The tent is up!
i don't do bad sauce passes

Love Begins
Monterey Bay Aquarium
One Nice Bug Per Day
KIROKAZE

blake kathryn

#extradirty

No title available

roma★
sheepfilms
d e v o n

No title available
Keni

Kiana Khansmith

oozey mess
occasionally subtle

tannertan36
No title available

No title available
Xuebing Du
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Estonia

seen from Bulgaria

seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Costa Rica

seen from United States

seen from Spain

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from Lithuania
@factotumbird
The tent is up!
The answer to "How did these Ancient People do this????" is basically always
1. A lot of dudes. Just a ton of fucking people from beginning to end of the process.
2. Ancient people weren't stupid, they just figured shit out the same way we do: fuck around until you find out.
3. We're gonna plan this out and it's gonna take ten fucking years, and you will cope.
4. Sticks and string are surprisingly versatile and can be used for a variety of purposes, like moving stuff and making sure things are even and go in the spot you wanted to put them in!
5. I want to make this easier and more efficient to move. If I put this on the round thing and push, it will move. If I put this in water, it will move. If I get some animals and rope and have a whole bunch of them drag it, it will move. All of these things are a better option than one guy trying to pick the whole fucking thing up.
"I'm not calling the people who believe in this conspiracy theory racist" I am. They're racist. Maybe not out of malice, but the fact that they believe in this is in itself racist. These conspiracies are always about brown people. Machu Pichu, the Pyramids, Göbekli Tepe, Easter Island, it is ALWAYS POC. It's never the Parthenon, it's never the Colliseum, despite the fact that these were built around the same time as some of the other sites these conspiracy chucklefucks like to throw around, it's never something fucking European. It's always "primitive people" with "stone tools" and "no understanding of modern engineering" so "clearly someone must have taught them this or given them the technology because CLEARLY they were just too Primitive and Savage to figure it out themselves." Fuck off with that shit.
pet peeve is when you look up fashion references from a specific era and you keep getting modern day '[era]-inspired' fashion like NO i want authenticity damn it. i can see your 2020 photo quality and your 2020 hair and your 2020 makeup. youre not fooling me.
hello i'm a historical fashion researcher and i have a lot of experience looking up things! this is a very widely experienced irritation and you're definitely not alone in this, but i am here to share everything i know!
so, ways to get around this:
turn off AI results. they're literally nonsense to us
don't use pinterest because the sources/provenance is often hard to trace
a standard internet search can be okay, but museum collections are the top tier (list of collections below this list)
instead of broad terms like victorian, regency, tudor, renaissance etc. try using the decade you're looking for. if you're not sure of what decade it is but have a vague image in your head, look on the fashion history timeline and just jump around until you find it. but even changing to e.g. 19th century will give better results than victorian
including terms like womenswear/menswear, daywear, formal wear, evening wear, court dress should increase the value of your search too
including "fashion plates" in your search can give you a nice impression of the intended silhouettes of the era. some of these might be a little stylised but will show you what was considered in vogue
for pre-fashion plate eras or things like makeup and styling, you'll have to look at portraiture or manuscripts. these are harder to actually find what you're looking for, but searching museum collections and limiting results to specific date ranges will be your friend
when looking at art, do bear in mind sometimes artists would paint fabric extra flow-y to show off their skills. it might not have been exactly like that in terms of fabric weight or drape. so, a pinch of salt required!
if you find something on image search where the provenance is dubious, reverse image search and you might find a source! i've been able to trace random pinterest images to real sources, but this does take a lot of time and effort and is often not worth the headache
some online resources and museum collections:
fashion history timeline is an invaluable resource if you're trying to get a feel for everything and should be your first port of call. it'll also link to good examples
the met has a vast number of extant examples of clothing, as well as fashion plates
costume institute fashion plates is a subcollection of the met for fashion plates (1800s-1922)
