Re: [Authentic_SCA] Mini-review - Findings: The Material Culture of Needlework and Sewing
- On Dec 8, 2009, at 8:27 AM, gianottadallafiora wrote:
> This book, published by Yale University Press in 2006 and written byA note of caution, however -- I've seen at least one review by a
> Mary C. Beaudry, examines archaeological evidence of sewing
> implements (straight pins, needles, needlecases, scissors, etc.),
> and has a lot of information about things in our period of interest
> such as the manufacture of straight pins in medieval and Elizabethan
> England and medieval France. Apparently Henry VIII had made a decree
> about how straight pins should be manufactured. And straight pins
> were made the same handmade way from the middle of the 16th century
> right up until 1830. Who knew?
> Anyway, I recommend this book for anyone interested in the history
> of needlework and history of how the implements used were
> manufactured and used, from pre-history to the 19th century.
medievalist that was less than enthusiastic. It was enough to make me
cross this book off my want list -- I'd be interested to hear whether
others who have seen the book agree with this review:
O (Dame) Christian de Holacombe, OL - Shire of Windy Meads
+ Kingdom of the West - Chris Laning <claning@...>
http://paternoster-row.org - http://paternosters.blogspot.com
> I'd be interested to hear whetherAs mentioned in Katrin's Togs from Bogs review, and Adelisa pointed out too, it depends what time period you are interested in.
> others who have seen the book agree with this review:
From what I remember reading, it was very strongly focused on early modern and modern evidence, and is really disappointing if you're interested in time periods before 1500 or so. And organised in a chronological sequence instead of a more precise item type.
I did like the chapter on thimbles, (mostly because it mentions Viking-age stuff, which is where my interest lies) although it would have been much better to have illustrations or even line drawings showing the differences in shapes and design that she mentions in the text.
As mentioned by Katrin, the way items are grouped together is far too broad. Big, decorative cloak pins mixed in with petite 'dress' pins, (or at least, that's what seems to be happening. See for example page 12 in the preview below. She jumps from Elizabethan 'skewers' to 14-15th century pins, and I don't think it's clear she is probably referring to finer, dress pins there.)
I suspect it's a problem of viewpoint-- we might see the difference between a veil pin and a cloak pin because we wear them, and have to dress ourselves with these items. If they're just all 'pins' then the chronological narrative matters more than the fact they are pins for different uses.
If people want to make up their own minds, GoogleBooks has a preview version that should give you a rough idea: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=rvT_aYLCKfIC
It is a handy book if it's in a nearby library and you want to flick through it, but I wouldn't spend the money on it for myself.
(who is an early period/Viking age sort of person, so will probably have a different view to people with later-period interests.)
- On Wednesday 09 December 2009 6:08:22 pm Quokkaqueen wrote:
> > I'd be interested to hear whether[snip]
> > others who have seen the book agree with this review:
> It is a handy book if it's in a nearby library and you want to flickThat's my impression too, based on what Katrin said in her review.
> through it, but I wouldn't spend the money on it for myself.
(from yet other early period/VIking Age sort of person). :-)
Cathy Raymond <cathy@...>
"No one can make as disastrous a bad choice as a smart person, because they
sell it to themselves really well."--Tobias Buckell
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]