Hairstylist Archeologist on YouTube

[heidi w.]

So, in another thread an LHC'er linked in a youtube video regarding a hairstyle that Cleopatra wore, and how she used this video as a jumpoff point for creating an updo from it. Because I felt the video was so well presented, including historical information, use of historically accurate items to create the updo, I went looking for her on youtube. So I typed in hair archeologist Janet Stephens, and lo, I found her. She has several videos, even including some on men's period hairstyles. It's kind of interesting to hear her discussion, such the Donna photos which covers how she suspects this woman had a type of alopecia, and showed what it looks like, and how the style was intended to cover the worst symptoms of this hair problem. All her videos are come with references of sources...and show a sculpture of something like that showing the hair the person wore in their life. She's pretty thorough, simple to follow, and it's fascinating to understand why wealthier people had access to those who did their for them. There was a lot of sewing in these hairstyles, and sewing an updo by yourself behind your own head is a bit difficult to achieve, so we had people do it. Remember, she's covering styles prior to when hairpins were used. So it's kind of interesting to watch her work. All her work, of the videos I saw this morning involved using a mannequin head on a stand. I'd love to talk with this woman; I bet it'd be a fun conversation. This woman has really done her homework.

Any of the styles presented are easy to copy, even if not period accurate such as the use of bone objects, or her type of hair scissors, or using hairpins instead of needle and thread.

I'd love to see more videos from her. Have fun watching. I hope this interests someone else, so we can have a nice chat.

heidi w.

[GoblinTart]

I'm going to have to look her up now!!

[froglet]

Wow, how cool is she? I've already the watched the Empress Sabine video. It will be awhile before I can experiment with any of these styles as my hair is still so short, but I find the videos fascinating nonetheless. Hair styles, body modifications, and clothing from past cultures is a subject I really get into. Now I'm off to watch more of her videos. Thanks! :D

[GoblinTart]

Just tried the Aphrodite knot. My hair needs a couple more inches to work. And some practice. And, not trying to do it on freshly washed hair.

If my YouTube would cooperate, I'd be watching her vids all day :) always tonite though.

[froglet]

I love the part in her Authentic Renaissance Hairstyle video where she realizes her mannequins hair isn't nearly long enough to complete the style! :lol: You're right, she looks like she'd be fun to talk to.

[Ishje]

that is really quite cool :D

[Alva]

Oh those videos are great! Really nice to see how that was done. Gives some inspiration but it is way too complex to try on myself. I like the Renaissance hairstyle a lot, but thigh length hair isn't yet what I got :D Gotta keep growing a while more

[lapushka]

It's really interesting to see how she recreates these old styles, and with the tools of the era too. Amazing. Wish she'd make more videos.

[brave]

I found this fairly interesting interview (http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/14729)with her, where she talks a bit about how she figured the hairstyles out.


Q: If you could choose one ancient hairstyle or technique to bring back into fashion today, which one would it be and why?
A: Selfishly, I would love to see more women of every age wearing their hair as long as they can: that way I could find hair models more easily!

[thirstylocks]

OOO thanks for leading us to her. I'm studying archaeology and find this exciting :D

[heidi w.]

I found this fairly interesting interview (http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/14729)with her, where she talks a bit about how she figured the hairstyles out.

That WAS an interesting blog post interviewing her. I contacted the author seeing if I could get a copy of her JRA article, somehow? (Maybe she'll write back with a lead.) I don't know the full reference info, so I can't just easily call up, I don't think.

Thank you for the link. Interesting....

heidi w.

[caadam]

I just watched her Faustina the Younger video. I was totally mesmerized by the hair stitching process! I've always wondered how they kept those hairstyles together. It honestly didn't cross my mind that it was just some needle, thread, and some water. How amazing!

Must... watch... more. lol

[Tisiloves]

I love her channel it combines my two great loves, hair and archeology.

[meishkamooshka]

Thank you so much for sharing this with us!

[jacqueline101]

Her video is neat.

[heidi w.]