v&a also has many extant garments, fashion plates, and incredible articles on clothing and aesthetics. read the details of the objects because they'll often reveal a lot about the piece
lacma is good for C19th-20th pieces
nypl digital collection for photographs
national portrait gallery or similar for portraiture, or literally any museum in your country that has historical art
national museums scotland can be useful situationally but might be oddly specific
stout style history is a great collection for finding image references for fat people wearing historical clothes. survival bias of a lot of museum pieces tends towards smaller clothing that couldn't be repurposed, but this aims to counter that. it's not sortable, but is still a really nice resource
wikimedia commons is surprisingly handy! and the images, if you should need to link/repost them, are public domain
auction websites sound like a funny one to recommend. some won't have mannequins and some will. just look up historical garment auctions and you'll find some!
anyway, i hope this has been a good place to start for anyone interested! there are probably some i've missed because there are so many museums across the world and i don't know about all of them or can't remember them. but these are the ones i've used the most! (my specialisation/jobs i've had to research for have only really been in western fashion, so my resources reflect that)
Wikipedia has a list of fashion museums. Unfortunately, the page itself is only available in German, but the introductory paragraph is very short and after that, it's organised by country, and then it's a simple list. If you click on a museum's article, the website is usually linked in the overview table.
Sweet mother, I can't long for girls--Arachne has crushed me with desire for fiber crafts
Should I buy a loom? No. Do I enjoy weaving? Very much no. Do I want to buy a loom and do some weaving? YES BADLY
Sweet Arachne, I cannot knit, you overcame me with longing too many times already this month and my tendons are fucked up. Please slow down with the longing for FIVE MINUTES
Arachne told me to tell you that if you had a spinning wheel you could probably spend your wrist-recovery time making yourself more sexy sexy yarns.
O cursed oracle! The gods are demanding indeed
Just a short video of my card weaving in progress
What kind of sorcery is this?! I can never turn more than 10 cards in sequence because they just refuse to cooperate and you have like, what, 35? 40?! HOW?!?!
40 in the tree strap above! The most I ever tried was 44 for this ramshorn strap below - that was tough, but also ok because the groups turned separately? I think my hands would murder me if I tried to go any higher on my backstrap setup though ;) I think the trick is maintaining appropriate tension!
Yeah, that one looks real nice. What did you use it for?
@diamondot speaking for myself, i just decided to learn it one day a few years ago (i had a viking phase ok) and simply started with it. It's surprisingly easy since all the info is available on the net. Honestly, i don't remember where i started since it has been so long ago and now i just browse pinterest for patterns alone. Google tablet weaving or card weaving (same thing, different names) patterns and some basic explanations and yt vids for how to turn and weave the stuff. Things like
S and Z threading are there for a reason, so mind your card orientation. Start with some easy pattern like simple wave or diamonds above, 6 - 10 cards are good for your first project. Don't lose hope in initial stage. Streching and threading all that yarn can take anything between 20 minutes and 3 hours depending on how big is the pattern and how skilled you are. Since you need some lenghts to secure ends and to turn cards, use about 40 cm more than wished lenght of your final product. Secure lose ends after threading through cards so you won't end with a bundled mess. Streching/knotting them to something is one way. Taping each card threads together or using weights (check pictures below) is another way (good only for shorter stuff though). Cards could be made out of anything as long as they have smooth edges and rounded corners. Cardboard, thicker plastic sheet, literal cards cut into squares with holes punched through them, whatever. These are mine 2 decks, minus cards i am using atm.
When you start weaving and pattern looks like a total mess, try turning cards in opposite directions. It usualy solves the problem (all that forward/backward can be a bit tricky and mirroring motions/patterns/card orientation can be confusing at first seemingly messing all your work even though you are doing everything right technicaly, just in opposite order/direction). Don't lose your hope. I still manage to mess up like first 5cm of every other work i start. It's not an issue as that start usualy gets cut off anyway (the tension is not right for at least first 4 rows, aka 1 full card rotation, until all threads go up and down at least once no matter what you do. Don't sweat it). You don't need any fancy startup either. Historicaly, people used to weave like this and this and this:
