I posted the mermaid yesterday.
I had stitched her upper body with what I believe to be the stitch they used in Opus Anglicanum ecclesiastical embroidery. For those of you that might not have noticed, it is not split stitch.
Or put it another way, it’s not split stitch the way we do it now.
How I set about my investigations
After studying several images in close detail over a considerable period of time, I made various stitch experiments, changing something each time.
After studying several images in close detail over a considerable period of time, I made various stitch experiments, changing something each time.
I made about 10 such experiments.
Sometimes making a small breakthrough, then falling back again.
I had a strong feeling that the more I stared at the images I was working from, I would eventually work it out.
I don’t pretend to be anything more than a very determined ‘eyeball’ , that also likes puzzles.
I drew contour maps, I tried to sew spirals, circles, flat sections, etc etc. nothing looked like the images I was studying, there was something going on that still eluded me.
It was all very frustrating, until I decided to double my thread and use untwisted silk.
I did this to literally copy what I could see. The historic stitches are perfect ‘Vs’, they are not trying to hide that or fade it out, and the Vs stack up perfectly if you work up in one direction and down in the opposite direction. This means the lines of stitching sit side by side uniformly with no gaps.
I knew at that point I was leaving contemporary interpretation behind and I was someone going back, way back in time, to before literacy, before clean water to drink or shoes for most people...I was unlearning what I had been told and was about to learn for myself....to really discover something from the past, something so baffling....it was like an obscure piece of code, a half-understood formula scribbled in a margin., and there I was all alone and it was about to unravel before my eyes, like the clouds parting after the tempest and a clear sky can at last, be seen...
I did this to literally copy what I could see. The historic stitches are perfect ‘Vs’, they are not trying to hide that or fade it out, and the Vs stack up perfectly if you work up in one direction and down in the opposite direction. This means the lines of stitching sit side by side uniformly with no gaps.
I knew at that point I was leaving contemporary interpretation behind and I was someone going back, way back in time, to before literacy, before clean water to drink or shoes for most people...I was unlearning what I had been told and was about to learn for myself....to really discover something from the past, something so baffling....it was like an obscure piece of code, a half-understood formula scribbled in a margin., and there I was all alone and it was about to unravel before my eyes, like the clouds parting after the tempest and a clear sky can at last, be seen...
Then things started to get very interesting.
The spirals were still proving to be very difficult, but I persevered.
In situations like this, you are literally teasing out the truth and it involves a lot of back and forth cross-referencing.
In situations like this, you are literally teasing out the truth and it involves a lot of back and forth cross-referencing.
Then from sheer exhaustion, I left off doing anything for about two days, then when I went back, somewhere in the back of my brain, I made a connection with what I understood about Chain Stitch and what I saw in the images I was studying and the switch was flicked!
So going back to this image, let’s really look at what we can see:
The stitches are very regular, both sides of the stitch have the same thickness of thread - I’m looking only at the stitches at the top of the forehead on this angel’s face, or right hand side of the image - in my view, this consistent uniformity of stitch, is not Split Stitch, as we know it, because when it changes direction it’s proportions do not alter e.g. both sides of the stitch maintain their balanced weight. With contemporary Split Stitch this is not the case, especially when it takes curves.
Take a step back...if it IS contemporary Split Stitch, then why has it been so incredibly difficult to reproduce this kind of work in the centuries since? Remember we are seeing this work in extreme close up. In my view it’s not enough to say “if you look at contemporary split stitch at a distance it looks the same as Opus Anglicanum”.
They themselves in historic times knew they could not be copied, they had ‘faith’ that their unique contribution to textile decoration would not be deciphered until it was unpicked, and no one was ever going to do something as ‘bad’ as that, because these items had become ‘holy’ at the time of completion.
I didn’t unpick anything to reach my conclusions, but I did study what the hands of Father Time had unpicked for us. In the sections of 700 year old rotting silk are the clues....All we had to do was wait for was digital high definition photography...
In my view they made it especially difficult to be ‘copied’ because they took a Chain Stitch and not only did they split it, but in so doing they made a backwards split chain. Just think about that a moment...a backwards split chain.
(Don’t confuse this method with a Reverse Chain stitch, as that is a very chunky chain stitch variation that wraps round two loops but does not split them.)
So we think of one stitch, they thought of two!
By splitting chain stitch and making it backwards, like stem, outline and back stitch, they were creating another fine line, but this time a line that could fill smoothly, consistently and take very very small curves without leaving gaps. Gaps were not part of their artistic oeuvre.
They also did something else with it...
So in so doing, they produced the finest possible Chain Stitch you can make and on TOP of that, they further worked out that if you tension it in the opposite direction to which you are sewing, you end up with a stitch so small it forms a knot that can take very, very tight curves really well.
Also, a tiny, tiny knot of a stitch, was, because of its intrinsic design going to prove extremely durable. As I said before, if the face can last, then the item will retain its value, both spiritually and commercially.
