Blog 2025

Week 1

It's great to be back teaching Experimental Archaeology! We have a large class this year -- 16 students -- and it's looking good so far in terms of student engagement and classroom community. We made some changes to the format of the course to help with scheduling and fit with new general education requirements. In practical terms, this means we have had to say farewell to the 3-hour Friday afternoon labs and fit our work within a regular 2x a week schedule. We've taken a few things out of the lineup, but we've been able to retain most of the more engaging hands-on exercises. It also helps that we now have a public historian in the department, Dr. Richard Anderson, and he is covering some of the public history material that used to be our responsibility.

After our introduction/orientation class, Dr Paxton and I shared a lecture in which we outlined the ways in which both history and archaeology as academic disciplines have evolved over the past 120-odd years. Whereas historians of the late nineteenth- and early-twentieth centuries focused on political history, with a belief in their own objectivity, archaeologists adopted a "cultural-historical" approach that sought to classify and categorize phases of the past based on their archaeological remains. The mid-twentieth century, in both disciplines, saw an emphasis on structures. In history, the contributions of the Annales school and the Marxists merged into an emphasis on history as a "Social Science" and incorporation of databases (sometimes called "Cliometrics"). Meanwhile, processualism was the focus in archaeology, with a similar insistence on structures, cultural processes, and general laws. We read Peter Reynold's possibly infamous article, "The nature of experiment in archaeology," and some students clearly found it too rigid for their liking. It makes sense, though, in the context of a processualist framework in which a new field, experimental archaeology, was seeking legitimacy. Finally, we discussed similarities between the so-called "new" history and post-processual archaeology, both risking fractures in the big narratives while finding more space for agency and multiple interpretations. The Reynolds reading, along with part of Stephen Saraydar's textbook, set us up to begin assessing experiments next week. And now that this background is out of the way, we'll be turning it over to the students, with more discussion-based classes and student-authored blog entries.

Submitted by Sandy B

Week 2

Types of Experiments and their Findings

In our second week of Experimental Archeology, our class returned to the works of Stephen Saraydar and looked more closely at the different types of experiments one can conduct within the field of experimental archeology, as well as their outcomes. Toward the beginning of class, Dr. Bardsley discussed a sign she once saw in a library that read, “Thank you for not doing research that has already been done.” I found this to be an excellent way to start off our discussion for the day, considering it laid a terrific foundation for establishing the first of Saraydar’s criteria for a good experiment. It allowed us to keep in mind the core tenet of research and discovery, which is to not only memorize the works of others but to expound on those topics with new information of our own. I especially appreciated this quote when looking back through my notes from the readings, and seeing exactly where Saraydar employs this idea firsthand. When commenting on the experiments, Saraydar also discussed areas of improvement or constructive feedback. I also found this to be an interesting parallel to our week 1 reading, in which we discussed Saraydar and Reynolds’s approaches to experimental archeological research. While Reynolds presents the field as one with little room for error or interpretation, Saraydar allows for more wiggle room, so to speak. These earlier readings lay a better groundwork for examining this week’s reading of Saraydar, in my opinion.

Then we examined how one can build on the work of others to successfully determine historical hypotheses, as well as how to apply a metric for the strengths and weaknesses of a specific experiment. For example, the class discussed methods of ancient Egyptian mummification, starting with Leek’s sheep experiment. The general consensus of the class was in agreement with Saraydar, which is to say that while the experiment was a fascinating attempt at brain removal via an incision through the brain, Leek failed to effectively replicate the original task due to his modernized approach. Once the class had successfully run through a few of the other named experiments within Saraydar’s text, Drs. Paxton and Bardsley set us loose on applying Saraydar’s criteria ourselves. By working in small groups, we each discussed amongst our small groups how effective each case study was, and then assigned it a grade. My group discussed Shea & Klenck’s on trampling and edge wear case study, which was given a B (although a case could have been made for a B+ or an A-). As the class discussed their respective case studies, we defended our grade assignment and worked through ways the experiments could be improved. I found this to be remarkably helpful when it came to fully understanding the material.