I just strech the thing between 2 chairs myself. Door knobs work as well and so does staircase railing. Wherever you have some space. Long hair clips are your friend, especialy when you are done with weaving for the day and you don't want stuff to tangle
And that's about it. Have fun 😊
Some of my favorite tablet weaving resources are :
This website is where I learned, twenty years ago while u was intending on Sturtevant Wi.
These books are both great, Collingwood is more comprehensive, but harder to just pick up and weave from.
Buy Card Weaving 2Rev Ed by Candace Crockett (ISBN: 9780934026611) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligib
Buy The Techniques of Tablet Weaving by Collingwood, Peter (ISBN: 9781626542143) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free deli
I love when people post things like this, then say, “ah ha ha, it’s not that complicated! 🤗”
It is complicated. You’re just really good at it!
Hi. I may be late to reply but i'm in a weaving mood so here we are.
The thing is that the technique looks complicated due to the fact that there is 100 something and that number alone is scary. But. Actually several buts.
But number 1 - the technique is OLD. Meaning - while being somewhat tedious just like any other textile craft, it has been used and learned for a long long time and there's plenty of resources (check out links above or any youtube video explaining the process) of varying difficulty from complicated af to easy peasy lemon squeezy with closed eyes
But number 2 - there is only one core principle/step you need to understand and that is when some threads go from up to down or from down to up (aka when they cross), you need another thread going in between so they won't simply snap back again. That's it. That's the basic principle behind every weaving ever. What card weaving does compared to standard weave is that instead of a single thread going up and down in the single row, you get 2 or 3 or 4 or 6 or whatever number of threads your pattern calls for in the same row
But number 3 - the number of rows = number of cards. Simple as that. Cards turn around to make a cord like when you are twisting 2 or 4 or whatever numbers of threads to make a rope. If some of those threads have different colours, you get a repeating pattern.
But number 4 - card orientation or S/Z orientation or whatever other fancy name for the twisting direction simply means that if you turn all your card in the same way at the same time, which one of them will make the twisted rope in this / angle and which one will do that in this \ angle. That's it. That's the whole mystery between S/Z threading.
But number 5 - you can start with as little as 4 cards to make a custom set of shoe laces or a key strap or whatever and call yourself a weaver. Because you did that. And it was nice. And it was easy. You just turn and thread and turn and thread and then you keep repeating this while watching a movie or something. There's no need for the math finals level of concentration here.
But number 5 - no one, literally NO ONE starts with a pattern like this
No. Everybody starts with something like this
Keep it simple, keep it easy, make 10cm and be done if you want to. It's perfectly fine.
But number 6 - you don't need any fancy items for starting. No hooks, no needles, no loom, no anything. If you have 2 balls of yarn in different color or some remains of your old cross stitch project or whatever and some card-like stuff you won't be sad for making holes in it, you are all set. Back side of the sketch pad is good. Poker cards cut to squares are good. A sturdy enough sheet of plastic is also good. You remember that old pexeso pairs stack you didn't touch since you were 9? Guess what!
My point is that if this looks like something you may be interested in, then you can absolutely try doing it for literally zero cost other than your time.
This reminds me that I have my Thor’s Hammer tablet weaving project still sitting in the closet untouched for the last few (almost 3?) years... I need to get back to that eventually.
@cryptid-extremist found it for ya! Go wild!
@hauntedbyyarn you've talked about this for ages!
I need to show you guys my mum's card weaving.... She writes with it. She does incredibly incritate patterns. It's stunning and beautiful and I am in awe
A small selection of my mum's work! She got excited and says she has more to show you guys, and some of her best stuff has already been sold! But stay tuned for more. The blue/pink/black band is my favourite: loads of different knot-like patterns going all the way down!
