 you are all invited to come here and look at what she brought after her talk because then it's the coffee break and we all have time for this. Thank you. I'm very excited to be talking in front of textile specialists, so I'm going to hopefully get some really good feedback. Combing the data, assessing the utility of weaving combs in the textile production sequence during the British Iron Age. Research on textile production in the British Iron Age, which spans from 800 BC to 43 AD, has associated long-handled weaving combs with the textile tool assemblage. They are one of the few non-mendal decorated objects which survive and are often cited in discussions abstracted from the utilitarian functions. As a subject for research, interest in their description typology and function has varied. John Hedges and Tina largely built on the seminal work of antiquarian researchers. Sir William Stucley referred to the two objects he recovered in Thutford as combs, though it was not until the 1870s when a clear trend emerged which assessed functionality. Nolan Coffetry began pulling them long-handled combs which was further elaborated upon by two contemporaries Joseph Anderson and, the coolest name ever, Augustus Lane Fox Pitt Rivers. By the time Bullied and Gray had published the results of the Glastonbury Lake Village excavations, the weaving theory was consolidated. The association of long-handled combs with other known spinning and weaving tools confirmed their usage with a warp-weighted loom. Such associations were confirmed by authorities on textiles such as Henshaw and Crowfoot. Counterarguments forwarded by the textile specialist Henry Lane Roth were largely overlooked by Bullied and Gray. In the published Mere Lake Village excavations, Bullied and Gray glossed over Roth's criticisms and continued upholding the weaving association because few seemed to support this opposing interpretation. More recent studies have spotlighted combs within new archaeological paradigms. In a tongue-in-cheek statement, Potter and Hedges introduced a topic of long-handled combs as a subject which required little elaboration, working at Dainbury Lynn Selwood closely inspected the wear patterns visible on many of the combs, though she only ever seemed to consider weaving as a function of long-handled combs. Tina Tui examined the use square evidence further. The outer times were typically broken in many combs which meant that long-handled combs could not have been used on the warp-weighted loom because the visible wear patterns do not support that theory. Instead, she suggested that long-handled combs were used on band looms. Crucially, the dominant research trends over the last century have primarily focused on long-handled combs being weaving tools. The history of the study of long-handled combs as weaving tools has been very briefly summarized here. The most significant problem with the line of reasoning proposed by many of these scholars is the potentially falsular of the weaving association in the first instance. During the period between the 19th and 20th centuries, domestic textile production was still a visible craft and some antiquarian scholars may have likened long-handled combs to the tools with which they were familiar. Though some antiquarians looked towards ethnography for answers, most seemed to rely on ancient Greek and Roman textual sources. Thus, long-handled combs were made to fit the channeau-pertoire of textile production based on the preconceived notions of their functions as weftbooters. This association resonates today despite the existence of a few critics and niche readership. However, not everybody seemed in accordance with the weaving attribution. Michael Ryder described their use in fiber processing and cited the transverse wear marks on the tines as evidence. Roe Bailey countered the weaving argument on several accounts and concluded that the combs were too narrow and the tines too closely spaced for effective use on the work-weighted loom. Instead, she also suggested that the combs were used for fiber processing. Unfortunately, the specialized nature of these publications has resulted in limited recognition. Contested views have necessitated the creation of a new rubric for recording long-handled combs, which is sensitive to a range of possible utilitarian functions. Aside from general metrics, attributes that address the question of function must also be recorded. Long-handled combs are created as a single, seamless piece. Morphologically, iron age combs tend to break into two or three sections that identify, handle, and terminal. They are usually found in iron age contexts in Britain and are rarely found outside of Britain. The preserved examples are manufactured from antler or bone. Within the category of long-handled combs, there are those with longer or shorter handles. They are geographically segregated and break into two regional groups, England and Wales, where the handles tend to be longer and Scotland, where the handles tend to be shorter. While it may be impossible to detect whether iron age people use long-handled combs for combing or weaving or both, or maybe neither, they are the prevailing theories set out by previous researchers. Thus, this was the springboard for the foundation for the creation of the following rubric. Previous studies of long-handled combs emphasized morphology as a proxy for function. This relationship can often be erroneous. Associations with spindle whirls and loom weights may imply usage within the textile production sequence, but my research at Dainbury has shown this relationship to exist approximately 9% of the time. To avoid contributing to contributing the same errors to the same problem, my approach utilizes aspects of object biography. When used appropriately, morphology and association with other objects can be useful for interpreting potential functions. Association with different types of objects may inform us of deposition habits, especially those