Deborah writes: <<Unfortunately, I think you're making a lot of assumptions, while also trying to compare apples to oranges.
"modern-style wool" doesn't really mean much, and you can't really say it (whatever "it" is) is much crimpier than any other form of Shetland.>> Well, I raise Shetlands, and I have animals of modern-style, medium-style, and primitive-style wool in my flock. There are dramatic differences between each type of wool--such that some people have suggested having at least two different Shetland registries. Modern-style, or UK-style, wool is a term that's been used quite a bit over the last few years. I understand this term to refer to the 'breed-standard' wool that Shetland Flock Book Society members are actively selecting for (my understanding is that rams can't be registered without meeting the wool standard). It's short (2-4 inches) and very crimpy. Some is very soft, with a handle very like Merino, while other is very like Suffolk--I believe the goal with the SSBG to be the Merino-type wool rather than the Suffolk type. I have one of each type in my flock right now--both are rams, and I'm interested in seeing what they produce in terms of their lambs' wool types. I have some primitive Shetlands, with wool up to 8 or 9 inches in some cases; some with a pronounced undercoat, some with the long, wavy outercoat but no very noticeable undercoat. I proposed on this list a couple years ago that it was the downy undercoat that was used for ring shawls, and the idea was shot down by many who insisted that type of wool wasn't true Shetland, and not the true wool type used for the ring shawls. I have no way of knowing, since information on wool type in historic textiles is even harder to come by than sizes of the yarns used. Primitive style wool seems to be quite dominant, at least in my flock. And I have some of what I call 'medium' Shetlands, though possibly 'intermediate' might be the better term. They have a staple length of 4-6 inches, with a moderate crimp not unlike BFL, though without the pronounced luster or silky handle (there's some shine when combed, but not a lot). They are quite soft, comparable to a Correidale but not as crimpy. There's evidence of a vestigial undercoat/overcoat where the fibers are moderating their differences so that a 'naked-eye' view of the wool would say all are the same. This is my personal preference--softness, moderate crimp and staple makes for a virtually all-purpose wool (except, of course, for a true ring shawl :) These are all pure-bred, pedigreed Shetlands. <<In the case of Shetland, in the islands at least (North American breeders have a different view), this means eliminating scadder and the dual coat.>> I can't speak for breeders in the islands or the UK, but it's definitely inaccurate to say North American breeders have a different view of what to select towards regarding wool type. There are many outspoken proponents of both primitive-type and modern-type wools. One board member of the North American Shetland Sheepbreeders Association insists anything other than breed-standard wool is 'bad' wool; one insists that only primitive style is worth having; another, like me, enjoys all types. The membership is just as diverse. As long as there's healthy, respectful disagreement on the subject, there will be registered Shetlands of all wool types--a great thing for spinners and spinners' flocks :) <<Their wool is probably much closer to what Shetlanders were using 100 - 150 years ago than any Shetland-breed wool, and certainly much closer than fine Merino.>> My understanding on this subject is that some breeders in the islands began crossing to mainland breeds at this period. And the trend of crossing led to the formation of the Shetland Flock Book Society, who were concerned that there be one standard to breed to in order to have a distinct breed called "Shetland" that could compete in mainland mills with mainland breeds. I have heard (but don't know of a primary source of documentation) that Merino was among the first crosses. This makes sense to me; Merino has long been held as the standard of soft wool, and therefore marketable wool (from a factory mill viewpoint). >From what I've seen, Merino dominates the characteristics of crosses quite a bit. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that a single Merino ram, used on a few hundred primitive-style Shetland ewes, would make a significant difference in the wool type of the lambs, and if those lambs were bred back to Shetland rams, would continue to have a huge impact on the future wool types, particularly if the breeders were actively selecting for wool that could be processed by mainland mills. I'm hypothesizing, as any mention of these possibilities on any list of Shetland breeders, inevitably seems to bring up a storm of denial/disapproval/anger :) But information in the Shetland Sheep 2000 Conference proceedings seems to back up my hypothesis. I'm sure a ring shawl in the sense of a lace shawl that can be drawn through a woman's ring is possible from both modern Shetland wool and from the undercoat of primitive Shetland wool. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that women in the islands did it both ways, depending on the type of wool available to them as spinners. I think it's a reasonable assumption, though, that modern Shetland wool, with its tight crimp, would be an easier wool to spin for a ring shawl than the 'medium' type Shetland fleece I used for my small sample. This conclusion is based on my hands-on experience with my own Shetland wool, Shetland I've purchased from other breeders, and a hundred or so samples of various types of Shetland wool I've acquired, in large part to study the wool types found in North American purebred flocks. Holly To stop mail temporarily mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: set nomail To restore send: set mail
