Guernseys vs. Jerseys

"Ouvre", she said coyly.
 (Gladys Thompson on page 5 of Patterns for Guernseys, and Arans, third edition, copyright 1979 by Dover Publications.)

Guernseys were knit with either Western Stitch Mounting or Combined Stitch Mounting.

Jerseys were knit using Eastern Stitch Mount.

The Eastern Stitch Mount produces a tighter fabric; and, a stitch that is more more square.  How the stitch is mounted affects the shape of the knit stitch.

Western and Eastern Stitch Mount do produce different fabrics, that can be distinguished by folks that have worked with both knitting methods.  The folks in Yorkshire often confuse these fabrics, and are not careful with what they call these fabrics. Jerseys have won "guernsey" knitting competitions, so even knitting judges in Yorkshire are willing to call a "jersey", a "guernsey". Their failure to be precise and accurate in their textile nomenclature is not my problem.

Rather my goal is to knit better fabrics, and understanding how stitch mount affects the  fabric is important. For me,  guernseys and jerseys are different fabrics, with different virtues, made with different knitting techniques.

However, knitting the gauge of guernseys and jerseys does require a knitting sheath or knitting belt of some kind to provide the leverage to pack the yarn tightly.  Thus, here we have two different knitting methods that produce different fabrics, but which use similar knitting sheaths.


I have been thinking about for "Ouvre" for sometime now.  Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the solution.  In this case. it also involved realizing that there is a serious error in Mary Thomas's discussion of stitch mount in her Knitting Book.  It is still a very good book.

Towards a taxonomy of knitting

A knitting needle is a lever for moving loops of yarn.

See http://www.ohio.edu/people/williar4/html/haped/nasa/simpmach/lever.htm

Levers used in knitting are Class 1, Class 3 and various springs.  If we look at the elements of the various knitting techniques we see:

Yarn tension

1. Right hand
2. Left hand
3. Both hands
4. Pin on chest or around neck

Tools 

1. Cable needles
2.  Cable needles/ 2 sets
3. Single point needles
4. "Sock needles" (Short double pointed needles, which may more or less flexible but the flex is used for ergonomic comfort rather than for individual stitch formation. Sock needles may be bent or curved but the curve is for ergonomic comfort rather than individual stitch formation.
5. Stiff, short double pointed straight needles, with knitting sheath to match
6. Flexible double pointed straight needles, with knitting sheath to match and flexed into each stitch.
7. Long double pointed straight needles with knitting pouch (may be stiff or flexible)
8. Short curved stiff DPN used with knitting sheath to match, and rotated into each stitch.
9. Hooked needles 

Fulcrum / mechanical advantage

1. Thumb of hand holding working needle. / ~1:3
2. Ball or base of thumb of hand holding working needle./ ~1:3
3. Second finger hand holding working needle./ ~1:3
4. Index finger hand holding working needle./ ~1:3
5. Knitting sheath./ 1;20 => 1:50
6. Center  or outside edge of  right palm./ 1;20 => 1:50
7. None, spring action of needle.
8. None, spring action of fabric.
9. Shoulder joint / e.g., no mechanical advantage.

Effort (source of force to move loop)

1. Rotation of right wrist
2. Fingers in right hand (any or all)
3. Forearm
4. Bicep
5. Deltoid
6. Pectorals
7. Tricep
8. Rhomboideus

Now, a Ravelry forum might offer 200 different knitting styles that I would say all use left hand yarn tension, the right thumb as a fulcrum with wrist rotation as effort yielding a mechanical advantage of 1:3.   200 styles of knitting that offer the same mechanical advantage.  One or another may offer ergonomic advantages or minor advantages in speed, but they all have the same mechanical advantage and the same amount of hand movement, so they are going to produce very similar results. 

However, if one looks around there are knitting techniques that involve flexing a needle held in a knitting sheath with the palm of the hand, into the working stitch, looping the yarn, and allowing the spring action of the flexed needle to finish the stitch.  This is such a different concept of knitting, that in contrast the 200 versions of continental knitting are all one technique.  And using one set of cable needles or 2 sets cable needles or DPN or SPN or changing the mount of the stitches or purling backwards does not change the essential analysis of how the lever is used to move the loops of yarn.

There are knitting techniques that involve rotating needles held in knitting sheaths into the stitch, looping the yarn over the needle and then allowing the spring of the fabric to pop the needle out of the fabric and finish the stitch. This generates a very powerful compound leverage, and the effort for the entire stitch is one quick push of the needle, with the knitting sheath controlling direction. this is an old and very fast way to knit, but it is not something that is likely to be included in a Ravelry thread on ways to knit.  It works very well.  The fact that I do it everyday makes it science, and since it is the technique used by the Terrible Knitters of Dent makes it is also history.  It is the right way to knit fine gloves and socks from very fine yarns.  Would you like a demo?