which reside outside of context of production, though it does not necessarily prove utilitarian function. A rubric for recording long-handled comb measurement data was developed to determine whether function could be revealed. The rubric is flexible as new research becomes available. Various attributes can be analyzed for interrelationships between manufacturing trends and useware. Preliminary data gathered from 17 long-handled combs from the iron age hillfort of Dainbury was consulted to determine the feasibility of the following rubric. An important goal for this extended pilot study was to determine what relationships exist between cone measurements and functionality. Weaving and non-weaving theories were considered. The additional lines of evidence which could potentially reveal function include length of time, the distance between tines, shape of space between the tines, specific wear patterns between tines, and pattern of polish from use on the handle. The length of time dictates how far the comb can be pushed through material before reaching the interdentate spaces. If combs are used for warp-weighted weaving, this could reveal the angle of the active shed. If they are used for combing, wool, or hackling flax, fiber-processing estimates could be produced. The distance between tines can indicate the coarseness of warp threads if we assume that one warp thread passes between the interdentate spaces. More warp threads could pass between the tines and this must be considered as well. This measurement might also reveal possible techniques for combing fiber. The shape of the space between tines is characterized as being U or V-shaped. Salman and Tue suggested that this might relate to the method of manufacture and modification through use, therefore recording this attribute will be of interest. Walt constitutes wear is not well understood. Two major types of wear patterns are noted between comb tines. The surfaces are polish or striated. These types of wear patterns have not been reconciled in terms of use, but recording these details could relate to functionality. Completely smooth tines could indicate that they were never used after manufacturing or were worn smooth by material passing through them. The opposite would then be true of the striations. The surface polish on the combs can be the result of the manufacturing process or from use, or tapanomical ones too. Examining and specifying whether these details exist and can be recorded will convey how the comb might have been held in the hand. Ergonomic factors have typically only been considered in passing. An initial study of 17 combs from the British, sorry from Dainbury, Hillfort in Iron Age, Britain was used to test this rubric and three metrics selected for analysis. The combs were selected based on whether tines were visible. Digital photos were taken and software used to take measurements. For interpretation, each attribute category of this rubric was designed to be understood collectively. In my analysis, there was considerable consistency of the interdentate spaces. The U shape occurred 71 times and the V shape occurred 15 times. Six combs had at least one V shape between tines. The evidence points towards the U shape being the predominant style of production and that knowledge of the material, manufacturing process, and the inch product would probably prerequisites. The distance between tines measurement revealed two distinct categories. Those with narrow spaces and those with wide spaces. These distances were consistent for 14 of the eight combs. Eight combs exhibited a range of distances between 0.6 and 0.8 millimeters, whereas the other five combs exhibited a range of distances between 1.0 and 1.4 millimeters. One interesting outlier had measurements between 2.1 and 3.4 millimeters. Where patterns is a tricky parameter to analyze? The descriptors chosen were smooth and striated. 14 combs produced useful data. Nine combs had smooth surfaces between the tines, possibly from finishing or from use on a loom or processing wall. Five combs illustrate striations angles towards the front of the comb, suggesting manufacture evidence from saws or perhaps from rubbing against warp threads or processing flecks. The results are inconclusive. This rubric has demonstrated the potential to reveal important pieces of information. There are some attributes of the rubric that are easier to measure than others, but the combination of quantitative and qualitative data allows for greater flexibility. Additional attributes can be added as needed. Though it has not been possible to show the extent of the capabilities of this rubric, it has begun establishing relationships between measurements and functionality. The evidence from 17 combs indicates that creating u-shaped spaces was a deliberate act in the manufacturing of combs. This demonstrates that the v-shape might have been created through use. A comparison of material hardness between antler and other materials used during the Iron Age might provide clues to this question of function. Additionally, the consistency of distances between tines suggests that the spacing of tines matter for their function. Narrow spaces will not permit thick material to pass through without risking breakages. This rubric has provided standardized metrics that yield evidential backing to subsequent interpretations. Largely, researchers have been working within a set of assumptions which relate long-handled combs with the weaving chain repertoire, forcing long-handled combs to fit into a single place. This rubric is evidence-led without assuming function. This is not an either or conclusion. As always, context is crucial in aiding our interpretations of production, use, and aspects of discard. Tafanomical considerations relating to deposition will be a crucial next step. Research on the function of long-handled combs has produced a new analytical tool, and with that, a more comprehensive understanding of long-handled combs.