I thought I was commenting on someone’s article, no idea what has gone wrong here and the delete button isn’t working. Move along, nothing to see here!
Fabulous x facinating, I did not know that there were Elizabethan knitting schools. 😳I am aware of the long tradition of knitting being very much a working class craft strongly connected to poverty x the working classes. However one of the things that I have learnt as I have travelled through my life is that the fundamental crafts that were universal to the pre Industrial age, where people lived closely connected to the land x subsistence existence, where people were multi skilled and they made the things that they needed, crafts interconnected. Basketry is very much a three dimensional knitting pattern, then the houses were made of wattle x daub, using fundamentally a basketry inner frame, then men or women used a type of knitting come tatting to produce nets to catch fish… thus that interconnectedness weaves many traditional crafts together. I do not agree wholly with your summary of knitting needed to be taught by institutions, knitting is a tradition that goes back thousands of years just like sewing, it reaches back to our earliest of times of existence. However during the medieval period there was a move to create closed shop guilds, it was about restricting who could and could not acquire certain artisans skills. Knowledge is power, skills provided people with the ability to make a living. The story of knitting is very much the same as hand sewing, everyone knitted but to acquire the advanced artisan skills of knitting one had to specifically learn the complex skills required you would then need to create your portfolio showing what you could do, so that you could attract work, very much like hand sewing. Also if a child did not have parents, or parental guidance they would need to be taught skills, you also have to remember the grueling long hours worked by whole entire families during the Industrial Revolution, forced off the land x into factories to exist in the most appalling living conditions, where high mortality existed across all generations there would be a need to teach, because the traditional framework of most people’s lives had broken down. Those are my thoughts. I really enjoyed your talk thank you
Thank you, I enjoyed reading this and the connections you're drawing. Basketry, netting, wattle and daub, all of that does feel like one continuum, people building what they needed with whatever they'd learned to do with their hands. As I've started trying my hand at other crafts myself, it’s easy to see how netting could easily have evolved into nålebinding, and nålebinding into knitting.
I'd add one bit of nuance though. I agree people carried the skills they needed for daily life, passed around a community or down through family. But I think knitting arrived into that mix later than most of the others, at least in England. There's evidence of knitted goods here as early as the 14th century, though these may well have been imported rather than made locally. It's only in the 16th century, once demand for knitted stockings took off and guilds formed around the trade, that it becomes a skill worth commercialising and teaching directly.
I don't think knitting had to be formally taught to exist, only that the knowledge doesn't seem to have been widespread yet in England at that point, resulting in the knitting schools popping up. There's actually a related thread in a later piece I wrote comparing English and Continental knitting styles: once teaching got formalised through schools, it often flattened a lot of regional diversity that existed before it.
Thanks again for such a thoughtful read, comments like yours are exactly why I love writing this stuff!
Intriguing I will have to do some research, as far as I understand that the story of knitting x hand sewing are very similar, as do most textiles past story it’s very open to various interpretations mainly due to its mundane everyday existence connected to the home and “Women’s Work” , our story is written by the victors, those with power and in general male voices , which means the true story is often not fully told. The very nature of textiles is that they are fragile items, often they are worn until they fall apart or they disintegrate leaving little or no evidence of prior existence. It is believed that “bog people” who survived incredible astounding preservation left us very detailed historical records in physical evidence, the people in later centuries who dug peat for fuel were very poor it is believed the clothing was in such astounding levels of preservation that those who found the fully clothed bodies of “Bog People” would wear the clothes themselves mainly because people were so poor but that has robbed us from knowing more. At this moment in time there may be evidence that exists in the 14 Century referring to knitting but that does not mean that is the earliest date when knitting first arrived upon the shores of Britain. Our knowledge of early textiles x clothing is surprisingly sketchy, most of what we know of Elizabethan women’s clothing is directly linked to Queen Elizabeth’s the firsts death effigy clothing x textiles prior to that period is exceptionally unusual and virtually non existence. So for a number of reasons I do not agree with your analysis of knitting came to the U.K. in the 14 Century 😊 thank you for this conversation wishing you well
Thanks for your fascinating article. I'm a neurologist by day, knitter by night. obviously I do not knit out of financial desperation. I knit for pleasure and mental health. I find it relaxing and therapeutic. I also enjoy the end product.
