Well, no. Of course not, but wide warps are very rare and noteworthy. Weaving wide warps is expensive and requires more skill and time than narrow ones.
Linen is not stretchy. It poses a lot of problems in weaving; warp threads break easily. A wide loom takes up a lot more space, is harder to put a shuttle through.
Well, no. Of course not, but wide warps are very rare and noteworthy. Weaving wide warps is expensive and requires more skill and time than narrow ones.
Linen is not stretchy. It poses a lot of problems in weaving; warp threads break easily. A wide loom takes up a lot more space, is harder to put a shuttle through.
#######################
1. Have you seen the huge old Chinese brocade looms—2 person operated . . . about as long as a semi? They toured the USA 20-30 years ago. Certainly the Chinese had a variety of wider looms. I assume other cultures did, too.
2. Wide looms would have indicated a larger investment in the enterprise in terms of space and yarn. The loom itself is not that much more complicated being wider.
3. What does “very rare” mean in what context? 1 out of 5; 1 out of 10? 1 out of 100? within 10 square blocks? within 100 square blocks? Within a city? Within 3 cities?
4. I have 300-400 warp thicker cotton threads on my loom currently . . . each thread a ball of yarn maybe 1,000 or so yards long. Weaving width is 25”. I don’t think a warp 50” wide would be much more trouble if my loom happened to be that wide—particularly with a boat shuttle.
5. Yeah, linen takes some special care. Tightly spun fine thread linen spun very well may not be as likely to break as some not spun so well. And, dampening the linen helps.
6. Looking at ancient Chinese weavings as well as some from other culture . . . I just do not doubt that such a fabric could have been available to the richer folks in the Middle East 2,000 years ago.
7. For all we know, Joseph of Aramathea may have had such a weaver in his own employ or household.