This article is not a tutorial on how to make a reconstruction of the Viborg tunic, but a commentary on my experiences while making said shirt. This reconstruction is based on Maggie Mulvaney's translation of Mytte Fentz's article that can be found at this link http://www.forest.gen.nz/Medieval/articles/Viborg/VIBORG.HTM. If the link does not work, please contact me via the "Leave Feedback" page within the "Contact" section of this web site, so that I may update this article appropriately. The writing of this article assumes that the reader has read (and understands) Mytte's article on the Viborg tunic, and has a solid understanding of garb making. I have included plenty of links to the original article, specially when referencing particular portions of the article, in order to make it easier for the readers to cross references this writing with the original article this writing is based on. The Viborg Tunic, is a Norse Viking tunic found in Denmark, that has been dated to the 11th century AD, which is towards the end of the Viking Age. Please note that this is still a work in progress and may not be complete as of yet.
In cutting the pattern, I used
a slightly different layout than what was suggested by Mytte Fentz's article. Sticking closely to the layout used in Mytte Fentz's article would have wasted a great deal of fabric, as the article focuses on a fabric
width of 95 cm (approximately 1 yard) and of course I used a fabric that was over 50% wider. The thumbnail to the left of this paragraph is roughly the layout I used. I measured and
drew the pattern on the fabric and cut the pieces out before deciding to take a photo, but I am fairly certain that this was how I mapped the pattern out. The largest difference
between how I laid the pattern out, was instead of cutting two separate pieces for the front and back lining (labelled "ryg foer" and "bryst foer" in Mytte Fentz's layout)
I opted to save myself the labour of sewing extra seams at
the shoulders and cut the front and back lining pieces out as one piece ("poncho style"). The lining piece is the piece in the bottom right of the photo. The other major change I made
in the layout was the omission of the item labelled "bryst foer" in the upper right hand corner of the layout used in the original article. I could not figure out what the purpose of this piece was, nor could
I figure out why that piece had the same name as the piece in the bottom right of the original article's layout.
I began by sewing the arms. Above and to
the right is a photo of the three component pieces that make up a single arm. Planning to do French seams, I sewed the three components together using a single running stitch. I did the
stitching about 6 mm (about 1/4 inch) from the edge of the fabric. At the left side of this paragraph is a photograph of one half completed arm. Please note that the fabric has the
"correct" side out. I have just not sewn the french seam to hide the stitching at this point. It is
difficult from the article to ascerttain how the sleeves were sewn, but as the article states in the section titled
"Pattern: interpretation and
reconstruction" (using this link you will have to scroll down a bit to see the relevant text), that very little of the sleeve's were intact, so there may not have been enough left
of the sleeve to determine how the seams on it were sewn. Despite the fact that I used a "French seam" for strength and comfort, it probably would have been better to "flatfell" the
seams on the arm (maybe if I ever make another of this type of tunic I will try that). On the lower right hand side of this paragraph is a photograph of the two completed sleeves after
the French seam has been completed. Due to the poor quality of the photo (my digital camera is very old and dying) it may look like there are two of the same sleeve in the picture,
one sleeve is shown completed and correct side out, while the other is shown completed with the sleeve being turned inside out to show the stitching and seam.
Next for the
torso of the tunic. I began by sewing the torso portion of the tunic by hemming the bottom of the lining. I could have saved myself doing this by performing the hemming of the
lining during the attaching of the lining to the outer layer of the tunic, but I decided I wanted some practice at a particular stitch and thought that pre-hemming the lining would
give me a perfect opportunity with the added bonus of having some semblance of functionality to this process. After hemming the bottom (both back and front) of the lining, I decided
that the stitch I was practicing was not appropriate, and would likely not work well for the purpose I was considering using the stitch for, I began the next step, sewing the neckline.
I used a single running stitch and sewed the two sides and the back of the square that form the neckline, this was done with the "wrong" or rough side of the fabric facing out (or if
you prefer, with the tunic inside out). I realized later that adding a re-enforcing stitch (perhaps and "overcast" stitch) may have been a good, but poosibly not neccessary idea. The
front has at this stage been left unsewn. After completing the stitching around the sides and back of the neckline, I turned the lining right side out by passing the lining through
the neck hole of the tunic. The photo at the beginning of this paragraph depicts the neckline after the stitching but before being turned right side out (top), and the neckline after
being turned through the neck hole so the correct side is out and the finished neck seam is showing (bottom).
I next began by hemming the shoulder seam of the arm. I used the exact stitch for this as outlined in the original article. The image from the article is not very clear, but essentially the arm is hemmed with an extra crease where the overcast stitch is sewn for the hemming. Another re-enactor I have worked with told me a theory that while most reconstructions of the Viborg tunic had the overcast stitching facing the inside of the tunic, but she wondered at the viability of the overcast stitching being done so as to show and hence be on the outside. I decided to make this recreation with the stitching showing, to test her theory out. I first tested a small section with the more traditional interpretation, and decided it looked dull and plai, then unstitched the portion and retried sewing it with the stitching showing, and found that it did look better. The stitching gave a nice touch of understated flash to the look of the sleeve.
Then the arms were attached using the simple running stitch with the arm and torso peices joined in almost a "butted" fashion. Once the sleeves were attached I completed the seam for the rest of the torso on each side. Again the seam for the two side sections was connected by folding over the selvedge of the lining and outer torso peices, and then sewn together in an almost "butted" manner using a simple running stitch (as always, as per the orginal article's depictions of the type of seam used). At this point I ran into a problem. I was beginning to run out of the linene thread. It had become very aparent to me, that I would not have enough of this thread left to finish hemming the raw edges, as well as stitching the geometric pattern on the torso portion of the tunic, in fact I was certain that there would not be enough thread left to complete either of those tasks, let alone both. I checked the web site for Smoke and Fire, and while I found a listing for linen thread, I did not see any item in their online catalogue that matched what I had been using up to this point. This means this project will have to be shelved until such a time where I can find the matching thread, or something close enough to satisfy me.
An 11th century linen shirt from Viborg - By Mytte Fentz translated by Maggie Mulvaney
Archaeological Sewing - An article by Heather Rose Jones about different sticthes and seam types used in various garb finds.