You should try out writing surrealism to see if you like it. Write confusing things on purpose. Get into stream of consciousness. Make something purposefully pointless.
So many of our storytelling ideas have been based around what’s marketable. Surrealism is actively hostile to the marketable. Actively hostile to the concept of purpose. It accepts confusion and absurdity wholeheartedly.
Idk you might find that it fits your brain perfectly. When I discovered surrealism it changed the course of my life. It really made me commit to the idea that I’m a writer. Not all of my writing is surrealist but surrealism taught me that understanding and reality can be fluid. It’s okay to make the reader work for your points. It’s okay to not have a point at all. Sometimes you can create discomfort and confusion and that is also art. Anything can have a perspective and perspective doesn’t have to matter. Time can be odd, place can be weird, storytelling methods can be unorthodox. You can just make art. You can go high concept. You can be funny, even.
Like look into Dadaism. Look into modernism. A lot of the pointlessness of the art and literature from the period between the world wars especially I think might really resonate with you. There was a lot of nihilism and confusion in that era and the art reflects that.
Oh hey, do you know what time it is? It is highly specific resource time!
Today we have the Royal School of Needlework Stitch Bank! There are HUNDREDS of stitch types in the RSN Stitch Bank.
And more added regularly, let’s look at a recent addition
I picked the first one in the 25 recently added Elizabethan stitches, the Elizabethan French Stitch
The stitch bank provides written and photo tutorials as well as a video option to learn to do it yourself. There are examples of the stitch in use, resources, references, everything but a needle and thread!
RSN Stitchbank
rsnstitchbank.org
I looked at some of the tutorials last night and holy shit I'm so impressed! They're SO thorough! Not only do they have written and video instructions, but there are photo and illustration options for each image AND a "flip view" button so that left handed people can see all the images in reverse!
I am going to jump in and add, as you said they are very detailed in their directions, something that takes a lot of time and money.
If anyone who has enjoyed this resource has the means, I encourage you to adopt or sponsor a stitch to help keep this free to access. I know not everyone has the means to (fair, been there) but if you can, check out their sponsor options
RSN Stitch Bank Progress
And one other resource I have shared before, The Lady's Magazine. Embroidery patterns from 1770-1819. In case anyone wants some historic ideas for using all these new embroidery stitches
The Lady's Magazine: Patterns of Perfection
I truly hate to tell you all this, but the reason needle sizes are numbered that way (smaller numbers = bigger needles) is BECAUSE SOME ASSHOLE HAD A 1-INCH DIAMETER CYLINDER AND LABELED HIS NEEDLES' SIZES BY HOW MANY NEEDLES HE COULD SHOVE IN THERE.
Like, 24 24-gauge needles can fit in a 1-inch cylinder. 18 18-gauge needles can fit in a 1-inch cylinder. Wrong and horrible. The worst possible way to measure a needle. Good night.
this is how shotgun shells are made apparently and then needles got made that way too
Wires as well
That is so unnecessarily imprecise.
It’s not actually that imprecise from a low-tech perspective though? How else are you going to measure the difference between a 6 vs a 9 gauge needle without some highly precise measuring equipment? This is cheap and replicable, and isn’t it easier to make a big cylinder to match a specific diameter?
I'd measure the diameter of the mold used to make the needle and label the molded needles accordingly but however people want to do it is fine I guess
Stacking circles inside circles doesn't measure things all that precisely. To give a super exaggerated example, a 1-guage needle via this method could be 1 inch diameter, .51 inch diamater, or anything in between. You can nearly double the size of a needle at that scale and still have the same gauge.
Obviously most needles are smaller than that and the margin of error is thus smaller, but it's still so unnecessarily imprecise when you can just measure the diameter of the molds and use that as your standard. If you want to measure them at home by chucking them in a ring you still can. But the measurement standard should be diameter-based.
It seems weirdly imprecise because it's not true. I don't know where this rumor comes from, but that's not how needle sizes came about. As I understand it, they come from wire gauge sizes, where you make a wire thinner and thinner by repeatedly pulling it through smaller and smaller holes in a draw plate:
They're numbered in order from largest to smallest because you do them sequentially, making the wire slightly thinner each time, and the gauge # is just the number of holes you pull it through.
