Wool, Weaving, and Appalachian Handicrafts

how the craft revival movement impacted the fiber industry in western north carolina

By Hannah Brown

During the late nineteenth through the early twentieth century, Appalachia was in the midst of a drastic transition that mirrored the rest of the nation. Following the rush of industrialization which has come to define the era, America was not only facing extensive changes in land utilization and urban development, but in self-identity as well. With the growth of extractive industries, Appalachia was established as a peripheral region that supplied vital resources (coal, timber, and manpower) to support American production.[i] At this time, traditional society was also undergoing vast transformations. The idealistic vision of the “American Dream” changed from Jeffersonian agrarianism and subsistence-style agriculture to rugged capitalistic individualism and reliance on a market economy.[ii] Especially in Appalachia, the shift from rural farms to urban centers was forced upon mountaineers due to the degradation of large expanses of land, which can be attributed to the extractive industries that powered the Industrial Revolution. Erosion, deforestation, and water pollution are just a few of the long-lasting environmental impacts the region endured because of this socio-economic transition.[iii] The Progressive Movement was a public-initiated response to the societal issues caused by rapid industrialization, urbanization, and immigration.[iv] Several different social movements are included under this umbrella term; however, the one most intrinsic to the reformation of the Appalachian region was the Craft Revival.[v] The Craft Revival Movement spurred the development of local industries in Western North Carolina that required the usage of fiber, particularly wool. During the Progressive Era, crafts involving sheep fiber provided supplemental income for families, especially for women, and expanded the mountain economy.

The revitalization of woolen craft in Appalachia was largely due to the institution of Craft Houses, which were directly tied to the Social Uplift Movement in the region during the era of Progressive reformation. America faced an overwhelming identity crisis after industrialization. Thus, there was a search for someone, something, or someplace that could help define who or what was now “American.” Appalachia had long been stereotyped as an isolated, “lily-white” region, that had abstained from the “corruption” of immigrants due to its seclusion.[vi] By inaccurately portraying the region as untouched by “outside” influences (especially immigrants), Appalachia garnered significant attention because many believed that mountaineers had retained the patriotic ideologies and cultural practices that the nation was founded upon. Since Appalachia was often characterized as purely American, many reformers believed that the mountaineers were deserving of social uplift programs instead of the motley of largely impoverished individuals that inhabited the large, quickly expanding urban centers.[vii] There was an emphasis on preserving the “positive” aspects of Appalachia due to fears of immigrants threatening U.S. culture and authentic American culture dying off of a result.[viii] The Craft Revival, a segment of this movement, aimed to preserve “authentic American handicrafts.” When referencing western North Carolina in 1926, Lydia A. Bancroft stated, “the greatest hope of the nation in developing a distinctly American art lies in the fact that these people come of a pure Anglo-Saxon ancestry and as yet have not become mixed with other European races as have the people in our industrial centers.”[ix] Bancroft claimed that the advantages of the “seclusion” of mountain people included maintaining “distinctly American” qualities; however, if the people want to remain as such, they must accept the support now offered by schooling.