I went on to discover that you can work the stitch in two directions, from right to left, or visa versa if you’re right handed. And from top to bottom. But you cannot work it bottom to top, as it’s a Back Stitch in essence, unless you crook your arm right round. I’ve used the sew method as I find it faster.
Because it’s a way or working that harks back to Soumak Weaving, you don’t need to pierce the fabric by more than one or two threads. And furthermore, as I worked out from the images I worked from, the stitch doesn’t go through to the linen. So that means the back is concealed from moths.
When I tried to unpick it, it took forever. Now they knew this, and in my view that’s what they wanted it for vestments that needed to be handled, worn and stored for many decades.
The other thing to note is you can produce an extremely regular surface pattern. This was perfect for workshop production lines, where a consistency of quality and workmanship was part of the deal.
The other thing to note is that in making this incredibly fine split chain stitch, you have to keep your threads untwisted at all times. So the first stitch demands careful untwisting of the threads, then you use your fingers like a loom to pass the thread through in a very controlled way. It sounds fiddly but in effect it’s very, very addictive. The shorter your threads get, the faster you can go.
I will post pictures of how to do it next time.
In conclusion: I believe our interpretation of contemporary Split Stitch is heavily influenced by what came after the 1300s, in terms of surface embroidery and the desire for super-smooth, indecipherable stitches that merge and blend. I would argue that Opus Anglicanum embroidery created very distinguishable, extremely fine lines of ‘split back chain stitch’ that could be steered to fit around and inside very small areas, to maintain a swirling visual harmony, not a million miles from the patterns created within Celtic metalwork designs.
Take a step back...if it IS contemporary Split Stitch, then why has it been so incredibly difficult to reproduce this kind of work in the centuries since? Remember we are seeing this work in extreme close up. In my view it’s not enough to say “if you look at contemporary split stitch at a distance it looks the same as Opus Anglicanum”.
They themselves in historic times knew they could not be copied, they had ‘faith’ that their unique contribution to textile decoration would not be deciphered until it was unpicked, and no one was ever going to do something as ‘bad’ as that, because these items had become ‘holy’ at the time of completion.
I didn’t unpick anything to reach my conclusions, but I did study what the hands of Father Time had unpicked for us. In the sections of 700 year old rotting silk are the clues....All we had to do was wait for was digital high definition photography...
In my view they made it especially difficult to be ‘copied’ because they took a Chain Stitch and not only did they split it, but in so doing they made a backwards split chain. Just think about that a moment...a backwards split chain.
(Don’t confuse this method with a Reverse Chain stitch, as that is a very chunky chain stitch variation that wraps round two loops but does not split them.)
So we think of one stitch, they thought of two!
By splitting chain stitch and making it backwards, like stem, outline and back stitch, they were creating another fine line, but this time a line that could fill smoothly, consistently and take very very small curves without leaving gaps. Gaps were not part of their artistic oeuvre.
They also did something else with it...
So in so doing, they produced the finest possible Chain Stitch you can make and on TOP of that, they further worked out that if you tension it in the opposite direction to which you are sewing, you end up with a stitch so small it forms a knot that can take very, very tight curves really well.
Also, a tiny, tiny knot of a stitch, was, because of its intrinsic design going to prove extremely durable. As I said before, if the face can last, then the item will retain its value, both spiritually and commercially.
I went on to discover that you can work the stitch in two directions, from right to left, or visa versa if you’re right handed. And from top to bottom. But you cannot work it bottom to top, as it’s a Back Stitch in essence, unless you crook your arm right round. I’ve used the sew method as I find it faster.
Because it’s a way or working that harks back to Soumak Weaving, you don’t need to pierce the fabric by more than one or two threads. And furthermore, as I worked out from the images I worked from, the stitch doesn’t go through to the linen. So that means the back is concealed from moths.
When I tried to unpick it, it took forever. Now they knew this, and in my view that’s what they wanted it for vestments that needed to be handled, worn and stored for many decades.
The other thing to note is you can produce an extremely regular surface pattern. This was perfect for workshop production lines, where a consistency of quality and workmanship was part of the deal.
The other thing to note is that in making this incredibly fine split chain stitch, you have to keep your threads untwisted at all times. So the first stitch demands careful untwisting of the threads, then you use your fingers like a loom to pass the thread through in a very controlled way. It sounds fiddly but in effect it’s very, very addictive. The shorter your threads get, the faster you can go.
I will post pictures of how to do it next time.
In conclusion: I believe our interpretation of contemporary Split Stitch is heavily influenced by what came after the 1300s, in terms of surface embroidery and the desire for super-smooth, indecipherable stitches that merge and blend. I would argue that Opus Anglicanum embroidery created very distinguishable, extremely fine lines of ‘split back chain stitch’ that could be steered to fit around and inside very small areas, to maintain a swirling visual harmony, not a million miles from the patterns created within Celtic metalwork designs.
No comments:
Post a Comment