I've looked again at one or two of her videos, and took the time to read the comments. She frequently replies to comments and includes little snippets of information, such as one comment included info about the citation of her JRA article (which is a lead for me), and I found out, for example, that men combed their hair forward, no hair part; and women always had a center part. Other hair parts came later in time. Prior to stitching women wore kinds of rags wrapped into the hair, and the stitching did away with the use, or need to use wraps in the hair. I would have thought, too, that hair sticks were used and possibly some kind of hair pin may have been tried given these tools that they used for styling the hair, such as the bodkins. If you can dream up a needle, I would think it wouldn't escape someone's notice that it can hold hair when stuck in the hair waiting for the next step. I would be curious to know if they invented any kind of sewing where it couldn't be seen in the hair, or if there was any concern over matching the color of the thread to the color of one's hair. I Soooooo want to talk to this lady. Pine, pine, pine. Alas....

heidi w.

[RapunzelKat]

Wow, these are great! She is fantastic, such clear explanations! I had come across the Cleopatra one in the style of the month thread, but I didn't realize she had a whole channel. Thank you for sharing, Heidi! I think I will give some of the simpler ones a try... My hair is semi-curly today so perhaps I could pull off the Aphrodite knot :D

Does anyone know if these were multi-day styles? (I have been watching the Roman ones.) It seems like sewing and unsewing the hair every day would be really time consuming. Bu maybe not, if you have someone to do it for you ;)

[heidi w.]

Wow, these are great! She is fantastic, such clear explanations! I had come across the Cleopatra one in the style of the month thread, but I didn't realize she had a whole channel. Thank you for sharing, Heidi! I think I will give some of the simpler ones a try... My hair is semi-curly today so perhaps I could pull off the Aphrodite knot :D

Does anyone know if these were multi-day styles? (I have been watching the Roman ones.) It seems like sewing and unsewing the hair every day would be really time consuming. Bu maybe not, if you have someone to do it for you ;)

I'm guessing this was the style of the day. Not different hairstyles a whole lot. But maybe sometimes, and yes, I am quite sure that most of these styles were performed by a kind of slave (there's a formal name she shares of these people, what their name was...)in the comments of one of the video. The word begins with a "c".

These people were famous, and also wealthy. It apparently wasn't unlikely that a style may have been created by 2 people, working to create a style.

The poorer folks had friends or someone close to them who helped them, or yes, they did it themselves, although less fancy, I imagine.

heidi w.

[GoblinTart]

I'm loving these videos! And why oh why, have I never thought of sewing hair??? I must try this next time I do an undo. My hair is not bobby pin friendly. And elastics are so fussy to use when I'm trying to tuck my ends under.

I love seeing that the paintings and sculptures can be recreated.

And the.men's hair. I always wondered what it was about the Greek and Roman men's hair that was so distinct. Even fringe and no.part. so simple I couldn't figure it out.

[Mrs.Witherup]

I love these videos! I haven't had the time to watch many but the ones I've seen were so cool! And she mentioned she needs long haired models!! Wouldn't that be fun to model for her?!
I wonder where she's located...Probably no where near me, darn it...

[fridgee]

Very interesting Heidi! I love the Empress Sabina one, I think it would still look really pretty even without the embroidery ring thingy.

[Diamondbell]

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing, heidi w. :)

[terpentyna]

Interesting stuff! I wish someone would stitch my hair, hairpins don't work so well for me.

[Alvrodul]

Interesting stuff! I wish someone would stitch my hair, hairpins don't work so well for me.
That actually works really well - the first time I wore my hair in the Cleopatra style, I actually stitched my hair into place with thin woolen yarn. It worked incredibly well, and was comfortable, too. :D

[heidi w.]

Wow, these are great! She is fantastic, such clear explanations! I had come across the Cleopatra one in the style of the month thread, but I didn't realize she had a whole channel. Thank you for sharing, Heidi! I think I will give some of the simpler ones a try... My hair is semi-curly today so perhaps I could pull off the Aphrodite knot :D

Does anyone know if these were multi-day styles? (I have been watching the Roman ones.) It seems like sewing and unsewing the hair every day would be really time consuming. Bu maybe not, if you have someone to do it for you ;)

She does suggest on one of her videos, or was it a comment under a video, that some styles may have been slept in overnight or for a few days.....

(I misread and misinterpreted your post yesterday evening....)

heidi w.

[heidi w.]

I have a reply leading me to contact Janet Stephens herself. I hope she replies. I just emailed her. How cool is that?

I hope for a good outcome.

heidi w.

[Alvrodul]

She does suggest on one of her videos, or was it a comment under a video, that some styles may have been slept in overnight or for a few days.....