Notably, in every gauge system I'm aware of, the size-0 wire or needle is still much, much less than an inch across, because it's a wire or a needle, not a piece of rebar.
My best guess about the "number of wires/needles that fit in a 1in cylinder" things is that someone who was confused about gauge numbers had a 1" hole, noticed that they could shove a little more than 20 24-gauge wires in it, jumped to the conclusion that this must be how it was defined, and started confidently telling everyone that this was true.
Do you want me to use historical knitting knowledge to make this a little bit worse
I must know how historical knitting information can be anything but a benefit.
And now I'm thinking about the Terrible Knitters of Mold or whatever it was, the women who hand-knit REALLY fast using knitting sheaths.
Right! so this post is about sewing needles, where gauge/diameter are slightly less important than in other types of needle, such as medical needles or knitting needles. There's of reasonable amount of wiggle room in crafting a sewing needle, a very ancient technology that can really be made any old way (it doesn't even need to have an eye - it can just be a poky thorn or animal quill that pokes thread through holes.) And the technological innovation of the metal sewing needle being made from drawn wire and the points ground on a grindstone is supported because we know that's how they did it and because that's the easiest way to to make long thin pieces of metal, so needle size mapping to wire size (and a higher number being number of draws through a plate) makes sense.
A historical forerunner of knitting, nalbinding, involves a single bone needle that looks like this, which is a tool that a reasonable competent handcrafter can make from bone.
The modern practice of fast knitting, however, requires at least a pair needles whose diameters exactly match, and for a lot of knitting work, require a set of needles that exactly match.
Sewing needles are tremendously low-tech tech. As I said, the eye is optional. It is not-impossible to make a bone, wood, quill or ivory needle with very little technology, simply by whittling. The introduction of metal wire-drawing techniques made them easier and better-quality, but you don't need to start with fine metalcraft to sew. (although sewing does FEEL like that. If You Wish To Make An Apple Pie From Scratch Sew A Single Flipping Button You Must First Invent the Universe.)
Knitting needles are pickier in their production than sewing needles. It is annoying and difficult to make four perfectly matching bastards. Also, since knitting makes its own fabric as it goes, it's very useful to have a fixed idea of the diameter of the needles, because that determines the properties of the resulting fabric.
So knitting needle popularity and knitted textile volumes are strongly (but not universally!) linked to the development of drawn-wire metal manufacturing, and the rises in popularity of knitted textiles follow the rise of drawn-wire metal manufacturing. European depictions of Knitting Madonnas show Mary knitting in the round on long metal double-points.
(also, for the record: knitting needles used to be called "pins," in English, which made a bit of sense because, like pins, they don't have eyes. But they also make stitches (like needles). At any rate, English now calls them "needles.")
So why aren't knitting needles - which you'd think are more closely linked to wire gauge - numbered "backwards" (higher number -> smaller needle) like sewing needles are?
Well, regrettably, they used to be - and that's how you'll find needle sizes described in (for example) early 20th century European knitting patterns! the oldest methodologies of knitting terminology corresponded in some ways to "draws through a plate", though it's hard to find out more about that (a historian who cares could do that) because standardised wire gauges weren't common, knitting patterns were secretive, the textiles themselves haven't survived, and people didn't think it was very important. Various countries and artisans used different numbers to describe wire and needles, and there were no consistent gauges for any.
That's why, today, a serious knitter will have a helpful tool to measure needles, detect what size they are, convert between USA and metric needles sizes, and also helpfully measure the gauge of the knitted material in cm or inches to compare against the expected fabric gauge in the pattern. To measure your needle, you pass it through the hole and see which one it matches! Here's a knitter's gauge:
You'll notice that a modern knitter's gauge recapitulates two tools from further up the thread (ha) - it resembles the wire draw plate, used for making wire, as well as the more engineering-looking wire gauge! This is because, again, it's one of the more efficient ways to measure this kind of material item. But you'll note a few other things. One is that there are quite weird numbers on one side. The hole at the bottom, labelled "9.00 mm" on one side, clearly refers to the current standard 9mm knitting needle. In the US, this needle is called a size 13... and in some mysterious measurement called GWR, it's 00.
