Exploring Ancient Textiles: Pushing the Boundaries of Established Methodologies

193 Pages·2022·12.366 MB·English

by  Alistair Dickey, Margarita Gleba, Sarah Hitchens, Gabriella Longhitano

ANCIENT TEXTILES SERIES 40
EXPLORING ANCIENT TEXTILES

pushing the Boundaries oF estaBlished methodologies
Edited by
ALISTAIR DICKEY, MARGARITA GLEBA, SARAH HITCHENS,
AND GABRIELLA LONGHITANO
Oxford & Philadelphia
Published in the United Kingdom in 2022 by
OXBOW BOOKS
The Old Music Hall, 106–108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JE
and in the United States by
OXBOW BOOKS
1950 Lawrence Road, Havertown, PA 19083
© Oxbow Books and the individual authors 2022
Paperback Edition: ISBN 978-1-78925-725-0
Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78925-726-7 (epub)
A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022937712
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval
system, without permission from the publisher in writing.
Printed in the United Kingdom by Short Run Press
Typeset by Lapiz Digital Services
For a complete list of Oxbow titles, please contact:
UNITED KINGDOM
Oxbow Books
Telephone [phone]
Email: [email protected]
www.oxbowbooks.com
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Oxbow Books
Telephone [phone], Fax [phone]
Email: [email protected]
www.casemateacademic.com/oxbow
Oxbow Books is part of the Casemate Group
Front cover: Top Left: SEM image of a textile from Predynastic Grave 4620, Badari, Egypt. Bolton Museum, accession number
BOLMG:1926.53.8.1. [Image by A. Dickey. Object courtesy of Bolton Museum, UK].
Top Right: Image of a wooden spindle whorl from Qasr Ibrim, Egypt, dated to the Later Medieval period. Bolton, Bolton Museum,
accession number BOLMG:1995.66.25. [Image by S. Hitchens. Object courtesy of Bolton Museum, UK].
Bottom: View to the north down corridor 4 in the Menkaure Valley Temple, Giza, Egypt. [Image by S. Hitchens with thanks to AERA].
DAERLDCL’EHAIE RBEOTD EDELNIO,PE IDAL GCLERIUAALT, LI MCMSTIUUTNEOSRNEIRMATCILOAAAI
Contents
List of contributors and editors v
List of figures vii
List of tables xiii
Preface
Ian Shaw xv
Introduction: Ancient tools and textiles – Thinking outside the box xvii
Gabriella Longhitano, Sarah Hitchens, Alistair Dickey, and Margarita Gleba
Part I: Application of analytical techniques on tools 1
1. Preliminary remarks on some wear traces on Egyptian and Levantine textile tools 3
Chiara Spinazzi-Lucchesi
2. Visible tools, invisible craft: An analysis of textile tools in Iron Age Cornwall 15
Lewis Ferrero
3. Tools and their products: Spindle whorls decorated by yarn impressions from
Iron Age Donja Dolina in northern Bosnia and Herzegovina 25
Julia Katarina Fileš Kramberger
4. Shears in the ancient world: A comparison between the Iberian culture of southern
Spain and Roman culture in northern Italy 39
Patricia Rosell Garrido and Fabio Spagiari
Part II: Application of analytical techniques on textiles and fibres 53
5. Bast fibre production from the southern coast of Peru: The case of the La Yerba II and III sites 55
Camila Alday
6. Humans, wool textiles, chronology, and provenance: A case study from the
Orenburg region in the southern Urals, Russia 69
Natalia Shishlina, Olga Orfinskaya, Daria Kiseleva, Anna Mamonova, Lidiya Kuptsova, and Tomasz Goslar
7. Using textiles to reconstruct looms: Burial shrouds from Deir el-Banat (Fayum, Egypt) 85
Olga Orfinskaya and Darya Klyuchnikova
8. EDS analysis of Neolithic to Early Dynastic Egyptian woven cloth in the Bolton Museum collection 93
Alistair Dickey
9. A post-excavation study using the archaeothanatological approach to determine
the possibility of wrapping in Early Bronze Age burials of Britain 111
Eleanor James
Part III: Cultural and personal identity 123
10. Beyond textile production: What textile tools can tell us about networks of craftspeople and cultural identity 125
Gabriella Longhitano
Contents
11. Textiles and human needs: A discussion of textile production in the Hallstatt culture 131
Karina Grömer
12. Textile tools and textiles from the ninth–eighth century BC necropolis of Incoronata (Basilicata, Italy):
Evidence for culture, status, and specialisation in a south Italian indigenous community 141
Francesco Meo
13. Translating sailcloth into raw materials, land, and labour 159
Lise Bender Jørgensen
Afterword 165
Lin Foxhall
List of contributors and editors
Camila alday is an archaeologist. Her doctoral research at lin Foxhall, FSA, MBE, is Professor of Archaeology and
the University of Cambridge explored bast fibre materials, in Ancient Greek History. She has written on women, men, and
an attempt to understand how the production of nets, looped gender in the classical world. She is an Honorary Professor
bags, mats, and other fibrous materials underpinned mari- at the University of Leicester, and in 2017 she was appointed
time subsistence strategies during the Andean Preceramic to the Rathbone Chair of Ancient History and Classical
Period (10,000–3,500 BP). Archaeology at the University of Liverpool.