She referenced the booming industries that developed during the craft movement in the region, particularly Biltmore industries. She proclaimed, “Their looms are made by their own men and boys, and the industry has grown until now there are more than ninety workers making handspun woolen materials on hand operated looms.” Biltmore Industries, established by George and Edith Vanderbilt, is a prime example of how wool was utilized in western North Carolina during the revitalization of Appalachian handicrafts. According to Ron Holland, “Edith Vanderbilt was extremely interested in establishing a weaving project, and in 1907 the homespun operation began."[x] Following its creation in 1909, Biltmore Homespun was the most popular sales item of Biltmore Industries, and by the 1920s, the company “claimed to be the ‘largest hand-weaving industry in the world.”[xi] Local mountaineers were employed to craft the woolen textiles, and Biltmore Homespun brought national attention to Appalachian weaving, even garnering the support of President Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who both utilized the brand for their suits.[xii] The most popular fiber blends from Biltmore consisted primarily of wool. Edith Vanderbilt’s idea to produce an​ all-wool dress fabric for commercial sale was rather unique, considering that other Appalachian weaving institutes such as Frances Goodrich’s Allanstand and William Goodell Frost’s Berea College produced the more common ‘‘linsey-woolsey’’ cloth of linen and wool which was the original technique used by traditional mountain weavers.[xiii] According to Sheila Bumgarner, Lucy Morgan (who established the Penland School of Crafts), visited Berea College in Kentucky. While there, “Morgan learned weaving techniques and returned home with modern looms and the idea of reintroducing the art of weaving cloth to her community.”[xiv] Penland School, located in the Blue Ridge Mountains, was a prevalent education center for the revitalization of crafts in the Carolinas. Mr. Edward Worst conducted the Institute at Penland several times throughout the 1930s due to his extensive knowledge of the weaving craft; however, Miss Lucy Morgan was the Director of the Penland Weavers and Potters and was the primary facilitator of the institution’s success.[xv] During preliminary weeks at the Penland Weaving Institute, classes would be offered for inexperienced weavers, and “instruction will also be given in carding, spinning, and vegetable-dyeing,” all of which are related to the weaving craft.[xvi] During “proper instruction” (when all students, no matter their experience level, were lectured at the institute), there was an emphasis on these three allied crafts, although students were also able to branch out into other craft disciplines. For those who had not yet fully invested in the available educational opportunities, a pamphlet produced by the Penland School of Handicrafts provided in-depth, step-by-step instruction for the process of taking raw wool and other fibers and transforming it into finished yarn. It included diagrams that showed the process of carding wool, using the high wheel, twisting/looping fresh yarn, and the interworking of yard winding equipment.[xvii] This guide was part of eleven in a series published by the Penland School of Handicraft. The emphasis on handcrafted items during this era sparked the interest of mountain locals in learning skilled practices, such as weaving. According to the Penland School of Crafts’ records, out of the eighty-three students in attendance at the school hailing from over twenty different states, thirty-four were from North Carolina.[xviii] Weaving was a form of supplemental income that was easily accessible to mountaineers, especially mountain women. The Penland School was a largely successful movement towards craft education, which emphasized “old-fashioned” methods for handling and utilizing wool.

The Southern Highland Handicraft Guild facilitated the cooperation of craft industries in North Carolina, which allowed for the collective success of industries dependent on woolen fibers. The Southern Highland Handicraft Guild is a craft organization that constituted a significant role in the market of Appalachian handicrafts during the early twentieth century and has since been recognized as an icon of the Craft Revival Movement. Individuals and groups from across nine states interested in the pursuits of handmade crafts “came together to discuss creating a cooperative that would bring together craft resources, education, marketing and conservation.” That group created a comprehensive exhibition of handicrafts from the region in 1930 with the establishment of the Southern Mountain Workers. For the first time in the nation’s history, “regional schools, producing centers and artisans were aware of what each institution produced and understood the possibilities for transforming the handicraft tradition into a meaningful part of the region’s economy.”[xix] The Guild provided a centralized structure that allowed for cooperation between craft industries across western North Carolina. The Guild sold and preserved regional crafts while ensuring a standard of quality among the different organizations that cooperated with them. By selling crafts as a collective (often showcased through brochures), craft sellers were able to reach a broader consumer base, which benefited handicraft industries across Appalachia.

The Craft Revival in western North Carolina advanced women’s autonomy by providing industries that appealed to their unique skill sets and increased the availability of educational opportunities so they could further their financial pursuits. Historically in Appalachia, homemade crafts were a part of women’s sphere of control. In a 1932 catalog for the Southern Highland Handicraft Guild, Allen H. Eaton expounded upon the advanced skill set of mountain women, writing that “[i]n the exhibition are many kinds of weaving, from the simplest baby blanket done on a two harness loom to the beautiful and difficult damasks and ten harness weaving done by the mountain women so perfectly that you will have to take my word for it that everything is done on hand looms.”[xx] Eaton even explicitly states women’s predisposition for excellence with weaving in particular. She stated that “[b]room tying and basket making, especially the heavier baskets, are usually done by men, but it is weaving in which the women excel, and a little should be said here about this form of handicraft, the most important of them all.”[xxi] Though the Guild was a collective that focused on the marketability of all handmade crafts, they made a point to emphasize that weaving was considered to be the most valuable skill because of how technical and difficult the process for creating finished products is. It is indisputable that women maintained a pivotal role in the Craft Revival, and according to Eaton, they were vital for the success of the weaving industry.