This harkens back to when knitting needles were connected to wire-drawing and the numbers ran "backwards". I don't know precisely what GWR stands for, but it's known to be connected to that, and thus some kind of "gauge wire reference."
A blogger who has looked at old knitting gauges connected Chamber's Bell Gauge with a knitting pattern, which begins: Take steel pins No. 13, Chambers' bell gauge...
Here's Chamber's Bell Gauge for sizing knitting needles. This gauge was created in the UK in 1847 and became almost the knitting standard - and the numbers go backwards. You can see that a size-1 knitting needle is the biggest, and indicates the size of the wire used to start making knitting needles! and the more "passes" make a smaller needle.
The USA was sort of a Wild West of knitting gauge for a very long time, either using artisanal English gauges (as steel needles tended to come from England anyway, but that's another post) or random individual manufacturer's sizes determined largely by wool size. This is a topic of great interest to people who like historical fashions and designs, and collectors of knitting gauges. An in-depth post below calls gauges, fittingly, "Rosetta Stones". Here's a proprietary measurement system of unclear age - a historian could make a guess - but look at the absolutely fabulous materials the needles could be made from! Bone, steel, applewood, celluloid, and NON-INFLAMMABLE (as celluloid was apparently that much of a problem.) There's a separate scale for your steels. There's a proprietary metric AND the metric system.
Early North American Knitting Needle Gauges Part 1 – Early Days and the Sizing Challenge – Webster's Knitting Needle Notions
And what that little card shows is that, at a point that we can only narrow down a little bit, "imperial/USA" knitting needle sizes swung 'round to recapitulate the metric system: bigger needles have more millimetres, and are thus a higher size-number.
But the UK didn't do that. Look at this gauge from part 2 of the post: Early North American Knitting Needle Gauges Part 2 – The Big Firms in the USA – Webster's Knitting Needle Notions
It has English sizes going backwards. Because of wire.
By WW2, there was a burst of innovation, from which the USA emerged staggering and blooded, with a single unified knitting-needle size, agreed-upon as a shared industry standard by needle manufacturers. This happened overnight and possibly as a result of a drinking session.
With the USA having pinned (ha) a measuring system down, and Metric ticking along in blissful and inarguable perfection, the Old English measurement, or GWR, based on the "backwards" wire scale, started disappearing.
Today, we tend to measure knitting needles as either Metric or USA, and patterns note both:
But if you're interested in historical knitting patterns, which use either "old English sizes" or an equivalent, those go backwards - and link directly to wire gauge.
This is part of the underpinning tradition of knitting being a direct conversation across the elders of human history (if you wish to knit a mitten, you must first reconcile the generations) as well as a pitched long-distance psychic battle with the pattern designer.
I hope this helps nothing, and confuses you more. Kiss!
Everyone's all "ohhh 2026 bring back physical media" until I start talking illuminated manuscripts and then suddenly we're not on the same page anymore
I made an illuminated manuscript skin for AO3? So im doing my part!
This is fantastic and needs to be shared. I just changed my skin to this and it brought me so much joy, thank you so much for making it
Kind of obsessed with this woman's freakishly modern jacket from 1904.
The complete lack of shoulder definition gives it the silhouette of an MA-1 bomber jacket, but bombers weren't even a thing yet. The Wright brothers barely achieved powered flight in 1903. The ribbing on the shoulder and the angular cutouts with the hexagonal mesh are so futuristic and cyberpunk, but even art deco wouldn't be a thing for another 15 years. The color is like a dusty NASA flight suit. All together it's giving lone spacefarer crash landing their tiny rustbucket ship on Mars.
Truly a visionary of her time.
“The markings upon the band begin to fade. The writing, which at first was as clear as red flame, has all but disappeared… a secret now that only fire can tell.” - The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring, 2001
Want to knit this scarf? You can download my free pattern here! :)
This is called illusion knitting! Basically, you knit a pattern in 2 color stripes, but then you use the difference between the texture of knits and purls to make a pattern appear at a low angle