(I misread and misinterpreted your post yesterday evening....)

heidi w.

Wouldn't surprise me. I had a period before I discovered the LHC, when I did hair-taping very frequently. It did take me quite a while to put it up properly, so I very often slept with my hair in taped braids a night or two after I put it up.


I have a reply leading me to contact Janet Stephens herself. I hope she replies. I just emailed her. How cool is that?

I hope for a good outcome.

heidi w.

So do I! :D I am definitely one of her fans - if you get a reply, perhaps you can tell her that she actually have genuine FANS here! ;)

[heidi w.]

I will definitely share that info! I am now talking with the lady who did the interview with her....fun exchange, but I am about to shut down and log off. So we'll see if tomorrow gets a reply.

heidi w.

[taliarose]

Yup she definately has a fan base here! I've tried the aphroditie knot and although it stayed up for about 6 hours at work it's not a good choice for me. My hair is not curly enough for it. Maybe I'll try it again right after a washing when I have more curl... Now the Cleopatra and the rennisance style both look like something I can do on my own if I have the time.... Hmmmm need to get up early on Saturday and try this. :cheese:

[Finnenna]

Oh, excellent! A new one! I wish she'd do more. I wonder if she would give us a definitive recreation of the Elling Woman's braided bun, or any other bog body styles. I try to scour the internet for pictures of old sculptures and paintings (Vermeer hairstyles, anyone?) and see if the hairstyles are worth it to send in to her for suggestions. :)

[Dorothy]

I loved this, watched all of them. I have a mother of pearl instrument that I think was used for hair taping. If only I had a local partner in crime to trade hairstyles with. As a sewer, I'm certain it would be possible to hide the stitches, even with non matching yarn - using the blind stitch. You would go in very close to where you came out, and then angle away from the outgoing thread once inside. Her sewing, despite her talent, is a little clumbsy, and I think she's rushing. Although I also think wool thread in those times would be less likely to be dyed, and sheep come in most hair colors. The thread could also be dyed with henna.

I just loved this, and if anyone comes across anything else about ancient hairstyles - especially Japan - I'd sure love to see it.

[PrincessIdril]

I've seen her, love those videos. I meant to put in a ILL request for her paper while I was still at uni but I never got time (My uni stupidly put the paper copies of JRA into storage! grr). Guess I'll try and get it through my local library. I have the full reference for her paper lurking round here if anyone here wants it to get a copy of the paper?(sadly there is no copy of it available free online, believe me I checked!)


I would have thought, too, that hair sticks were used and possibly some kind of hair pin may have been tried given these tools that they used for styling the hair, such as the bodkins.

They were used:
http://www.yorkshiremuseum.org.uk/Page/ViewCollection.aspx?CollectionId=17
Roman hairpins work in the same way as modern sticks, they are usually just a lot shorter (as you were meant to use several). Some are longer as they had decorative ends which were designed to be seen.

To be honest this is my only issue with Janet really, so far she hasn't offered any discussion of Roman hairstyles which were pinned. Which gives people the impression that all Roman women sewed their hair, which the archaeological evidence indicates simply wasn't the case.
Plently of women must have been more inclined to use pins rather than sew their hair if the number of pins in the archaeological record is anything to go by! (Especially in Britain) And there is plenty of pictorial evidence for the use of hairpins.

[livius drusus]

Greetings all. I'm the blogger whose interview with Janet Stephens was linked to upthread. I'm a huge fan of Janet's work and am thrilled to find a whole new fan club here where the locks are long.


I love these videos! I haven't had the time to watch many but the ones I've seen were so cool! And she mentioned she needs long haired models!! Wouldn't that be fun to model for her?!
I wonder where she's located...Probably no where near me, darn it...
She is in Baltimore. It's my fondest hope that she can find more live models for her upcoming YouTubes. The manikins just can't compare to her work with living hair.


I am now talking with the lady who did the interview with her....fun exchange, but I am about to shut down and log off. So we'll see if tomorrow gets a reply.
Thank you, Heidi. I really enjoyed our exchange as well. :)

[livius drusus]

Roman hairpins work in the same way as modern sticks, they are usually just a lot shorter (as you were meant to use several). Some are longer as they had decorative ends which were designed to be seen.