One of the most pivotal individuals in the revival of weaving in western North Carolina was Frances Louisa Goodrich. Goodrich, an American weaver, writer, and archivist, was “among the first to promote a revival of weaving as a cottage industry in the North Carolina mountains.”[xxii] In a booklet promoting Allanstand Industries, Goodrich explained her process in discovering the traditional weaving and dying practices of mountain women. She traversed the western North Carolinian countryside in the hopes of collecting pieces of generational wisdom from mountaineers regarding wool and weaving processes, and she was largely successful in her endeavor. She stated, "it is this part of the mountains that most of our knowledge of dyes and weaving has been gained, for more of the thrifty old-time ways have been kept.”[xxiii] Goodrich retained the ideals that many Americans during the period of Progressivism had regarding Appalachian mountaineers; that through their “isolation,” they harbored wisdom worthy of preservation. Coverlets (a cross between a blanket and a quilt) were distinctly regarded as one of the most difficult weaving projects one could undertake. However, by interviewing several different mountain women across western North Carolina, Goodrich was able to discover individuals who had been trained by their predecessors in the craft. Katherine Caldwell expounded upon Frances Goodrich’s theory that coverlet creation could relieve economic hardship for women. According to Caldwell, “When [Goodrich] sent the coverlet to her northern friends, their reaction convinced her that if the women of Brittain’s Cove could produce some homespun weaving, there would be a mail order market for it.”[xxiv] To fill the increasing number of orders for coverlets, the women at Allanstand specialized in dyeing, carding, spinning, and weaving (all steps in the transformation of wool fiber to yarn). Francis Goodrich stated in reference to Allanstand Cottage Industries that since its establishment, “The orders have never been wanting.”[xxv] With a northern market established for Appalachian handmade products, weaving became a resoundingly profitable industry. From 1925-1926, Allanstand Cottage Industries showed a profit of $1,920.21 in weaving alone.[xxvi] The economic advancements that occurred in Allanstand primarily benefited women, because it was they who specialized in the tasks pertaining to the creation of yarn and other woven products, which were consistently the institution’s most profitable export. Not only were weaving industries primarily staffed by female employees, but most of them were also founded by women—Biltmore Homespun was instituted by Edith Vanderbilt, Penland School of Craft was established by Lucy Morgan, and Allanstand Cottage Industries was headed by Frances Goodrich. The Craft Revival Movement would not have been possible without the expertise and ingenuity of women during the Progressive Era.