I taught both my girls to knit and spin. I also taught elementary school students how to spin. We made our own drop spindles out of a dowel rod and weighted disc. This only cost a few pennies to make. I can see how this could be a source of income for the impoverished. Although it may have been a task of drudgery or necessity for many, I still think people derived a sense of purpose and value from doing these apparently menial tasks. I certainly do.
I agree wholeheartedly. I’m a physicist working at a university, so my projects are often very long, and I can be quite far removed from any immediate impact they might have. With knitting, I can see my progress right there in my hands. Even if I have to rip back and fix something, I still know I’m moving in the right direction. It can also be as simple or as challenging as I choose.
It’s wonderful that you’ve been able to pass those skills on to a new generation. My grandma taught me to knit as a child, and although I didn’t come back to it for another 20 years, I don’t think I ever would have if that hadn’t happened. And your work is lovely!
When I was training to be a nurse in the late 1970s, in Aberdeen, my fellow students from Shetland spent a lot of their free time knitting. Their families sold sweater packs to knit, with the complicated yoke already completed. The students knitted the yokes to send home to contribute to their family business. They were very fast knitters and made beautiful yokes.
Wow, what an amazing story! It’s fascinating how long the hand-knitting industry was able to hold out until so recently. That’s lovely that you got to see it first hand.
What a fascinating account—I really enjoyed reading this! One of the things I find so compelling about textile traditions is their inherent duality. They're often framed as tools of domesticity and social control, especially for women. Samplers, for example, weren't just decorative; they were almost tests of diligence and suitability for marriage. Knitting schools and workhouses fit into that same history of discipline and necessity.
But like you conclude here, I think it's too simple to stop there. The act of making has a value that can exist alongside coercion. Even if knitting or mending was something people had to do, that doesn't mean they couldn't also find satisfaction, pride, or moments of peace in it. That's what I found so interesting about your text: history doesn't have to be either oppression or empowerment. Both can be true at once, and textile traditions seem to embody that contradiction better than almost anything else. Wonderful text!
Thank you - this is such a generous reading. I really like how you frame that duality, especially around samplers and knitting schools. I think what interests me most is exactly that tension: textiles can offer a space for expression and even a sense of freedom, but that freedom is never absolute. It’s shaped by social expectations, by what is considered proper or valuable, and later by what can be sold. That coexistence is what makes the history so rich.
Question: I was taught by my grandmother (American) to knit by holding the incoming yarn in my left hand and loop it over the needle. When I visited my cousins in Ireland, they laughed and said that was so time consuming. They did it a completely different way.
The paternal grandmother who taught me was descended from Anabaptists who emigrated to Missouri from Germany, whereas my cousins on my mom’s side are in Ireland.
Sure! These are the two most common styles of knitting used today. Holding your yarn in your left hand is known as “continental” knitting, and holding it in your right hand is “English” knitting. As the names suggest, English style is more common in the UK and other English-speaking countries, while continental is more widespread on mainland Europe, though it was never a hard-and-fast rule.
The main difference is how the yarn is wrapped around the needle. In English knitting, you use your right hand to throw the yarn around the needle for each stitch, while in continental knitting you hold the yarn in your left hand and pick it with the needle instead. They both produce the same fabric.
Since people emigrated to the US from all over Europe, there’s always been a mixture of both styles, although English does seem to have been more common. Nowadays, with so many online resources, the continental method has become more widespread, especially since many people feel it is faster or more efficient. In reality, fast knitters can use either style, and it’s more important to use the method you find most comfortable.
Personally, I use both methods depending on my mood, and there’s a tonne of variation within them, which I talked a little bit about in this article a couple of weeks ago:
Such an interesting look at a side of knitting we rarely imagine today. Informative and beautifully detailed. I saved it to revisit. Wonderful work, as always.
Really interesting. Thank you.
I thought I was commenting on someone’s article, no idea what has gone wrong here and the delete button isn’t working. Move along, nothing to see here!
