The article from Fynske Minder about the Køstrup find that I discussed here a few weeks ago also discussed a curious fabric fragment associated with down. The English translation I have described this part of the find as follows:
Above the brooches there were fragments of two layers of tabby-woven wool with feather/down between them. Fragments of tabby-woven textile were also found on the key. There were also fragments of linen tabby underneath the lowermost layer of wool fabric over brooch X505 [one of the tortoise brooches]. These fragments could be the remains of a cloak or a cushion. Furthermore, remains of a small piece of iron plate with a round punched hole were found two cm north-west of brooch X501 [the other tortoise brooch]. In the rust, several pieces of textile with scattered stitches were preserved. On one side of the iron plate, there were two layers of two-ply tabby, probably wool, with a thread count of ca 8/8 threads/cm. Above this there was a small fragment of one-ply tabby-woven linen? With a thread count of 26/20 threads/cm. Above the wool tabby there were also remains of two woven bands, which were tabby-woven over four warp threads, whereas the thread count of the weft was ca 24 threads/cm. The woven band could be the remains of a facing/”edging” of a cloak and the small piece of iron plate could have been attached to the edge and be part of a closure.
Page 178 (question mark in the original).
Although the author notes that this find could have been part of a cushion or coverlet, it is unusual to have a down-filled or quilted cloak. That factor might point toward a cushion or coverlet--except for the iron plate, which would be out of place for either item.
The author seems to be inclined to believe that the find in question likely was part of a cloak. I can think of several aspects of the find that tend to support that. Only one plate was found (likely a coat would have two or more closures), and it was found high up on the body, above the tortoise brooches (where a cloak conventionally is tied or clasped).
It would be useful to know the exact size of the iron plate. The article says only that it was "small," without giving the size. But the size of the plate could be very useful to know in attempting to reason about how the find should be characterized. A plate that was, say, 5 cm by 3 cm would be comparable in size to later cloak clasps, and might indicate that the item was used as a cloak. On the other hand, if the plate was significantly smaller than that, say, 2 cm by 2 cm, it becomes much more likely that it was part of a set of clasps used on a coat. Similarly, it would be useful to know how thick the plate is; a thicker plate would be less likely to have rusted to indistinguishable fragments in the grave than would a thin one. Finally, it seems to me that a cloak plate likely would be thicker than plates used as fasteners for a coat. The article says that only "remains" of the iron plate were found, which may indicate that the plate was thin (and leaves open the possibility that there were other, similar, iron plates, elsewhere on the body, which have rusted into dust).
So the Køstrup find contains enough information to argue that the occupant of Grave ACQ wore a down-filled coat--but not enough information to confirm the presence of such a coat. I need to keep my eyes open for other finds involving down, to see whether they include a similar iron plate that might have been a clothes fastener.
EDITED after the original post date to clarify and further explain my thoughts.
EDITED after the original post date to clarify and further explain my thoughts.