And, then there are the long DPN used with a knitting pouch.  What can I say, but that it was a breath of fresh air.  

If you want to tell me there are a large number of different ways to knit  that I do not understand or cannot perform, then you need to tell me about knitting techniques that use physics and tools not listed above.  When I learned to knit, I was almost instantly dissatisfied, and I rapidly went through all the minor variations.  That is, I spent ~6 years trying all the variations of the standard modern knitting methods.  At than point, it became very clear that I was looking for something radically better.

There followed months of experimentation with gansey needles and years of  learning how to control them with knitting sheaths.  This blossomed into an entire spectrum of very powerful knitting techniques that were very different from hand held needles and quite different from each  other.

Then, came swaving, where curved needles are held in a knitting sheath and rotated into the stitch, and the stretch of the fabric acts as a spring to finish the stitch.  This is different from all other knitting.

So, yes I know  the common knitting styles and understand the variants of the common knitting styles.  

My View of Knitting History

I am highly amused by the reaction that I get when I talk about knitting sheaths in history groups. Knitting sheaths are tools, like rocks and hammers. Sometimes they are the right tool, sometimes they are the wrong tool for the job. However, for me, it is funny for somebody that has never used a knitting sheath to vehemently say that knitting sheaths are unnecessary. That is like somebody that has never used a hammer telling a carpenter that hammers are unnecessary. I have to think that this is a residue of the Victorian loathing for the poverty associated with “knitting for pence”, and the Victorian distain for the tools of the impoverished contract knitters.


Actually, I thought about felt quite a lot. However, we have good knowledge that it was not much used aboard square rigged, sailing ships. So the real question is why was felt not used more? The answer is that felt clothing does not suit the kind of work done on a (square rigged) ship. As a result, the great sea faring centers have museums devoted to knitting, not felting. Felt clothing was very practical and popular on steam ships starting in the Victorian Era.


Knitting for subsistence fishing could be performed by wives, sisters, mothers, and other family members. However, Great Britain was a great sea faring nation with a navy that pressed crews - no chance for a mother to knit for her son while he served in His Majesty’s’ Navy. So there was commercial knitting for seamen as early as there were navy press gangs – and in France that was um – 1380? Customs tax records suggest that the wool that those French navy sailors wore came from England and was knit in the Channel Islands. Knitting was such a large industry in the Channel Islands that for a while customs tax on British wool exported to the Channel Islands was the primary income for the British Crown. When the Tudor Wool Act was passed, (to protect the Yorkshire knitting Industry) the Channel Islands turned to piracy, which was only resolved when Sir Walter Raleigh reestablished knitting on the Channel Islands as an industry. In those days, knitting was big business.


In Victorian days, knitting became conspicuous consumption in the tradition of Thorstein Veblen, Gary Becker, and Kevin Murphy. Knitting loosely proved that a lady’s house had central heat. Ladies wrote new knitting manuals to teach their students how to knit slowly and elegantly. Another great virtue of knitting slowly and loosely is no stress on the wrists. Thus, the ladies were able to discard the distained knitting sheaths. The old professional knitters did not write their skills down, and subsequent generations of knitters from all walks of life looked to the knitting manuals written by Victorian ladies. However, later generations of knitters forgot that those Victorian ladies had a distain for practical professional knitting.

As Mary Thomas writing in 1938 said,

Knitting sheaths, or sticks, as they were sometimes called, are now a feature of museum interest, but at one time, when hand knitting was a vast and flourishing industry and speed a matter of pence, every knitter owned and used these implements. . . .

 Mary Wright was one of the first to address the subject of knitting sheaths openly in her 1979 book, Cornish Guernseys & Knit frocks. (It is also worth noting that she damaged her wrists knitting a replica gansey on circular needles.)


In the old days, when knitting was an important technology, they were very, very good at it. One of the finest examples of knitting that we have is a fragment of silk hose with designs in gold filaments from the Arab world, knit in the Ninth Century. That was knit with the élan that separates the talented professional from the merely competent amateur. Yes, today we have people that do things like: http://www.ravelry.com/projects/dawn9163/whitby-gansey, but it took her more than a month and she had sore wrists afterward.

In the Victorian era, we lost much our heritage of these professional knitting tools and expertise. We no longer have cadres of talented professional hand knitters with trade secrets, advancing their craft generation by generation. We forgot how to knit ganseys without sore wrists. We have forgotten how to hand knit silk and gold at 30 stitches per inch. With a few exceptions, now, we do “hobby” knitting. Our professional knitters are designers that make a living doing designs for “hobby knitters”. I look to history, not for history per se, but for clues that can let me be a better knitter in the future.