To be honest this is my only issue with Janet really, so far she hasn't offered any discussion of Roman hairstyles which were pinned. Which gives people the impression that all Roman women sewed their hair, which the archaeological evidence indicates simply wasn't the case.
Plently of women must have been more inclined to use pins rather than sew their hair if the number of pins in the archaeological record is anything to go by! (Especially in Britain) And there is plenty of pictorial evidence for the use of hairpins.
Janet argues in the JRA that actually Romans did not use hairpins as we think of them. Bodkins of varying lengths and shapes, yes, hairpins, no. It's not just a question of semantics. Her point is an important one: that the u-shaped wire hairpin we use today to create elaborate styles did not exist in any form until the late 18th century, and that therefore referring to bodkins as hairpins is both inaccurate and gives a false impression of how Roman styles were achieved.

From pages 115, 117 and 119 of the JRA article:


In order to understand why one tool is more suitable than another for re-creating a particular Roman hairstyle, it is necessary to understand the physical capabilities of each. Hair bodkins depend on isometrics to hold the hair in place: the hair must be coiled or twisted tightly so that, once the hair bodkin is inserted, the push of the hair against each end of the hair bodkin is balanced by a pull along the middle of the shaft. If there is too little isometric tension, the hair bodkin will fall out and the hair will collapse. Hair bodkins can easily support tight buns and twists with a pleasing decorative effect but, because of their reliance on stress and tension, they have major limitations if they are expected to be the sole support of a hairstyle[....]

Archaeological evidence proves that hair bodkins were the main supports for some hairstyles. At York, the dressed hair of a 2nd- or 3rd-c. adolescent Roman girl was found preserved with her skeleton. Her hair was secured in a bun by two hair bodkins made of jet. [...] Because of such evidence, many scholars conclude that women secured their hair exclusively by means of hair bodkins during all periods of Roman fashion history. Yet hair bodkins would have been viable fasteners only when female hairstyles had a simple design and a strong isometric factor. To create the tight matronly buns that Faustina the Younger wears, for example, only one or two bodkins are necessary. However, the practicability of hair bodkins is challenged in periods when more complex and less isometric styles were in favor: the more fussy and detailed the hairstyle, the less effective a hair bodkin would be to support it. Styles with many small individual elements arranged in rigorous symmetry over broad surfaces of the head defy construction with hair bodkins. Non-isometric styles include (but are not limited to) the late Trajanic turban styles, the flat, serpentine buns of the 3rd c., stacks of parallel braids built up into the air like the towers, popular during the reign of Antonius Pius, and styles that dangle off the back of the head, such as an early version of the hundred-strand braid (wide, folded plaits most popular in the 4th c.). Presuming they could even be made to work, hair bodkins would have been necessary in vast numbers to construct these elaborate and non-isometric hairstyles.

[PrincessIdril]

Janet argues in the JRA that actually Romans did not use hairpins as we think of them. Bodkins of varying lengths and shapes, yes, hairpins, no. It's not just a question of semantics. Her point is an important one: that the u-shaped wire hairpin we use today to create elaborate styles did not exist in any form until the late 18th century, and that therefore referring to bodkins as hairpins is both inaccurate and gives a false impression of how Roman styles were achieved.


I should explain when I refer to "pinned" styles I meant styles secured using what archaeologists call "hairpins". I am fully aware that Romans did not have pins as we know them.
What she calls "bodkins" are known as "hairpins" in the archaeological community. Why? Most likely because the term gives the public a reference point when looking at them. Is it inaccurate? Possibly, but there are many terms like that in the archaeological community that we don't change because it would just cause unneccesary confusion.

In truth I'd never even heard the term "bodkin" until I found her channel. So from this point on I shall continue to refer to them as hairpins simply because that is the term I am used too.

But I don't agree that calling these artefacts hairpins gives a false impression of how Roman hairstyles were secured/achieved. There were plently of styles which can be achieved through the use of these pins, which most "normal" women would have worn. The highly intricate styles considered by Janet would only have been work by a very small percentage of Roman society.

[livius drusus]

I should explain when I refer to "pinned" styles I meant styles secured using what archaeologists call "hairpins". I am fully aware that Romans did not have pins as we know them.
What she calls "bodkins" are known as "hairpins" in the archaeological community. Why? Most likely because the term gives the public a reference point when looking at them. Is it inaccurate? Possibly, but there are many terms like that in the archaeological community that we don't change because it would just cause unneccesary confusion.
Well, I think accurate terminology is worth encouraging, even if there's some confusion during the transitional period. Suggesting that elaborate hairstyles could be achieved with "hairpins" is already confusing, after all, and I think is a symptom of experts in one field (ie, Roman archaeology) getting sloppy when they encounter areas that they know little about (ie, hairstyling).

