Experimental Archaeology

[ShadyGroveAG]

Who's done it? Where? Whatcha know?

I started to help construct a mound once but didn't follow through when I found out we weren't using period appropriate tools and would instead be haulin' dirt around with steel wheelbarrows and such.

My atlatls have always sucked and I can never get the hang of throwin' 'em the right way.

[Nick Setten]

I haven't done any experimental archaeology, but boy oh boy do i want to. Does anybody out there have any experience in this field? As ShadyGrove said "Who's Done it? Where?"

[Alan Kirkland]

I've done some. Worked with both historical recreation groups (the ones at state parks and the like, not so much the fringe groups) and in the classroom. Built a dug-out boat at Fort Toulouse-Jackson in Alabama a few years ago, we used period tools and burning to hollow it out, shape the exterior, and then launched it in the Coosa River. Done some ceramic replication, learned to flint-knap, that sort of thing. Have done some extensive research on the practical side with metallurgy, both smelting and forging.

My atlatl's used to suck. Then persistence paid off and I can make 'em pretty good now.

[ShadyGroveAG]

Ah, so patience's the thing?

[Kirst]

I did a little experimental archaeology! lol, not sure it counts tho...i made a flint necklace, with some wood from the cherry blossom in our back garden, and i used the flint to cut a gap init for the flint to sit in, but my folks drew the line at letting me use sinew, so i had to use some soldering wire, but it works. lol
Does that count as experimental archaeology?

I also helped to build a miniture round house on one of the local sites, we used wood form some of the local tress that had been cut down, and mixed the clay and horsehair n stuff ourselves, but we had to get a professional in to do the thatching, i did it with college, so im guessing that one does count! lol

Experimental archaeology is so much fun!

[Alan Kirkland]

One of my current experiments is working on a pole-and-cane structure which follows the general pattern of ones I've excavated for years. Of course, when one looks at post hole patterns, there is never any idea of what the superstructure might have looked like. You guess, you speculate, all the while scooping dark mould out of the post hole, but it's hard to really have a feel for what prehistoric people might have actually done.

So far, it has turned out better than I could have hoped. The photo is from the early stages o construction. It looks much better now, and is starting to have its compliment of working surfaces put in. I guess the upshot is that doing little projects like these make one think. One of the most human endeavours is the problem-solving process, and since the creation of technologies is what we do, that's the cool part of experimenting in archaeology. It's not the tools you use, or the "mood setting" you work in, it's the implementation of ingenuity to problems. Experimental archaeology used to be called ethnoarchaeology long ago, before the SAA and AAA crowd decided to dramatize it.

Working on any kind of handy-craft project that invokes the problem-solving process is in its own way experimental archaeology. Our most ancient ancestors encountered the same problems we do today; how the devil do we feed, clothe, and shelter ourselves from want? Observation is the first step, using an eye for terrain and materials to forsee potential use. The three basic elements prehistoric people looked for were water (most important), timber, and game. If all three were present, then it had the potential to be a good place to live. If something desired were not available then the question was "How do I get it?", the answer to which sometimes took individuals on journeys of hundreds of miles and days of travel to get "it", whatever "it" happened to be. We see all kinds of evidence of this in the exotic (meaning went to great lengths and trouble to obtain "it") materials used for artifacts, and especially features. Like the megalithic structures in Europe, for example. I had to travel for some distance to obtain the river cane used in a lot of this structure, but it was less important traveling to get it than doing without it. Same kind of thought process ancient people went through.

As for 'period appropriate' tools, sometimes I am glad I don't use them. Cutting down a tree and trimming it out with a flint or chert axe is a lot more work than using a metal axe, let me tell you. But for all that there is a certain satisfaction to having someone visit your residence and see your project in the back yard and exclaim over it. Gardens and structures are two of the most important features that any archaeologist can work with, because in doing so one gains a degree of insight into just how labor-intensive much of prehistoric life really was, although it was spread out over more time than our contemporary culture(s) would consider efficient.

Any body else making stuff?

[Grace Stuart]

havent done any yet, but really interested...apparently a guy that done our course in college built a full size viking house (type 2 i think?) in his back garden for his 4th year thesis project!! pretty awsome!!!also maybe google billy Quinn the great beer brewing experiment... he gave a lecture at my college. basically did experiments in sites called fulacht fiadh; previously thought to be cooking sites...mostly bronze age...and brewed beer in them..was very interesting and apparently the beer tasted pretty good too!!! this is all irish archaeological context!!!