lise Bender Jørgensen is Professor Emerita of Archaeology margarita gleBa, FSA, is Assistant Professor at the Depart-
at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, ment of Cultural Heritage, University of Padua, Italy. Her
Trondheim, Norway. She is an internationally regarded research interests includes the archaeology of the pre- and
expert in archaeological textiles of Europe and the Roman protohistoric Mediterranean and western Asia. Her special
World. area of research is textile archaeology, including scientific
analytical methods of fibre and textile investigation.
alistair diCkey holds a PhD in Egyptology from the Uni-
versity of Liverpool. His research explores textile production tomasz goslar is a physicist. Since 2001, he has been con-
during the Neolithic, Predynastic, and Early Dynastic peri- ducting research at the Institute of Physics of Adam Mickiewicz
ods of Egyptian history. He has also excavated extensively University. He also heads the Poznań Radiocarbon Laboratory
in Egypt, Cyprus, Kazakhstan, Italy, and Northern Ireland. which he set up in 2001. Tomasz is an expert on the youngest
Quaternary period and his research is related to determining
lewis Ferrero is a recent Cambridge alumna with a special the chronology and mechanisms of past climate changes.
interest in textile archaeology, gender archaeology, and
experimental archaeology. They began working with tex- karina grömer studied prehistoric archaeology at the Univer-
tiles at the age of 13, when they joined the Devon Guild of sity of Vienna in Austria. She specialises in textile analysis,
Weavers, Spinners, and Dyers. The current focus of their research of textile tools, and reconstruction of prehistoric
research explores the connection between textile production costume. Since 2008, she has been working at the Department
and land use. of Prehistory of the Natural History Museum Vienna for
different international research projects. Her current research
Julia katarina Fileš kramBerger is currently enrolled in focuses on the analysis of textiles from graves and salt mines,
postgraduate doctoral studies in archaeology and employed covering a time-span from 2000 BC to AD 1000.
at the Department for Archaeology, Faculty of Humanities
and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, through the Cro- sarah hitChens is an AHRC-funded postgraduate researcher
atian Science Foundation (CSF). As a PhD candidate, she at the University of Liverpool working in collaboration with
has worked on two CSF projects with topics in prehistoric the Bolton Museum. Her research focuses on the archaeo-
archaeology, funeral practices, and female identities. She is logical textiles and spinning implements from Qasr Ibrim.
currently a researcher on a CSF project called Creation of
European Identities – Food, Textiles and Metals in the Iron eleanor James is currently working in commercial archae-
Age Between Alps, Pannonia and Balkans. ology as a practising Senior Project Archaeologist with
vi List of contributors and editors
GUARD Archaeology Ltd. Her research interests include (CESRAS) and the Postgraduate Studies Department of the
osteology, textiles, and post-medieval pottery. She is a Heritage Institute. She is a textile specialist and historian of
Member of the Society of Antiquaries, Scotland and a Russia and has researched extensively and excavated across
Practitioner of the Chartered Institute of Archaeologists. Russia and Egypt.
daria kiseleva, holds a PhD in Geological and Miner- patriCia rosell garrido is a PhD candidate in Archaeology
alogical Sciences. She is a senior research fellow at the and a predoctoral researcher at the Department of Prehistory,
Zavaritsky Institute of Geology and Geochemistry, Urals Archaeology, Ancient History, Greek Philology, and Latin
Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, and is an Associate Philology at the University of Alicante, Spain. She works
Professor at the Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg. She at the Museo Arqueológico de Alicante and at the Museu
is a specialist in the analytical methods of investigation of Arqueològic Municipal d’Alcoi Camil Visedo Moltó. Her
cultural heritage objects, especially in inductively coupled interests lie in the field of gender and feminism in Iberian
plasma mass spectrometry. culture, with a current focus on everyday life and mainte-
nance activities such as textile production, food processing,
darya klyuChnikova graduated with honours with a Mas- and cooking.
ter’s degree in Art History. She is a junior researcher at the
Center for Egyptological Studies of the Russian Academy
ian shaw is Senior Research Fellow in Egyptian Archae-
of Sciences and a textile conservator at the State Research
ology at the University of Liverpool and Visiting
Institute of Restoration in Russia.