One of the things I respect the most about Janet: she has really done the work. Her paper delves deeply into the historiographical scholarship as well as the ancient sources and archaeological record. She is has educated herself and become an expert from the academic side just as she is from the hairstyling side. I don't know of any archaeologists or historians who can make the same claim quite simply because although they have vast knowledge and understanding of the history, they have no particular expertise in styling hair.


In truth I'd never even heard the term "bodkin" until I found her channel. So from this point on I shall continue to refer to them as hairpins simply because that is the term I am used too.
Fair enough.


But I don't agree that calling these artefacts hairpins gives a false impression of how Roman hairstyles were secured/achieved. There were plently of styles which can be achieved through the use of these pins, which most "normal" women would have worn. The highly intricate styles considered by Janet would only have been work by a very small percentage of Roman society.
The Fayuum portraits depict "normal" women, not empresses. Other archaeological evidence such as the beauty case of Cumae, the arrangement of accessories in the mundus muliebris relief now in the Split Museum, the few surviving of bodkins contrasted with the large number of blunt, wide needles that have been found all over the Roman world, plus documentary evidence in ancient sources like Ovid, Martial and Juvenal suggest that hair sewing was a widely utilized practice.

[Tisiloves]

Well, I think accurate terminology is worth encouraging, even if there's some confusion during the transitional period. Suggesting that elaborate hairstyles could be achieved with "hairpins" is already confusing, after all, and I think is a symptom of experts in one field (ie, Roman archaeology) getting sloppy when they encounter areas that they know little about (ie, hairstyling).
:scissors:
The Fayuum portraits depict "normal" women, not empresses. Other archaeological evidence such as the beauty case of Cumae, the arrangement of accessories in the mundus muliebris relief now in the Split Museum, the few surviving of bodkins contrasted with the large number of blunt, wide needles that have been found all over the Roman world, plus documentary evidence in ancient sources like Ovid, Martial and Juvenal suggest that hair sewing was a widely utilized practice.

Just to make things worse in sewing a bodkin needle is a thick needle with a large eye, just like the ones used to sew hair :)

[livius drusus]

Also, the Romans apparently used the same word, acus, to mean needle, bodkin and even curling iron. In other words, there's plenty of confusion to go around already. :lol:

[Tisiloves]

Also, the Romans apparently used the same word, acus, to mean needle, bodkin and even curling iron. In other words, there's plenty of confusion to go around already. :lol:

Trust me, after my Latin GCSE I am well aware of the amount of Roman linuistic confusion; and the adventures of Severus and Marius in Alexandria.

[PrincessIdril]

Suggesting that elaborate hairstyles could be achieved with "hairpins" is already confusing, after all, and I think is a symptom of experts in one field (ie, Roman archaeology) getting sloppy when they encounter areas that they know little about (ie, hairstyling). .

I have never actually read a text or museum display suggests that all hairstyles were secured using these items. However that may be me interpreting texts differently to others. But since these pins were used to secure some hairstyles I do think calling them hairpins is accurate.
And given that until relatively recently most scholars are men, how hairstyles are secured was probably considered to be an "insignificant" detail, much like the issue of how ancient women dealt with their periods! Men (generally) aren't interested in the female side of archaeology and as such hair (and other femmine issues) are rarely discussed.

ALso I am not disputing that hair sewing was a widely utilized practice, however I am merely stating that from my experience of the archaeological record pinned hairstyles appear to be equally prelevant and as such I wish that Janet would do some styles that use them. For example the styles illusrated in this gallery:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/content/image_galleries/roman_hairstyles_gallery.shtml?1

But I think we may be refering to different artefacts in our arguments which may be confusing the issue slightly, given that you state that are few surving bodkins.
When I refer to "hairpins" I am referencing artefacts like these:
http://www.wiltshireheritage.org.uk/galleries/index.php?Action=4&obID=193&home=1
Of which there are thousands in the archaeological record especially in Britain. Would you mind linking to an archaeological example of what you call a bodkin?

[heidi w.]

