they consist of single finds,
but additional fibre analyses would help to identify more of them. And we have
to take a step back from today’s ‘usual’ mass-produced products to reflect on
ancient skill and production, which was much better and more varied than we
imagine.

References
AMBROSIUS A., De dignitate sacerdotali. Translated by Rev. E. De Romestin,
Edinburg: Hendrickson. Internet: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.
toc.html

AMREIN, H., A., RAST-EICHER and R. WINDLER 1999. Neue Untersuchungen

zum Frauengrab des 7. Jahrhunderts in der reformierten Kirche von Bülach
(Kanton Zürich). Zeitschrift für Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte 56: 73–114.

APPOLINARIS SIDONIUS, Epistulae. Book V, translated latin-french by J.F.

Grégoire and F.-L. Collombet, Lyon/Paris: Rusand 1836. Internet: http://
remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/sidoine/lettres5.htm

ARISTOTELES, Historia animalium. Translated by D‘Arcy Wentworth

Thompson. University Adelaide. Internet: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/
history_anim.1.i.html.

BANCK-BURGESS, J. 1999. Hochdorf IV, Die Textilfunde aus dem

späthallstattzeitlichen Fürstengrab von Eberdingen-Hochdorf (Kreis Ludwigsburg)
und weitere Grabtextilien aus hallstatt. und latènezeitlichen Kulturgruppen.
Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag.

CARVER, M. 2007. Sutton Ho – Burial Ground of Kings? London: British Museum

Press.

CASSIANUS, J., Collationes patrum. German translation by A. Abt, Kempten

1879, Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, 1. Serie, Band 59. Internet: http://www.
unifr.ch/bkv/buch283.htm

58
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

CLAUDIANUS, Carmina minora X, De birro castoreo. Internet: http://penelope.

uchicago.edu/Thayer/L/Roman/Texts/Claudian/Carmina_Minora*/omnia.
html#X

DE CHARLEVOIX P. 1744. Journal d‘un voyage fait par ordre du roi dans l‘Amérique
septentrionale, Adressé à Madame la Duchesse de Lesdiguières. Tome troisième,
Paris: Rollin Fils.

DESROSIERS, S. and A. RAST-EICHER 2013. Luxurious Merovingian

Textiles Excavated from Burials in the Saint Denis Basilica, France, 6th-7th
century. Textiles and Politics: Textile Society of America 13th Biennial Symposium
Proceedings, Washington, DC, September 18- September 22, Washington 2012.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tsaconf/675/

ENCYCLOPÉDIE 1771: Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire universel raisonné des

connaissances humaines. Mis en ordre par M. de Felice, Tome IX. Yverdon: Société
typographique.

GEIJER, A. 1938. Birka III. Die Textilreste aus den Gräbern. Uppsala: Almqvist.

FISCHART, J. 1572. Aller Practick Groszmutter. http://books.google.ch/books/

about/Aller_Practick_Groszmutter.html?id=tVePPgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y

FLEURY, M. and A. FRANCE-LANORD 1998. Les trésor mérovingiens de la

basilique de Saint-Denis. Woippy: Gérard Klopp.

HAIGH, H.S. 1949. Speciality fibres. Journal of the Textile Institute Proceedings,
40(8): 794–813.

HARDY, C., C. CALLOU, J.-D. VIGNE, D. CASANE, N. DENNEBOUY, J.-C.

MOUNOLOU and M. MONNEROT 1995. Rabbit mitochondrial DNA diversity
from prehistoric to modern times. Journal of Molecular Evolution 40: 227–237.

HERRMANN, S., K. LANGE, and F. WORTMANN 1996. Characteristics of

Angora rabbit fibre -2 The influence of the methionine content in feed and of
the environmental temperature on fibre and medulla diameter in angora wool.
World Rabbit Science 4: 155–158.

ISIDOR of Sevilla, Etymologiae. see Müller et al. 2013.

JUNGES, W. 1955. Jahreszeitlicher Rhythmus und Variabilität der

Markhaltigkeit des Angorakaninchen-Vlieses. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und
Züchtungsbiologie 64: 271–286.

59
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

KANIA, K. 2010. Kleidung im Mittelalter – Materialien-Konstruktion-

Nähtechniken, Ein Handbuch. Köln/Weimar/Wien: Böhlau Verlag.

KISSLING, C. and S. ULRICH-BOCHSLER 2006. Kallnach-Bergweg – Das

frühmittelalterliche Gräberfeld und das spätrömische Gebäude, Bericht über die
Grabungen von 1988-1989. Bern: Rub Media Verlag.

KOVALEV, R. 2002. The infrastructure of the Novgorodian fur trade in the pre-
mongol era (ca. 900–ca. 1240). PhD University of Minnesota.

LAUFFER, S. ed. 1971.Diokletians Preisedikt. Berlin: de Gruyter.

LOPEZ-MARTINEZ, N. 2008. The Lagomorph Fossil Record and the Origin

of the European Rabbit. In P.C. Alves, N. Ferrand and K. Hackländer (eds.),
Lagomorph Biology: Evolution, Ecology, and Conservation: 27–46. Berlin/
Heidelberg, Springer.

MAGNIEN, J.-C. and L.-J. DEU, 1809. Dictionnaire des productions de la nature et
de l‘art, qui font font l‘objet du commerce de la France, soit avec l‘étranger, soit avec
ses colonies, Tome 1. Paris: Bailleul.

MONNEROT, M., J.-D. VIGNE, C. BIJU-DUVAL, D. CASANE, C. CALLOU, C. HARDY,

F. MOUGEL, R. SORIGUER, N. DENNEBOUY and J.C. MOUNOLOU 1994. Rabbit and
man; genetic and historic approach. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 26(Suppl. 1):
167–182.

