Guidelines for Interpretation

In addition to a formalised structure for data collection as described above, a developed methodological approach requires defined conventions to guide the process of interpreting information. By nature, the process of historical inquiry involves interrogation of widely varying sources. However, the degree of abstraction involved in creating a structured database means that source evidence must be considered carefully in the process of data compilation as well as in interpreting the consolidated corpus.

To ensure that all data are handled in a consistent manner, explicit guidelines for interpretation are helpful. Because evidence is mainly descriptive and occurs in the form of mentions, each attribute is treated as an independent data element and is assigned equal weight. Judgement of the veracity of information is part of the analytical process and is based on patterns defined by the aggregated corpus.

Given the nature of the evidence, it is neither possible nor desirable to restrict information gathering to luxury silks. In some texts, silk descriptions appear together with

112 For a discussion of combined modelling approaches for humanities research, see Bradley 2005; Short and Bradley 2005.

details about other fabrics. Consequently, this study takes a broader approach by gathering information about all types of textiles. The aim is to exploit information gained from primary sources by applying a consistent framework to structure and order information. The resulting corpus provides an aggregated population to discern patterns and perform analysis.

a. Process of description

In developing specific research guidelines, it is helpful to consider how textiles were depicted in written works and the kinds of descriptive conventions applied. Even a cursory review of the sources indicates that textiles were a prominent feature in the regional material culture during the period covered by this study. An obvious feature of historical writing is that tangible goods are visible to us only through description. The process of relaying information depends upon an author’s interest, knowledge, experience, and intended audience as well as choices and the ordering of information.¹¹³ By nature, all textiles have a number of basic qualities in common. The discrete set of possible raw material components used in textile production can be combined in a variety of ways to produce distinctive materials.

b. Problem of terminology

Reference to common images is evident in the extensive terminology associated with textiles. Through the lexicon of textiles, we see a rich environment of different types and purposes. Many fabrics have specific names and identities that would have been understood in a contemporaneous setting. A confounding problem of historical textile studies is how to interpret the meaning of specific terms. Philologists have long tried to clarify the meaning of

113 Webb 1999, 62.

textile terms in primary sources with limited success.¹¹⁴ For example, in his preface to BOC, Vogt observed that it is not possible to know the precise nuances of textile-related terms.¹¹⁵

Probing more deeply, there are several reasons why textile terminology presents such a challenge. First, sources are far from explicit in the use of textile lexicon. With few

exceptions, authors used specific textile terms in context without elaborated definition or provision of descriptive details. According to Piponnier, a comprehensive study of textile terms would require rigorous research methods covering the technology, etymology, and evolution of language to reach a satisfactory outcome.¹¹⁶

Even a well-conceived, cross-cultural effort to construct a glossary of textile terms would face additional challenges. Examination of textile terms in context demonstrates imprecise usage and classification.¹¹⁷ Some of the terms encountered in this study cover several categories of the same product, making it difficult to discern how the named quality was similar to or different from other distinguishing characteristics.¹¹⁸ Moreover, textile terminology was not stable, but evolved different meanings over time. Various factors contributed to the migration of meaning including changes in material type, production location, and technology. Piponnier suggested that in general, imitation and substitution of lesser materials led to a decline in the quality of textiles designated by the same term.¹¹⁹

In some instances, obscure or ambiguous textile terms may limit research results.

Meaning may be irretrievably lost if descriptive details are lacking. Like other specialised lexicons, textile terminology usage can be inconsistent and localised. When referring to

114 Lombard 1978, 239.

115 BOC, Vogt, Vol. I, 30.

116 Piponnier 1967, 878.

117 Piponnier 1967, 864.

118 Lombard 1978, 238-239.

119 Piponnier 1967, 869.

finished textile goods, a number of vague or general terms such as robes or stuffs were

commonly used. In spite of these limitations, the textile mention database aids examination of evidence through contextual comparisons among sources.

c. Textile names

One of the most challenging aspects of deciphering textile terminology pertains to textile names. In his examination of Islamic textiles, Serjeant listed a total of 168 names from his compilation of written sources. Among the Genizah sources consulted for a study of bridal trousseau lists, Stillman found more than sixty textile names, sixteen of which were in

addition to those included in Serjeant’s work.¹²⁰ A glossary of Byzantine textile terminology and names would be a valuable contribution to the field, particularly in association with Islamic and Jewish sources.

Textile terms in both Arabic and Greek generally fall into distinct groups. The three categories common to both languages are: descriptive or technique-based terms, names carried over directly from other languages, and geographic appellations. This third category may refer to a district, city, region, or even more generally, a culture. For example, Islamic and Genizah sources both contain numerous references to Rūmī textiles. A fourth category found only in Arabic sources was based on honorific or tributary references. Although many of the texts in the Cairo Genizah were written in Hebrew script, the terms associated with textiles were transliterated mainly from Arabic, but also from Greek in a few instances.

As a group, these toponymic textile terms pose the greatest challenge to interpretation.

In many instances, ambiguous usage makes it difficult to differentiate between stuffs

described as originating in a particular location from descriptions meant to indicate a style or

120 Stillman 1972, 19.

fashion of dress.¹²¹ While a geographic reference might be authentic, place names frequently were used in conscious imitation. For example, some historical toponyms such as damask, muslin, and tabby have been carried into modern use, but with meanings that have changed greatly over time. Today muslin is an inexpensive, loose cotton, but Marco Polo described Mosul cloth as woven with silk and gold.¹²² This reference provides an indication of the

migration of meaning and tangled references that are often associated with textile trade names.

In summary, this chapter describes a data methodology to gather widely distributed information into a consolidated resource. Textiles were a dominant feature of the regional material culture and were frequently mentioned in middle Byzantine sources as well as

contemporaneous Islamic and Jewish texts. Prosopography provides a model for development of a textile mention database that supports identification of historical processes associated with silk in terms of production and consumption characteristics. The following chapter applies the database methodology to a broad range of Byzantine sources.

121 Stillman 1972, 25.

122 Mar Pol, I.60; see I.62 n. 3 for discussion of changed meaning for muslin.