Professor in Egyptology, IHAC, Northeast Normal Uni-
versity, Changchun, China. He is the co-editor of Ancient
lidiya kuptsova is an archaeologist specialising in the Egyptian Materials and Technology (2000), the author of
Bronze Age cultures of Eurasia. She heads the archaeologi-
Ancient Egyptian Technology and Innovation (2012) and
cal laboratory at the Orenburg State Pedagogical University,
co-editor of The Oxford Handbook of Egyptology (2020).
Russia.
natalia shishlina is a Doctor of History, Principal
gaBriella longhitano holds a PhD in Archaeology from
Researcher of the Archaeology Department in the State
the University of Liverpool. She is currently undertaking
Historical Museum in Moscow and in the Museum of
a PhD in Cultural Heritage at the University of Catania.
Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera), Rus-
Her ongoing project aims to analyse textile fragments from
sian Academy of Sciences, in Saint Petersburg. She is
Archaic Sicily. Her research interests include ancient textile
the curator of the Steppe and the Caucasus Prehistory
production and related social practices.
collections. She is a leading authority on the Eneolithic,
Yamnaya, Catacomb cultures, chronology, isotope stud-
anna mamonova graduated from the Russian State Univer-
ies, and textiles.
sity for the Humanities with a degree in textile conservation
and restoration. She has been a textile conservator and
researcher at the State Historical Museum Conservation FaBio spagiari is a PhD student in History, Critics and Con-
servation of Cultural Heritage at the University of Padua.
Department since 2001.
His research interests are concentrated on the study of the
FranCesCo meo, PhD, is the Scientific Director of the Classical world, with particular emphasis on the Roman age,
Museum and Archaeological Park of Muro Leccese as in particular studies of the Roman army. His current work
well as the Director of Archaeological Excavations. His concerns the study of Roman craft tools related to carpentry,
research explores textile production and other manufactur- metallurgy, and agro-pastoral activities.
ing activities in southern Italy in the first millennium BC,
the transformations occurring in the Greek and indigenous Chiara spinazzi-luCChesi, PhD, is a Marie Skłodowska
worlds of Magna Graecia between the Iron Age and the Curie postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Textile
Roman Republican period, the Messapia settlements, Research at the University of Copenhagen. She obtained
funerary practices, and social organisation in the ninth to her PhD in Antiquities at the University of Venezia – Ca’
second century BC. Foscari. In her doctoral thesis she analysed the different
typologies of tools related to the production of textiles in
olga orFinskaya is a senior researcher at the Center for use in Egypt and the southern Levant, from the Neolithic
Egyptological Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences to 600 BC.