Through the development of industries that relied heavily on the usage of fiber, primarily wool, the Craft Revival stimulated the Appalachian economy and provided a means of supplemental income for mountaineers. There are several accounts from the period that attest to the economic benefits the mountain region experienced to the revitalization of woolen crafts. A newspaper article from 1937 that referenced the return of weaving work to Sylva, NC, stated that “[p]re-revolutionary handicrafts, utilizing patterns that came from the old countries, are returning to find an honored and profitable position in modern North Carolina.”[xxvii] By stating that the patterns came “from the old countries,” it is clear that the author’s intent was to kindle nostalgic (and arguably patriotic) sentiments for their audience. Many people believed it was honorable work to preserve and encourage true American culture during this era, which is why handicrafts found a wide consumer base and the social uplift movement in Appalachia became so profitable. In the 1932 catalog by the Southern Highland Handicraft Guild, several different institutions listed that had different variations of woolen crafts available for purchase. One blanket in particular was described in great detail; however, it was not the style or the design that was the center of attention, but rather the process in which the blanket was crafted. First, the advertisement gives a brief description of the appearance: “The blue, madder, and white striped blanket from Pine Mountain, listed number 462, would attract attention anywhere.”[xxviii] This is standard for the majority of crafts listed in the catalog. But, Eaton then emphasizes that It was made by Ophie Jackson “who raised the sheep from which she sheared the fleece, carded and spun the yarn, dyed it with vegetable dyes—indigo blue and madder pink—worked out her own design in stripes, and wove the blanket on an old mountain loom such as her mother and her grandmother had used in that section of Kentucky to weave clothing for their families.”[xxix] The selling point of this piece was not its appearance, but rather the generational knowledge and techniques that were used to craft an original piece of art. Potential buyers were more interested in the fact that the piece originated in Appalachia from a female mountaineer that used the very same loom as her ancestors than its design. During this period, crafts were advertised based on their ties to “authentic Appalachia,” which is why the familial ties of Ophie Jackson to her mother and grandmother in Kentucky are referenced. By proclaiming the creator of the craft has derived from generational knowledge, her craft would then appeal to the potential buyers (generally middle/upper class individuals) who sought “authentic” handmade wares. This descriptive segment of the catalog also attests to the fact that the wool utilized by at least some mountaineers was sourced from local sheep. In a newspaper article from 1954, Paul Pleasants also references the process of production for local mountain weavers. According to Pleasants, “Weaving is extensively practiced in the mountains, and one of the most interesting is that of the Cabin Weavers, at Norton, near highlands.” He describes the weaving process of Mrs. Lewis Norton, stating that “from the neighbors she obtained wool; and she carded and spun it into thread”—once again, locally sourced wool is emphasized. [xxx] Pleasants further describes that after developing her craft she began to educate her neighbors in the process of weaving, and “as their markets grew, more looms were installed, and cotton and linen and other materials added to wool.”[xxxi] As referenced in this newspaper article, the revitalization of mountain handmade crafts came with an increasing demand for looms in the region. As the weaving industry developed, catalogs like “Bernat Looms and Loom Accessories,” which advertised different variations of looms and accessory components one would need for wrapping/interweaving threads, began to circulate in western North Carolina.[xxxii] The loom was a necessity for the revival of weaving in Appalachia. The widespread availability of this technology is one of the reasons that the commodification of mountaineer production was possible. The loom was an essential piece of equipment not only for craft houses but for individual homemakers as well and is an example of an industry that flourished in the region due to the revitalization of regional craft.

The Craft Revival Movement brought Appalachia to the forefront of American minds. In the search for a “distinctly American art,” the nation turned to Appalachia, and were not disappointed. Entrepreneurs (many of which were women) utilized generational knowledge possessed by local mountaineers to create a profitable American industry. Appalachian handicrafts were extremely coveted in a time where people were struggling to define what truly was American. With the profitability of weaving and woolen crafts, especially as a means for supplemental income, sheep fiber had a significant influence on the mountain economy. The process of utilizing raw wool was referenced in several informational articles from the period, and a few even claim that certain weavers sourced wool directly from sheep of their own, or their neighbors. There were ample educational opportunities for mountaineers to learn traditional weaving skills due to the abundance of Craft Houses that pervaded not only western North Carolina, but Appalachia as a whole. Though some may argue that the commodification of mountain culture could be described as another form of extractive industry not unlike the original, detrimental environmental exploitation of Appalachian resources (coal, timber, and manpower), the economic benefits that the region reaped from craft revitalization were worth the cost. Weaving was a form of skilled labor where women thrived, and it provided them a means of economic autonomy. Most importantly, traditional mountain skills that could have died out were preserved due to the national attention the craft industry received.

[i] Roberta McKenzie, “Appalachian Culture As Reaction To Uneven Development: A World Systems Approach to Regionalism,” Journal of the Appalachian Studies Association,1 (1989), 100.

[ii] Luke Manget, “Appalachia and the Industrial Revolution,” History 460: American Environmental History (class lecture, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee NC, February 27, 2024).

[iii] Luke Manget, “Appalachia and the Industrial Revolution.”

[iv] “Overview: Progressive Era to New Era, 1900-1929,” In the Library of Congress, U.S. History Primary Source Timeline.

[v]Anna M. Fariello, “Making History: Revival in Context,” In Craft Revival: Shaping Western North Carolina Past and Present, (Hunter Library Digital Initiatives, 2007).