When you look at it from the aide, a knit stitch looks flat while a purl stitch looks like a little bump. So if you have a pattern of knits and purls you look at from the side, the knit stitches will fade into the background while the purl stitches will stay visible. You use that effect, while keeping a steady stripe pattern, to create the illusion:
From above: plain stripes because your eye focuses on the colors
From the side: you see the pattern of purl stitches because they stick up above the flatter knit stitches
(Photos source)
And this lets you do some absolutely AMAZING patterns:
Plain stripey shawl becomes a PORTRAIT
Or, like above, a scarf becomes the One Ring
This is fascinating, thank you for the explanation! I´ve never seen something like it, but I´m also not the most experienced knitter.
A source for patterns is http://www.illusionknitting.woollythoughts.com/information.html
The main site has all kinds of interesting knitting stuff, but this page is *just* illusion knitting.
top 5 ancient artistic cultures (not sure about phrasing. yknow like "jomon style" or "anglo saxon art")
the jade creatures of Hongshen, a late Neolithic culture of northeast China contemporaneous w the latest stages of Sredny Stog and just about all of Yamnaya. attempts to find analogues to these critters in nature have borne little fruit, not least bc the Hongshen appear to had been perfectly capable of pursuing realism in their art – when they wanted to. this article argues the creatures draw inspiration from the shape of human bone and cartillage, like so:
the rest go as follows:
2. figurines of Bronze Age Scandinavia. I just think these look really aesthetically pleasing. look at those curves! idk what to think about attempts to interpret the figurines as depicting historically attested Nordic deities. the most famous artefact to survive from the Nordic Bronze Age, the Trundholm Chariot, seems to depict a myth of only marginal significance to later Norse civilisation
3. the erotic pottery of the Moche, predecessors of the Chimor, who flourished on the coast of northwestern Peru prior to their conquest by the Inca. this post goes a little into the various theories concerning the purpose of the so-called "porn pottery" – I like Larco Hoyle's idea that the pottery (none of which appears to depict penis-in-vagina intercourse) was used by the Moche in order to teach and show methods of natural birth control. but ofc there's a direct analogue in depictions of sodomy on Greek pottery, which doesn't really seem to had served a didactic purpose
4. the Thinkers of Hamangia - not much of a "style" given that it's only these two figurines, I suppose, but these two are my favourite sculptures to come out of Neolithic Europe by far. could write a whole post about them, honestly; definitely among my favourite pieces of prehistoric art in general. afaict, the figurines are nowadays mostly interpreted as a prehistoric equivalent to Gauguin's Where Do We Come From? - I personally prefer to think of them as analogous to his Grape Harvest at Arles
5. cosmetic palettes of late Neolithic Egypt, or what is properly known as the Naqada III phase of Protodynastic Egypt. I just find them to be really pretty – and I kind of love the idea of decorating what is basically a make-up container with depictions of your country's military conquests. the most famous of these palettes is the Narmer Palette; my personal favourite is the Bull Palette, shown on the left. I'd totally use them to mix my kohl
Drawing table from the 1930s
New medieval peasant cultural exchange post. Medieval peasant shows you the real night sky and you light on fire and explode.
@bookshelfdreams wait wait hold on give me a minute to process these tags 😭
going to start researching sheep breeds that are like endangered or need conservation and then seek out their wool to use, preferably buying directly from the herders, so i can support them
i found a farm that has Navajo-Churro sheep and sells their wool as roving and yarn directly to the public, along with several other uncommon breeds :) website here
holy shit theres a lot of small farms out there with heritage breed sheep n other animals selling their fiber!!
re: your tags, totally fine to reblog!! there's a whole database of farms im looking at now on the Livestock Conservancy website!! here's the link, all you have to do is select "yarn" or "fiber" from this drop down menu
and it'll give you contact info and websites to A BUNCH of small farms selling their heritage breed fiber directly!! you can also look up by animal breed if you want a specific kind of fiber like, say Navajo-Churro
it's AWESOME!! many of these farms seem to be certified by the Conservancy and the Conservancy itself seems to be like a good nonprofit
German hunting knife, 19th century