List of figures
Fig. 1.1. S triations due to manufacture on bases of spindle whorls A 5441 (Hazor) and
10-K-02-Ar2 (Megiddo) (Images: Author). 5
Fig. 1.2. Wheel traces on spindle whorl 08-K-072-Ar5 (Megiddo) (Image: Author). 5
Fig. 1.3. Dome (a) and base (b) of spindle whorl 08-K-089-Ar6 (Megiddo) (Image: Author). 6
Fig. 1.4. a) Breccia spindle whorl UC 15413; b) detail of ‘upper’ hole; c) detail of ‘upper’
hole of UC 73209b (Images: Author). 7
Fig. 1.5. ‘Upper’ and ‘lower’ hole of: a) A 62625 (Hazor); b) A 90894 (Hazor);
c) 08-K-033-Ar7 (Megiddo); d) MM 2440 (Naqada) (Images: Author). 8
Fig. 1.6. Manufacture of Hazor spatulae with trabeculae only partially obliterated by wear:
a) M 78802; b) A 1533 (Image: Author). 8
Fig. 1.7. Manufacture of Gurob spatulae: a) MM 555.b (x); b) MM 555 (ii); c) MM 555 (xxix);
d) MM 555 (i) (Images: Author). 9
Fig. 1.8. Bone spatulae from Gurob with trabeculae obliterated in the central area: a) MM 555 (ix) and
b) MM 555 (xxxi); c) spatula with lateral wear MM 555 (xiv) (Images: Author). 9
Fig. 1.9. Deep striations on UC 7712 (i) (Gurob) (Image: Author). 10
Fig. 2.1. The location of each site in this study: 1) Carn Euny; 2) Bodrifty;
3) Trevelgue Head; 4) Trevisker; 5) The Rumps (Image: Author). 17
Fig. 2.2. Map showing the proportions of spinning and weaving tools from sites across Cornwall:
1) Carn Euny; 2) Bodrifty; 3) Trevelgue Head; 4) Trevisker; 5) The Rumps (Image: Author). 18
Fig. 2.3. The range of materials used for spindle whorls (left) and loom weights
(right) in the studied sites (Image: Author). 23
Fig. 3.1. The site map showing the location of the Donja Dolina in relation to nearby rivers (Image: Author). 26
Fig. 3.2. Graph showing the number of spindle whorls per weight category or class with
photographs of three whorls as examples (Image: Author). 28
Fig. 3.3. Typological table of spindle whorl shapes mentioned in the text. Biconical and
lenticular whorls are divided into subcategories depending on the shape of their
protruding parts (Image: Author). 29
Fig. 3.4. Spindle whorls belonging to the first decoration pattern group (Image: Author). 30
Fig. 3.5. Four decoration pattern groups: Group 1) impressed parallel curves on both surfaces of the
whorl; Group 2) impressed parallel zig-zag lines on both surfaces of the whorl; Group 3)
vertical impressed lines along the perimeter of the whorl; Group 4) unique or undefined
patterns of impressed yarn and incisions on the entire surface of the whorl (Image: Author). 31
Fig. 3.6. A and B) spindle whorls belonging to the second decoration pattern group; C and D)
spindle whorls belonging to the third decoration pattern group (Image: Author). 32
Fig. 3.7. Spindle whorls belonging to the fourth decoration pattern group (Image: Author). 33
Fig. 3.8. Digital microphotographs of two spindle whorl decorations at 20× magnification. A and B)
whorl surface with visible Z-plied impression (S-plied yarn), with thread diameter and twist
angle measurements; C and D) negative cast of spindle whorl decoration in modelling
clay – visible S-plied impressions (S-plied yarn), with thread diameter and twist angle
measurements (Image: Author). 34
viii List of figures
Fig. 3.9. The impression of a Z-spun or plied thread results in a negative cast of the
original thread, where the twist direction is opposite (S-directional) from
the original thread’s twist or ply. 34
Fig. 3.10. Two spindle whorls with decoration resembling or imitating yarn impression
but created by impressing other kinds of ribbed material (Image: Author). 35
Fig. 4.1. Shears components (Image: F. Spagiari after Spagnolo Garzoli 1999, 237–40, no. 4). 39
Fig. 4.2. a) Morphometric features suitable for different functions (Image: after Busana, Francisci, and
Spagiari 2020, 289, fig. 2.1); b) drawing of shears represented on the Aquileia stele (Image:
F. Spagiari after Zaccaria, 2009, 289, fig. 5); c) drawing of shears represented on the altar-tomb
of Alba Fucens (Image: F. Spagiari after Zimmer 1982, 120, fig. 33); d) drawing of shears
represented on the Sens relief (Image: F. Spagiari after Wild 1970, 179, fig. 73b); e) drawing