Fabulous x facinating, I did not know that there were Elizabethan knitting schools. 😳I am aware of the long tradition of knitting being very much a working class craft strongly connected to poverty x the working classes. However one of the things that I have learnt as I have travelled through my life is that the fundamental crafts that were universal to the pre Industrial age, where people lived closely connected to the land x subsistence existence, where people were multi skilled and they made the things that they needed, crafts interconnected. Basketry is very much a three dimensional knitting pattern, then the houses were made of wattle x daub, using fundamentally a basketry inner frame, then men or women used a type of knitting come tatting to produce nets to catch fish… thus that interconnectedness weaves many traditional crafts together. I do not agree wholly with your summary of knitting needed to be taught by institutions, knitting is a tradition that goes back thousands of years just like sewing, it reaches back to our earliest of times of existence. However during the medieval period there was a move to create closed shop guilds, it was about restricting who could and could not acquire certain artisans skills. Knowledge is power, skills provided people with the ability to make a living. The story of knitting is very much the same as hand sewing, everyone knitted but to acquire the advanced artisan skills of knitting one had to specifically learn the complex skills required you would then need to create your portfolio showing what you could do, so that you could attract work, very much like hand sewing. Also if a child did not have parents, or parental guidance they would need to be taught skills, you also have to remember the grueling long hours worked by whole entire families during the Industrial Revolution, forced off the land x into factories to exist in the most appalling living conditions, where high mortality existed across all generations there would be a need to teach, because the traditional framework of most people’s lives had broken down. Those are my thoughts. I really enjoyed your talk thank you
Thank you, I enjoyed reading this and the connections you're drawing. Basketry, netting, wattle and daub, all of that does feel like one continuum, people building what they needed with whatever they'd learned to do with their hands. As I've started trying my hand at other crafts myself, it’s easy to see how netting could easily have evolved into nålebinding, and nålebinding into knitting.
I'd add one bit of nuance though. I agree people carried the skills they needed for daily life, passed around a community or down through family. But I think knitting arrived into that mix later than most of the others, at least in England. There's evidence of knitted goods here as early as the 14th century, though these may well have been imported rather than made locally. It's only in the 16th century, once demand for knitted stockings took off and guilds formed around the trade, that it becomes a skill worth commercialising and teaching directly.
I don't think knitting had to be formally taught to exist, only that the knowledge doesn't seem to have been widespread yet in England at that point, resulting in the knitting schools popping up. There's actually a related thread in a later piece I wrote comparing English and Continental knitting styles: once teaching got formalised through schools, it often flattened a lot of regional diversity that existed before it.
Thanks again for such a thoughtful read, comments like yours are exactly why I love writing this stuff!
Intriguing I will have to do some research, as far as I understand that the story of knitting x hand sewing are very similar, as do most textiles past story it’s very open to various interpretations mainly due to its mundane everyday existence connected to the home and “Women’s Work” , our story is written by the victors, those with power and in general male voices , which means the true story is often not fully told. The very nature of textiles is that they are fragile items, often they are worn until they fall apart or they disintegrate leaving little or no evidence of prior existence. It is believed that “bog people” who survived incredible astounding preservation left us very detailed historical records in physical evidence, the people in later centuries who dug peat for fuel were very poor it is believed the clothing was in such astounding levels of preservation that those who found the fully clothed bodies of “Bog People” would wear the clothes themselves mainly because people were so poor but that has robbed us from knowing more. At this moment in time there may be evidence that exists in the 14 Century referring to knitting but that does not mean that is the earliest date when knitting first arrived upon the shores of Britain. Our knowledge of early textiles x clothing is surprisingly sketchy, most of what we know of Elizabethan women’s clothing is directly linked to Queen Elizabeth’s the firsts death effigy clothing x textiles prior to that period is exceptionally unusual and virtually non existence. So for a number of reasons I do not agree with your analysis of knitting came to the U.K. in the 14 Century 😊 thank you for this conversation wishing you well
Thanks for your fascinating article. I'm a neurologist by day, knitter by night. obviously I do not knit out of financial desperation. I knit for pleasure and mental health. I find it relaxing and therapeutic. I also enjoy the end product.
I taught both my girls to knit and spin. I also taught elementary school students how to spin. We made our own drop spindles out of a dowel rod and weighted disc. This only cost a few pennies to make. I can see how this could be a source of income for the impoverished. Although it may have been a task of drudgery or necessity for many, I still think people derived a sense of purpose and value from doing these apparently menial tasks. I certainly do.
