Documentation for A&S Competition:
One person's opinion

by David Swan, writing as Henry MacQueen

These notes are particularly targeted at artisans who intend to enter items in the "Northern Lights Arts and Sciences Pentathelon". This is only opinion, other judges may have other opinions. I will be soliciting opinions of other judges and including their input in these notes.

Documentation is for Judges

The first thing that you need to realize is that the target audience for your documentation is the judges, so I'll start by telling you a little bit about that.

The judging process is somewhat chaotic and anything that your document does to reduce that chaos is a "real good thing"(tm).

Typical questions that are overheard in the display room during judging: "Has anyone seen (the item) that goes with this documentation?", "Where is the (category) table?" and, all to often, "Has anyone seen the documentation folder for (item)?" Good documentation should help judges avoid these questions.

Typical questions that are overheard while an item is being examined usually are along the lines of, "What material is this?", "What did they use to (whatever)?", "Is that glued-up lumber?", "Was this done by hand?" Good documentation should provide answers to all of these types of questions.

The sheer number of entries and the effort that judges make to be fair and thorough mean that there is an element of time pressure during judging. This means that brevity and conciseness are highly prized attributes in A&S docs. Your document is not a research paper, but you can write a research paper that you may attach and refer to in your document.

Specific things to do

• I like to see a small pix or good drawing of item on the front page to help me find the item that the doc is about. It's a real time saver.
• I really like it when the artisan makes a separate copy of the documentation for each category that an item is cross entered in, and some indication of which category the actual item is sitting in.
• Essential to me is an "executive summary" that sums up what the piece is and what the artisan has done in a few words as are humanly possible.
• Immediately after that should be a list of "I did this" and "I bought that", with short justifications for each of the choices made.
• Finally, some sort of attached reference. Endnotes are usually sufficient, but I really like seeing relevant photocopied pages from the sources with the relevant parts highlighted.

Format

• typewritten or computer printout
• leave lots of whitespace
• affix the pages together (a stack of loose pages will become scattered)
• keep it simple: black printing in a single font on plain white paper

Examples

The following examples are items that I have made. The first item has never been in competition; as a practice piece I would probably not enter it. The second item was entered in Ice Dragon XII 'way back in A.S. XXIV. This is not the documentation that I entered with it, but is fresh documentation that I cooked up for this example. (The original doc was, er..., disappointing. I was younger, then.)

Repousse Rabbit Entered in: metalwork woodwork Practice piece, copper repousse, rabbit and leaves theme taken from an illustration in a Dover book based on an Islamic illumination ca. 1400. Framed in a turned wood frame for mundane display. Although the technique and subject matter are period, it would be unlikely that it would have been presented and displayed in this manner but would have been a single part of a larger work. Metalwork The sheet copper was purchased. The technique I used for doing the repousse was taken directly out of Theophilus (Upon Divers Arts) but I did one thing differently: I used tin instead of pitch to stabilize the finished work, since tin was available to me, less expensive and more durable. Copper sheet thickness was consistent with what Theophilus recommended (i.e. thin enough to show a crimp when pinched with a fingernail). Woodwork Birch, face turned on an electric lathe. The piece of birch was split off a block of firewood in my woodpile. The repousse item is held in place by a disk of board held in place by metal clips. The frame is stained using a commercial stain and finished with six coats of tung oil. References [copy of pages from Theophilus] [copy of page from Dover book showing the drawing]

Judges comments on the example.

Good things:

• described the materials
• described the method sufficiently that I know that it was a method used in period
• described the shortcomings ("would not have been displayed in this manner")
• described modern choices (electric lathe)
• described period choices (got wood of a block of firewood)
• described substitution (used tin instead of pitch, and said why)

Shortcomings (questions not answered):

• how was the item polished?
• how was the tin applied?
• why that particular colour of stain?

I would score this documentation at 4 out of 5.