of shears represented on the Vatican Museum relief (Image: F. Spagiari after Zimmer 1982,
134, fig. 49). 40
Fig. 4.3. Map showing the limits of regio Contestania and the location of the six case studies: La Covalta
(Albaida, Valencia, and Agres), El Xarpolar (Vall d’Alcalà), La Bastida de les Alcusses (Mogente),
La Serreta (Alcoi, Cocentaina, and Penàguila), L’Alcúdia (Elche), and Camí del Bosquet (Mogente)
(Image: P. Rosell Garrido after Bonet Rosado and Vives-Ferrándiz Sánchez 2011, 9, fig. 1). 42
Fig. 4.4. Spatial distribution of the eight pairs of shears found in the oppidum of La Bastida
de les Alcusses, Mogente (Valencia, Spain), fifth–fourth century BC (Image: P. Rosell
Garrido after Bonet Rosado and Vives-Ferrándiz Sánchez 2011, 65, 66 and 171). 42
Fig. 4.5. The analysed shears from south-east Spain: a) La Bastida de les Alcusses, Department 63
(Image: P. Rosell Garrido after Fletcher, Pla, and Alcacer 1969, 64, fig. 22); b) El Xarpolar
(Image: P. Rosell Garrido after Grau Mira and Amorós López 2014, 252, fig. 8.24);
c) La Serreta (Image after Moratalla Jávega 1994, 131, fig. 15); d) L’Alcúdia (Image:
P. Rosell Garrido after Ronda Femenia 2016, 604, fig. 538.1); e) La Bastida de les
Alcusses, Department 4 (Image: P. Rosell Garrido after Fletcher, Pla, and Alcacer 1965,
46, fig. 7); f) L’Alcúdia (Image: P. Rosell Garrido after Moratalla Jávega 1993);
g) La Covalta (Image after Violant y Simorra 1953, 126, fig. 8.1); h) Camí del Bosquet
(Image after Aparicio Pérez 1988, 414, fig. 7.4); i) La Bastida de les Alcusses, Department 126
(Image after Bonet Rosado and Vives-Ferrándiz Sánchez 2011, 113, fig. 23). 43
Fig. 4.6. Shears in northern Italy: a) distribution map showing the sites where shears were found,
classified according to the different chronological phases: the Late Iron Age/Roman period
(second century BC–first half of the first century BC); the Roman period (second half of first
century BC–fifth century AD); and sites with a continuity from the Late Iron Age to the
Roman period (second century BC–fifth century AD); b) graph showing the number of
shears represented during the different chronological phases (N=130). 46
Fig. 4.7. Some examples of the shears recorded in northern Italy: a) Arquà Petrarca, Tomb L
(Image after Gamba 1987, 260–1, fig. 16.5); b) Arsago Seprio, Tomb 233 (Image:
F. Spagiari after Tassinari 1987, 66); c) Valeggio sul Mincio, Tomb 4 (Image after
Salzani 1999, 16, pl. VIA, no. 38); d) Ornavasso, Tomb 137 (Image: F. Spagiari after
Piana Agostinetti 1972, 139–40, fig. 139 no. 7); e) Remedello di Sotto, Tomb 14
(Image: F. Spagiari after Vannacci Lunazzi 1977, 20, pl. XVI, no. 3); f) Introbio,
‘Warrior’s Tomb’ (Image after Rapi 2009, 74–6, pl. XXXV, no. 258). 47
Fig. 4.8. a) Probabilistic frequency of activities that the shears recorded in south-eastern Spain could
be used for; b) probabilistic frequency of activities that the shears recorded in northern Italy
could be used for. The percentage values do not indicate absolute quantities, but
‘probabilistic’ ones, which derive from the sum of the percentages of probability
of the specimens recorded. 49
Fig. 5.1. Location of La Yerba II and III, south coast of Peru (after Beresford-Jones et al. 2018, 401). 56
Fig. 5.2. Plant fibre assemblages of La Yerba II and La Yerba III (Image: Author).
a) Twined mat (Typhacea); b) fragments of bast fibre fishing net (Asclepias sp.);
c) yarn and fragment of fishing net (Scirpus sp.); d) cordage (Asclepias sp.);
e) fragment of looped bag (Scirpus sp. (?)) and f) fragment of looped bag (Scirpus sp.). 58
Fig. 5.3. A) Cross marks of Sarcostemma bast fibres (TLM); B) dislocation of
Sarcostemma bast fibres (SEM) (Images: Author). 59
Fig. 5.4. Bast fibres of: A) Typha; B) Cyperaceae (Images: Author). 60
List of figures ix
Fig. 5.5. S EM micrographs of: A) cf. Sarcostemma bast fibres occurring as single fibres;
B) cf. Scirpus fibres occurring as a pack of fibre bundles (Images: Author). 60
Fig. 5.6. A ) Modern sample of cotton (Gossypium sp.) fibre; B) microphotograph of
Apocynaceae fibre (cf. Sarcostemma) from La Yerba III; C) cotton (Gossypium sp.)