MOMMSEN, T. and H. BLÜMNER1893. Der Maximaltarif des Diocletian. Berlin:

G. Reimer.

MOULHÉRAT, C. and G. VIAL 2000. Première attestation d‘un tissu en laine

de chèvre cachemire en Gaule. In: D. Cardon and M. Feugère(eds.), Archéologie
des textiles des origines au Ve siècle, Actes du colloque de Lattes, octobre 1999: 107–
114, Montagnac: Mergoil.

MÜLLER, M., M.-L. BABIN and J. RIECKE 2013. Das Thema Kleidung in den
Etymologien Isidors von Sevilla und im Summarium Heinrici 1. Berlin/Boston: De
Gruyter.

OGLAKCIOGLU, N., P. CELIK, T. BEDEZ UTE, A. MARMARALI and H.

KADOGLU 2009. Thermal Comfort Properties of Angora Rabbit/Cotton Fiber
Blended Knitted Fabrics. Textile Research Journal 79(10): 888–894.

PLINIUS C. secundus, Naturalis historiae. Latin and English, translated by J.

Bostock and H.T. Riley, London/N.Y. 1893. Internet: http://www.perseus.tufts.
edu/hopper/text?doc=Plin.+Nat.+toc

60
 Speciality fibres for special textiles

POLYBIOS, Histories. Translated by Shuckburgh, E.S., London/

N.Y. 1889. Internet: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/
text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234

RAST-EICHER, A. 1996. Oxidierte Textilien und Fasern. Archaeological Textile

News 22: 4–6.

RAST-EICHER, A. 2008. Die Textilien. In: M. Ramstein, and C. Hartmann

(eds), Langenthal, Unterhard, Gräberfeld und Siedlungsreste der Hallstatt- und
Latènezeit, der römischen Epoche und des Frühmittelalters: 166–183, Bern:
Erziehungsdirektion des Kantons Bern.

RAST-EICHER, A. 2010. Garments for a queen – first results of the new

investigation in the merowingian grave of Queen Arnegundis. In E. Andersson
Strand, M. Gleba, U. Mannering, C. Munkholt and M. Ringgaard (eds.), NESAT
X, Symposium in May 2008 in Copenhagen: 208–210. Oxford: Oxbow.

RAST-EICHER, A. 2013. Biberweich! In S.Frey /ed.), La numismatique pour

passion: Études d’histoire monétaire offertes à Suzanne Frey-Kupper par quelques-
uns de ses amis à l’occasion de son anniversaire 2013: 219-230. Lausanne: Editions
du Zèbre (Études de numismatique et d’histoire monétaire 9).

SALASCHEK, I. 2009. Vom Notstandstier zum Wohlstandstier – Kaninchenhaltung

in Deutschland. Diss. Hannover http://elib.tiho-hannover.de/dissertations/
salascheki_ss09.pdf

SCHMIDT-COLINET, A., A. STAUFFER and K. AL-AS‘AD 2000. Die Textilien

aus Palmyra, Neue und alte Funde. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

SCHMITZBERGER, M. 2009. Haus- und Jagdtiere im Neolithikum des

österreichischen Donauraumes. Diss Universität Wien, Wien.

SHAKYAWAR, D. B., P.C. PATNI and N.P GUPTA 2007. Studies on animal fibre
blended handmade felts: Part II – Frictionional, compressional and thermal
properties. Journal of Fibre and Textile Research 32: 301–305.

SUN PEI, SUN RUN-JUN and LAI KAN 2007. The fundamental structure and
properties of arctic fox wool. Wool Textile Journal 09: 32–34.

VAREKAMP, J.C. 2006. The historic fur trade and climate change. Eos 87(52):
593–597.

VARRO, M.T., De re rustica. Latin and English. Translated by W.D. Hooper and
H.B. Ash. Bury St. Edmunds: Loeb Classical library, 1934. Internet: http://
penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Varro/de_Re_Rustica/2*.html

61
Antoinette Rast-Eicher

VINEIS, C., A. ALUIGI and C. TONIN 2011. Outstanding traits and thermal
behaviour for the identification of speciality animal fibres. Textile Research
Journal 81(3): 264–272.

YANG JUAN-YA, MA SHI-QIONG, GE YE-QIAN and XI BO-JUN. 2011. Study

on marten hair and its blended yarn. Shanghai Textile Science and Technology 12:
46–52.

WALTON ROGERS, P. 2009. Fibre and dyes in Norse textiles. In: E. Østergård
(ed.), Woven into the Earth, Textiles from Norse Greenland:79–92. Aarhus:
University Press.

WILD, J.P. 1970. Textiles of the Northern Roman Provinces. Cambridge: University
Press.

WILKENS, B. 1999 Changements dans la faune de l‘Italie centrale et Méridionale

au cours de l‘Holocène (du Mésolithique à l‘Age du fer). In N. Benecke (ed.),
The holocene history of the european vertebrate Fauna, Modern aspects of research
Workshop 6-9 April 1998 in Berlin: 141–149. Rahden: Leidorf (Archäologie in
Eurasien Band 6).

WINCOTT HECKETT, E. 1998. A late Bronze Age Horsehair Ornament from

Cromagh, Armoy in Ireland. In L. Bender Jørgensen and C. Rinaldo (ed.),
Textiles in European Archaeology, Report from the 6th NESAT-Symposium, 7-11th
May 1996 in Borås: 29–38. Göteborg: Göteborg University.

62

View publication stats