Knitters that come to me for “history” are going to be disappointed. Knitters coming to me for ideas on how to knit better are going to be amazed and delighted. I have used rocks (Clovis blades) to cut my meat, but sometimes a steel knife is - just better. I have pounded nails with a rock, but sometimes a carpenter’s hammer is – just better. I have used Addi Turbos, but sometimes DPN with a knitting sheath is - just better.



He, who knows only his own generation, remains always a child.

Rutt – A History of Hand Knitting

For the last few years, every discussion of the history of knitting has eventually resulted in somebody quoting Rutt, and that often being accepted as the final authority, because Rutt has so many sources, he must be right! That should not be the case. A History of Hand Knitting is manifestly incomplete, and often wrong. The common theme of his errors was to ignore the traditions of professional, commercial, and serious knitters. He ignored their tools and their techniques and this inevitably lead to erroneous conclusions about their knit products.

His first error is in his definition of knitting, where he limits it to yarn. In fact, many early knitters included gold filaments, and the incorporation of such metal wires does not prevent that work from being "knitting." Moreover modern knitting machines may use strands of synthetic material which is yarn only in the broadest sense, yet the fabric is still clearly knitting. Thus, the definition of knitting must one of process and topology, and not one of material.

Rutt wonders around his description of knitting needles without ever understanding that different knitting needles were used for different knitting techniques. (While he references commercial knitting techniques, he does not actually discuss them. Thus, glosses are deliberate, rather than purely ignorant.) Most importantly he fails to point out role of knitting sheaths in various knitting techniques. He fails to note that there were long steel needles used with knitting sheaths yeilding a spring action for knitting ganseys – this is one kind of needle with its own technical constraints. Shorter DPN could be used with other kinds of knitting sheaths (and different knitting technique) for knitting other kinds of objects. Despite later extensive quotes from Howitt, on the use of curved needles in the Yorkshire Dales later in the book, Rutt does not bring this information into his section on needles. And yet, it was the physics of a curved knitting needle (with a knitting sheath) that made the very fast knitting of the Yorkshire Dales possible. This is a completely different knitting technique from what is used with gansey needles, and a history of knitting needs to recognize that. Thus, Rutt does not describe the needles that were used by generations and generations of professional, commercial, and serious hand knitters. The cottage workers in England made exporting boat loads of hand knit hose to France possible. They are a big part of the history of hand knitting. These are the tools that made fine fisherman’s ganseys possible. Those ganseys made cod fish possible. The cod fish made the Church's "fast days" possible. Taxes on the knit goods supported the British Crown. These tools that Rutt ignores were critical to history as we know it.

Then Rutt talks about holding the needles and he ignores knitting sheaths and pouches. These had been at the core of techniques for professional, commercial, and serious hand knitters for centuries. What he does get right is admitting that the knitting styles that came in at the beginning of Queen Victoria’s reign, slowed knitting down. However, those knitting techniques are the only ones he describes in detail and says little about the methods of hard working (and fast) cottage knitters. Rutt says, “Ideally only one needle should move”. This may be true for slow, elegant, stylish knitting in the post-Victorian drawing room, but it contradicts Howitt’s eyewitness description of how the fastest knitters ever known (the Terrible Knitters of Dentdale) did knit. They are an important part of the history of hand knitting and they need to be discussed by someone that understands what they did, and how they did it.

Rutt did not understand the tools used by generations of hand knitters. This is a deep and fundamental fault with Rutt’s knowledge of knitting.

Having glossed the tools and techniques of serious knitters, in favor of drawing room fashion, Rutt dismisses the work of Braham Norwick while acknowledging that the metal work discussed is topologically knit. Rutt says it is not knit because it is not yarn -that is silly! I have knit metal wire and the process is knitting; that is one must now how to knit before one can knit metal wire, and if you can knit metal wire, you can knit yarn because the process is the same. Anybody that has knit both knows this. Any knitter that has knit wire knows that after knitting wire, you go find some yarn to knit because it feels so good after knitting the wire.

And so on! That is my feelings on the first 25 of or Rutt’s 213 pages, and it does not get much better. He attributes dates without justification, and he missed important work. He makes mountains out of molehills and molehills out of mountains, and it is hard to tell what he is going to do with any particular reference.

I will gladly admit that Rutt cites a great many sources, but his analysis of those sources is faulty and out of context. If Rutt is cited, always go back and look at the original source. Rutt is not the last word in knitting. Rutt did not write a history of hand knitting, he wrote a justification of modern drawing room knitting.