[vi] Samuel B. McGuire, “The Literary ‘Discovery of Appalachia’ (1870s-1910s),” History 446: Southern Appalachian History (class lecture, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee NC, February 21, 2024).

[vii] Samuel B. McGuire, “The Literary ‘Discovery of Appalachia’ (1870s-1910s).”

[viii] Samuel B. McGuire, “Appalachian Missionaries & Romantics,” History 446: Southern Appalachian History (class lecture, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee NC, February 26, 2024).

[ix] Lydia A. Bancroft, “Art Possibilities in Western North Carolina,” Cullowhee State Normal Bulletin, January 1926, (Cullowhee State Normal School, 1926), 11.

[x]Ron Holland, “Biltmore Industries,” In the Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell, (University of North Carolina Press, 2006).

[xi] Kelly H. L’Ecuyer, “Uplifting the Southern Highlander Handcrafts at Biltmore Estate Industries,” Winterthur Portfolio 37, no. 2/3 (2002),146.

[xii] Ron Holland, “Biltmore Industries.”

[xiii] Kelly H. L’Ecuyer, “Uplifting the Southern Highlander Handcrafts at Biltmore Estate Industries,” 142.

[xiv] Sheila Bumgarner. “Penland School of Crafts,” In the Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell, (University of North Carolina Press, 2006).

[xv] Bonnie Willis Ford, “The 1931 Weaving Institute at Penland,” In The Handicrafter, November/December, 1931.

[xvi] Penland Weavers and Potters, “Weaving Institute, 1935,” (Penland School of Crafts Records, 1935).

[xvii] Toni Ford, “Spinsters Guide to Hand Spinning of Wool, Flax & Cotton,” Penland School of Crafts, 1943.

[xviii] Penland Weavers and Potters, “Weaving Institute, 1935.”

[xix] “About Us-Southern Highland Craft Guild,” Southern Highland Craft Guild, 2024.

[xx] Allen H. Eaton, “The Handicrafts of the Southern Highlands,” in A catalogue of mountain handicraft by the members of the Southern Highland Handicraft Guild (Washington, D.C.: American Federation of Arts, 1932), 9.

[xxi] Allen H. Eaton, “The Handicrafts of the Southern Highlands,” 8-9.

[xxii] Anna M. Fariello,“The People: Frances Goodrich,” In Craft Revival: Shaping Western North Carolina Past and Present, (Hunter Library Digital Initiatives, 2006).

[xxiii] Frances Louisa Goodrich, “Allanstand Cottage Industries,” Frances L. Goodrich Collection (1901/1902), 5.

[xxiv] Katherine Caldwell, “From Mountain Hands: The Story of Allanstand Craft Shop’s First 100 Years.” In Craft Revival: Shaping Western North Carolina Past and Present, (Hunter Library Digital Initiatives, 2008).

[xxv] Frances Louisa Goodrich, “Allanstand Cottage Industries,” Frances L. Goodrich Collection (1901/1902), 5.

[xxvi] “Allanstand Cottage Industries financial report, 1926,” Southern Appalachian Digital Collections.

[xxvii] “Mountaineers Again Take up Weaving Work,” Statesville Daily Record, February 26, 1937.

[xxviii] Allen H. Eaton, “The Handicrafts of the Southern Highlands,”10.

[xxix] Allen H. Eaton, “The Handicrafts of the Southern Highlands,”10.

[xxx] Paul Pleasants, “Do you know about the cow blankets? John Hall’s mad mules? Hardy Davidson’s ducks? Stuart Nye’s silver? And Roby Buchanan’s native gems?,” The State, May 22 1954.

[xxxi] Paul Pleasants, “Do you know about the cow blankets? John Hall’s mad mules? Hardy Davidson’s ducks? Stuart Nye’s silver? And Roby Buchanan’s native gems?”

[xxxii] Emile Bernat & Sons Co., “Bernat Looms and Loom Accessories,” Clementine Douglas Papers, 1925/1939, Southern Appalachian Digital Collections.