I agree wholeheartedly. I’m a physicist working at a university, so my projects are often very long, and I can be quite far removed from any immediate impact they might have. With knitting, I can see my progress right there in my hands. Even if I have to rip back and fix something, I still know I’m moving in the right direction. It can also be as simple or as challenging as I choose.
It’s wonderful that you’ve been able to pass those skills on to a new generation. My grandma taught me to knit as a child, and although I didn’t come back to it for another 20 years, I don’t think I ever would have if that hadn’t happened. And your work is lovely!
The article was so interesting, and then I learned even more in the comments. Thank you!
When I was training to be a nurse in the late 1970s, in Aberdeen, my fellow students from Shetland spent a lot of their free time knitting. Their families sold sweater packs to knit, with the complicated yoke already completed. The students knitted the yokes to send home to contribute to their family business. They were very fast knitters and made beautiful yokes.
Wow, what an amazing story! It’s fascinating how long the hand-knitting industry was able to hold out until so recently. That’s lovely that you got to see it first hand.
What a fascinating account—I really enjoyed reading this! One of the things I find so compelling about textile traditions is their inherent duality. They're often framed as tools of domesticity and social control, especially for women. Samplers, for example, weren't just decorative; they were almost tests of diligence and suitability for marriage. Knitting schools and workhouses fit into that same history of discipline and necessity.
But like you conclude here, I think it's too simple to stop there. The act of making has a value that can exist alongside coercion. Even if knitting or mending was something people had to do, that doesn't mean they couldn't also find satisfaction, pride, or moments of peace in it. That's what I found so interesting about your text: history doesn't have to be either oppression or empowerment. Both can be true at once, and textile traditions seem to embody that contradiction better than almost anything else. Wonderful text!
Thank you - this is such a generous reading. I really like how you frame that duality, especially around samplers and knitting schools. I think what interests me most is exactly that tension: textiles can offer a space for expression and even a sense of freedom, but that freedom is never absolute. It’s shaped by social expectations, by what is considered proper or valuable, and later by what can be sold. That coexistence is what makes the history so rich.
This was fascinating.
Question: I was taught by my grandmother (American) to knit by holding the incoming yarn in my left hand and loop it over the needle. When I visited my cousins in Ireland, they laughed and said that was so time consuming. They did it a completely different way.
Can you explain the difference?
Thank you!! That is so informative!
The paternal grandmother who taught me was descended from Anabaptists who emigrated to Missouri from Germany, whereas my cousins on my mom’s side are in Ireland.
I’m glad I found your Substack!
Amazing, that makes sense then! It’s fascinating that the heritage comes out in something as trivial as how you hold the yarn when knitting.
Sure! These are the two most common styles of knitting used today. Holding your yarn in your left hand is known as “continental” knitting, and holding it in your right hand is “English” knitting. As the names suggest, English style is more common in the UK and other English-speaking countries, while continental is more widespread on mainland Europe, though it was never a hard-and-fast rule.
The main difference is how the yarn is wrapped around the needle. In English knitting, you use your right hand to throw the yarn around the needle for each stitch, while in continental knitting you hold the yarn in your left hand and pick it with the needle instead. They both produce the same fabric.
Since people emigrated to the US from all over Europe, there’s always been a mixture of both styles, although English does seem to have been more common. Nowadays, with so many online resources, the continental method has become more widespread, especially since many people feel it is faster or more efficient. In reality, fast knitters can use either style, and it’s more important to use the method you find most comfortable.
Personally, I use both methods depending on my mood, and there’s a tonne of variation within them, which I talked a little bit about in this article a couple of weeks ago:
https://knitjonpurljon.substack.com/p/800-year-old-knitting-mistake
Thanks for sharing such an inspiring piece of history. I certainly recognize the hard work you put into researching and writing this article.
Thank you! It was so interesting I didn’t want to stop researching.
Such an interesting look at a side of knitting we rarely imagine today. Informative and beautifully detailed. I saved it to revisit. Wonderful work, as always.
Thank you so much for the kind words, and for sharing. I’m happy you find my posts interesting!
You’re most welcome. Not only interesting but also very informative, real treasures. It’s a pleasure to read your posts and share them.