I finished it in about a week, definitely before starting the next band. It's about 7/8" wide, about 67" long. As a reminder, it's a 32-card band, two 4-threaded edge tablets (one on each side), and 30 2-threaded pattern tablets. I think it's a little bit wider than the original, not that I care about that. The pic above is unblocked and shows both sides.
I didn't change the weft tightness at the other end to match my experiments at the beginning, mostly because I was tired of the band and just wanted to get it done. Also, with a band this long, it's not hugely noticeable.
I am totally fine with turning edge tablets every other time rather than every time. I think it might make a little bit of difference in how firmly I can beat the weft, though I don't think it's a huge overall impact. It did mean that I didn't have to work out excess twist all that often. The pattern area is twist neutral, so twist only accumulates in the edge tablets. With turning each edge every other time, twist accumulated half as much.
The band is cute enough. I rather like the little one I did better, though (the one from the bands in the Louvre).
Other than that, I don't have much to say about it!
Next up -- I don't know. As usual. Maybe I'll chart out several possible Coppergate bands (i.e. make charts that are consistent with the evidence I have, which may not be fully accurate). Or maybe I'll do something entirely different.
I am doing more reading about pre-medieval Anglo-Saxon tablet weaving -- there are a few other papers written by Penelope Walton (Rogers) about cemetery finds. There's quite a lot of variety in the techniques that were used. Interesting... I'm still trying to match some of her terminology to my understanding of what those terms refer to. But it's all very cool, and I hate that it's so hard to do good internet searching these days to find out more.
No comments:
Post a Comment