I've seen her, love those videos. I meant to put in a ILL request for her paper while I was still at uni but I never got time (My uni stupidly put the paper copies of JRA into storage! grr). Guess I'll try and get it through my local library. I have the full reference for her paper lurking round here if anyone here wants it to get a copy of the paper?(sadly there is no copy of it available free online, believe me I checked!)



They were used:
http://www.yorkshiremuseum.org.uk/Page/ViewCollection.aspx?CollectionId=17
Roman hairpins work in the same way as modern sticks, they are usually just a lot shorter (as you were meant to use several). Some are longer as they had decorative ends which were designed to be seen.

To be honest this is my only issue with Janet really, so far she hasn't offered any discussion of Roman hairstyles which were pinned. Which gives people the impression that all Roman women sewed their hair, which the archaeological evidence indicates simply wasn't the case.
Plently of women must have been more inclined to use pins rather than sew their hair if the number of pins in the archaeological record is anything to go by! (Especially in Britain) And there is plenty of pictorial evidence for the use of hairpins.

If you acquire the article, sharing it with others without the author's direct consent that is best to be had in writing, you could be violating copyright law. It's possible that the copyright belongs to JRA.. Lots of publications have oversight of works of author's once that article is given to another entity. Whoever owns the copyright, Janet Stephens or JRA, that's who you have to ask and seek permission of. I acquired the article from someone, and then meanwhile I got in touch with Janet herself, and she has shared the photographs with me, but all on the understanding that I will merely quote, and not share the entire article. I have no plans of sharing the text with anyone, actually. It's just safer that way. Cause once it's online, it can get anywhere by anyone who wants to hitch a ride. Ms. Stephens is a super nice lady. And I think she makes a compelling case about sewing, and presents evidence of sewing of the hair going on. Anyway, this has turned out to be an interesting discussion.

What you attached was interesting. Where is a picture of the "hairpins" that was used to attach this piece to the head? Any photos of that anywhere? Just curious to see what their "hairpins" looked like to compare with what we have now as hairpins. I'm assuming, for one they were larger, and obviously not really of metal? What materials did they use for hairpins?

I think an important thing to keep in mind regarding the sewing is that so far, Ms. Stephens is highlighting what the upper crust of society likely did. I am fairly certain that women with no one to do their hair probably were less likely to sew their hair. In these times, more "plebian" women often wrapped their hair in cloth wraps, for example.

Anyway, I'm just generally curious about the entire subject......

heidi w.

[heidi w.]

Oh, excellent! A new one! I wish she'd do more. I wonder if she would give us a definitive recreation of the Elling Woman's braided bun, or any other bog body styles. I try to scour the internet for pictures of old sculptures and paintings (Vermeer hairstyles, anyone?) and see if the hairstyles are worth it to send in to her for suggestions. :)

I found out the reason she hasn't posted a new video in a while. She's eyeball deep in research on another aspect of Roman Hairdressing. I did tell Ms. Stephens that she has a fan base at LHC. I also told her that if she'd ever like to use live models, she can contact me, and I'd help her find some long-haired gals in her area.

heidi w.

[heidi w.]

I have never actually read a text or museum display suggests that all hairstyles were secured using these items. However that may be me interpreting texts differently to others. But since these pins were used to secure some hairstyles I do think calling them hairpins is accurate.
And given that until relatively recently most scholars are men, how hairstyles are secured was probably considered to be an "insignificant" detail, much like the issue of how ancient women dealt with their periods! Men (generally) aren't interested in the female side of archaeology and as such hair (and other femmine issues) are rarely discussed.

ALso I am not disputing that hair sewing was a widely utilized practice, however I am merely stating that from my experience of the archaeological record pinned hairstyles appear to be equally prelevant and as such I wish that Janet would do some styles that use them. For example the styles illusrated in this gallery:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northyorkshire/content/image_galleries/roman_hairstyles_gallery.shtml?1

But I think we may be refering to different artefacts in our arguments which may be confusing the issue slightly, given that you state that are few surving bodkins.
When I refer to "hairpins" I am referencing artefacts like these:
http://www.wiltshireheritage.org.uk/galleries/index.php?Action=4&obID=193&home=1
Of which there are thousands in the archaeological record especially in Britain. Would you mind linking to an archaeological example of what you call a bodkin?