yarn (DinoLite 50×), south Peru, Early Horizon; D) Apocynaceae yarn (DinoLite 50×),
La Yerba III (Images: Author). 61
Fig. 5.7. A) micrograph of untwisted fibres of cf. Scirpus (epidermis and bast fibres),
La Yerba II; B) micrograph of cut marks in bast fibre, La Yerba III (Images: Author). 62
Fig. 5.8. S pecialised tools for fibre production: a) bone needles (possible net-making needles),
La Yerba II Trench 1 SU 9522 and SU 9505; b) modified shell Choromytilus, La Yerba III
Trench 1 SU 1005; c) obsidian flakes, La Yerba II UE 1004, UE 1007, UE 1010 and
UE 1015 and La Yerba III UE 9505, UE 9511, UE 9546 and UE 9550 (images
modified after Chauca 2019); d) wooden needle, La Yerba III Trench 1 SU 9523
(Images: Modified from Beresford-Jones et al. 2018 and Chauca 2019). 62
Fig. 5.9. A ) ‘Fluffy and white’ Sarcostemma bast fibres (DinoLite 50×); B) ‘stripped and brown’
cf. Scirpus fibres (DinoLite 50×) (Image: Author). 63
Fig. 5.10. P lied threads from La Yerba II with minimal single thread twisting:
a) S2*z yarn, La Yerba II, UE 9013, Unit (M6); b) Z2*s yarn, La Yerba II,
UE 9756, Unit (M2) (Images: Author). 64
Fig. 5.11. T extile techniques: A) twining; B) looping; C) knotting; D) spliced yarn (Image: Author). 64
Fig. 6.1. O renburg region, location of the kurgan burial grounds: 1) Gerasimovka I; 2) Gerasimovka III;
3) Kamenka; 4) Bogolyubovka; 5) Pleshanovo II; 6) Mount Berezovaya (Image: Authors). 70
Fig. 6.2. B urials containing wool textile fragments: 1) Gerasimovka III 1/3; 2) Gerasimovka I 11/2;
3) Kamenka 2/1; 4) Pleshanovo II 2/2; 5) Bogolyubovka 2/8 (Image: Authors). 71
Fig. 6.3. K amenka, Kurgan 2, Burial 1. Multi-layered textile fragment: 1) general view and schematic
drawing: 1) light-coloured cloth; 1a) second layer of the light-coloured cloth after it was folded
back; 1b) third layer of the dark-coloured cloth; 2) dark-coloured cloth; 2) side view and
schematic drawing of the fragment: A) microphotography; B) schematic drawing of the layer
positioning in the sample: 1) light-coloured cloth, 2) dark-coloured cloth; a) section where two
cloth pieces are pressed together; b) section where three layers of the light-coloured cloth and
a layer of the dark-coloured cloth are pressed together; c) section where the light-coloured cloth
is folded back; d) third layer of the light-coloured cloth; *) place where, most likely,
two dark-coloured cloth pieces were joined together with a seam (Image: Authors). 73
Fig. 6.4. K amenka, Kurgan 2, Burial 1. Multi-layered textile fragment: 1) dark-coloured cloth;
A) general view of the fragment; B) schematic drawing of textile weave; 2) bright field
microphotographs of wool fibres: A) wool fibres from the yarn of sample 42.1; B)
wool fibres from the yarn (Image: Authors). 74
Fig. 6.5. K amenka, Kurgan 2, Burial 1. Band: 1) general view; 2) schematic drawing of the
weave (Image: Authors). 74
Fig. 6.6. B ogolyubovka, Kurgan 2, Burial 8: 1–2) general view of two fragments; 3) schematic
drawing of the textile weaves; 4) microphotographs of the wool fibres with various
degrees of preservation (Image: Authors). 75
Fig. 6.7. B ogolyubovka, Kurgan 1, Burial 31: 1) general view of the cloth fragment;
2) schematic drawing of the textile weave; 3) microphotographs of the wool
fibres (Image: Authors). 75
Fig. 6.8. B ogolyubovka, Kurgan 1, Burial 31: 1) general view of the multi-layered fragment 1;
2) positioning of the layers; 3) microphotographs of the wool fibres (Image: Authors). 76
Fig. 6.9. B ogolyubovka, Kurgan 1, Burial 31: 1) general view of the multi-layered fragment 2;
2) microphotographs of the wool fibres (Image: Authors). 76
Fig. 6.10. P leshanovo, Kurgan 2, Burial 2: 1) general view of the fragment; 2) schematic drawing
of the weaves; 3) microphotographs of the wool fibres (Image: Authors). 77
Fig. 6.11. G erasimovka III, Kurgan 1, Burial 3: 1) general view of the band fragment; 2) schematic
drawing of the weave; 3) microphotograph of the wool fibres (Image: Authors). 78