Thorsbjerg Shirt Entered in: early period garb weaving Early period shirt, based on the bog find at Thorsbjerg as described in "Ancient Danish Textiles from Bogs and Burials", by Margrethe Hald Early Period Garb Wool early period shirt (ca. 850). Pattern from Hald (see below), sized to fit me. Constructed using simple overcast stitching (to prevent raveling, see below) and linen thread. The body of the shirt is commercial cloth, with a thread count and weave consistent with shirts of the period. The cloth that I chose is a 2/2 twill, but the original bog shirt is done in a broken lozenge twill. The colour, although commercial, is consistant with madder, as compared to a set of dyed wool samples that I dyed myself, using various recipes. I added tablet woven trim, bone button and decorative cuffs, none of which were on the original. I wove the sleeves, described below. Weaving The sleeves are for judging in the weaving category; the hem decorations, although I wove them, are not. The hem trim is tablet woven in a diamond pattern, of a blue colour deeper than could be easily gotten with woad or indigo. The pattern is common to the SCA but I haven't documented it to period use. I wove the sleeves in two pieces and stitched them together. The sleeve body is broken lozenge twill, woven on a warp weighted loom, using the suggested heddle tie-up from Hoffman (see below), but not using a woven header band (I used individual pegs, instead. Never again!) The hair/fleece proportion is consistant with descriptions of period wool in Hald. The colours are pretty generic, with the green being similar to a weld/woad sample that I obtained at Pennsic. The actual thread count is somewhat coarser than in the original. The original does not provide clues about the original colours, but I chose contrasting colours based upon the representation of broken lozenge textiles in the Oseberg Tapestry. The terminal end of the weaving was finished using the tablet weaving finish technique described in Hoffman. The cuffs were done using a pick float technique (not documentable to period) using a small tapestry loom and felted to keep the floats from pulling. The motif comes from the Mammen band as illustrated in Simpson. The actual Mammen band is a metalic brocade that is only as wide as my finger, but I liked the motif. Comments I made the warp weighted loom, myself, and all the associated bits and pieces. The selected staple length and hair/fleece ratio itches. A lot. No wonder these folks were noted for their short temper. References Photos Madder colour sample yarns The sleeves being woven Sleeve, showing cuff detail [photo] Oseberg Tapestry, as depicted in a reconstruction watercolour made by Oldsaksamlingens draughtswoman under instruction by professor Bj rn Hougen. [photo] Oseberg Tapestry, as shown in several different museum photographs available in various books. [photocopies] [stitching types in early period garments] [thread count and twill types of the period] [heddle tie-up from Hoffman] [patterns from Hald] Bibliography: Simpson, Jacqueline. Everyday Life in the Viking Age, London: Carousel Books, Transworld Publ, 1967. Hoffman, Marta. The Warp Weighted Loom, Robin and Russ Handweavers, 1974. Hald, Margrethe. Ancient Danish Textiles from Bogs and Burials: A Comparative Study of Costume and Iron Age Textiles, translated by Jean Olsen. Publications of the National Museum, Archaeological-Historical Series, Vol. XXI. Copenhagen: National Museum of Denmark, 1980.

Judges comments on the example.

Good things:

• described the materials
• described the method sufficiently that I know that it was a method used in period
• described the shortcomings (trim colour not right, cuffs & trim not in original)
• described modern choices (commercial cloth for the body)
• described period choices (wool staple, linen thread, stitch type, etc.)
• alludes to lessons learned during construction (don't use pegs on w/w loom!)

Issues:

• in the bibliography, the book "Everyday Life in the Viking Age" is one that I look at with suspicion. It may cast doubt on the validity of the research behind this article, but it doesn't detract from the completeness of the documentation.
• I'd end up taking points off for some of the non-period stuff in the item, itself, but the fact that they were mentioned in the doc makes the document complete.
• As a side note: the actual placement of the hem trim is also not documentable to early period. My personal knowledge leads me to believe that hem trims would be only on the front side of the garment. This issue is not enough for me to take points off the documentation... it's a research issue, not a documentation presentation issue.

I would score this documentation at 5 out of 5.