Maybe hairstick would be a bit closer than hairpin to describe bodkin in more modern terms.....? All the definitions I found referring to bodkins and all the pictures I've seen online don't show a pinning aspect of the bodkin as with today's modern hairpins.

I think that was super nice of the lady who interviewed Ms. Stephens for her blog was really nice to pop in and converse with everyone. I had a delightful conversation with her myself, and thought it was super nice of her to help me out.

heidi w.

[PrincessIdril]

If you acquire the article, sharing it with others without the author's direct consent that is best to be had in writing, you could be violating copyright law. It's possible that the copyright belongs to JRA.. Lots of publications have oversight of works of author's once that article is given to another entity. Whoever owns the copyright, Janet Stephens or JRA, that's who you have to ask and seek permission of. I acquired the article from someone, and then meanwhile I got in touch with Janet herself, and she has shared the photographs with me, but all on the understanding that I will merely quote, and not share the entire article. I have no plans of sharing the text with anyone, actually. It's just safer that way. Cause once it's online, it can get anywhere by anyone who wants to hitch a ride. Ms. Stephens is a super nice lady. And I think she makes a compelling case about sewing, and presents evidence of sewing of the hair going on. Anyway, this has turned out to be an interesting discussion.

What you attached was interesting. Where is a picture of the "hairpins" that was used to attach this piece to the head? Any photos of that anywhere? Just curious to see what their "hairpins" looked like to compare with what we have now as hairpins. I'm assuming, for one they were larger, and obviously not really of metal? What materials did they use for hairpins?


I only offered to share the referenece for the paper, as in the details needed to locate the article incase people were struggling to find it. Articles from JRA can sometimes be tricky to get hold of. Trust me I know all about copyright etc. when it comes to journal articles, I've just finished a dissertation!

I believe what I linked are the only photograohs of that particular find, as far as I am aware not much else survived in the grave that bun was found.

This is what Roman hairpins looked like:
http://www.wiltshireheritage.org.uk/galleries/index.php?Action=4&obID=193&home=1
As for what they were made of, well pretty much anything. Most examples in museum collections are made of bone/antler but there are many examples made of precious and non-precious metals, jet and even glass. Currently there is no evidence of wooden pins but it's highly likely there were wooden ones.

[PrincessIdril]

Maybe hairstick would be a bit closer than hairpin to describe bodkin in more modern terms.....? All the definitions I found referring to bodkins and all the pictures I've seen online don't show a pinning aspect of the bodkin as with today's modern hairpins.


I think with the bodkin vs hairpin debate earlier in this topic may be due to a slight misinterpretation on my part. I assumed that bodkins and hairpin were simply different names for the same artfact (it's all too easy to forget that us archaeologists have different names for things than other people!) but I think we may have been refering to different items.

I think we just call them "hairpins" rather than hairsticks as the term probably comes from a time when the use of hairsticks was relatively uncommon. As I've read quite a few late 19th/early 20th century site reports which refer to these artfacts as hairpins. So I think it's just an old term that's stuck around, archaeologists rarely change terminology. (The only example I can think of immediately is "Pygmy Cups" being renamed as "Incense Cups")

[heidi w.]

Thank you PrincessIdryl. I hope I remembered how to spell that correctly. Nope. No cigar for me. LOL....the last part is Idril. Anyway, thank you very much.

heidi w.

[Mrs.Witherup]

She is in Baltimore. It's my fondest hope that she can find more live models for her upcoming YouTubes. The manikins just can't compare to her work with living hair.




Darn it! Baltimore is a loooonngg way away from me. I would love to do hair modeling for her.... or anyone for that matter, lol :D

[heidi w.]

Do people in this thead understood who "livius drusus" is? She is the lady who interviewed Janet Stephens and featured the interview on her blog. Please be nice to her, if people don't mind me saying. This is her first visit to our community, and it was nice of her to come to us. She is not a regular LHC member.

Just a little FYI....

I have spoken now with this interviewer, I never caught her real name, not even the first name, and now also with Janet Stephens. They have both been very kind to me, giving me extra info and answering my questions overall.

heidi w.

[Finnenna]

I found out the reason she hasn't posted a new video in a while. She's eyeball deep in research on another aspect of Roman Hairdressing. I did tell Ms. Stephens that she has a fan base at LHC.

Oh, fantastic! I look forward to reading her research when she's finished. :)