Submitted by Mary W

Flintknapping Obsidian & Making Indigenous Points

Week 3, Jan 29th

After a few classes' worth of study on flintknapping and Clovis points, today we finally tried our hands at reducing obsidian chunks to flakes. In our hour of smacking stones with minimal bloodshed, we learned multiple techniques (such as how to grind down the rocks, stone anatomy, and proper striking methods on rock platforms) and how to use various tools to carry them out. We ended up with a lot of shards to turn into things such as arrowheads, spear points, and so on. My friend kept making mini axes.

The experience was enjoyed by many, despite aforementioned minimal bloodshed, and arguably I'd wager that made it more memorable. Multiple students kept some of the prettiest pieces of leftover obsidian to take home as momentous trinkets for their first time flintknapping.

G. Piazza

Making Tools from Bones

Week 5, February 10th & 12th

On Monday February 10th, we talked about how people in the past used bones in different ways. We read three articles that showed us how bones were used for cutting, chopping, and even burning. One article explained how bones were shaped into tools for cutting, showing that some bone knives could be just as sharp as stone ones. Another article talked about making bones into chopping tools, describing how thick bones like femurs were used to break open other bones for marrow or to cut wood. The third article, written by Jensen, studied burned bones and how different elements, like Ba, Ca, Al, Mn, Fe, Hg, and Pb, move between the soil and bone over time. The study only tested six burned bones from the same pig, so the results were not very expansive, but it still showed that certain elements like aluminum and iron could go into burned bones through the soil, while other ones like calcium stayed the same even after 20 some years. The study said that a larger experiment with more pigs and different bury sites could provide better info. In class we compared these articles to Reynolds’ eight rules for experiments. We gave Jensen’s study a B+ because it used the right materials, but it didn’t repeat the experiment much and didn’t stay within the right limits. We also talked about what counts as real experimental archaeology and should experiments only use old methods, or is it okay to use modern tools to help us with these experiments?

On Wednesday, we got to work with real bones. Some students had scapula bones, while others had long bones like the radius, ulna, tibia, or fibula. We used tools like files, drills, hammers, and axes to shape the bones into different objects. Some students made flutes, knives, jewelry, arrowheads, and even a slingshot. It was really cool to see how creative people got with their bones. But we talked about how ancient people didn’t have the same tools we do. Instead of drills or hammers they had to use stone tools and other materials. This made me think about how much harder it must have been for them to create tools. Even though we made useful objects, the way we did it was very different from how people in the past would have done it.

Submitted by: Joseph P

Cave Painting

Week 6, February 17 & 19

Monday's class focused on the three readings we had on cave paintings. These readings were intended to prepare us for Wednesday's lab and making our own paint. Our discussion consisted of the process of making the paint, substances used, and the different methods there were to paint such as spitting, brushes, or finger painting. We learned the three main steps to making the paint: pigment, binder, and an extender. The pigment would be the ground colorant material, the binder could be bone marrow (egg yolk or whites in our case as it was the most accessible), and the extender could be yucca (water or soap served as substitutes in our case). Our ultimate question was why people have cave painted. While cave paintings may have taken an extreme amount of skill and sacrifice of resources, it seems that these paintings had been a way of ritual and manifesting.

On Wednesday's class, we worked with the ingredients pigments, eggs, soap, and water to create our mixture for paint. To enhance our experience, we worked in the dark and secluded space of the Comenius basement where many students worked on a variety of paintings—some with manifestation in mind.

Submitted by: Karen M.

Reviewing Project Proposals

Monday, Feb 24 -- Project Planning I – literature review and presentation of proposals

This week on Monday, we discussed people’s project proposals. We started by writing notes, questions, and suggestions about each project. We used certain methods to look at the other student's proposals and question it; the word was SMART: Specific question, Measurable results, Anachronisms appropriate, Realistic resource, and Time-appropriate.

Christine and Jack's experiments are about using hot rocks to cook complex foods. The professors suggested the use of turkey instead of chicken (as they iniitally proposed) due to it being available in America in the past. Andrew's is recreating blades using different materials and testing which materials was best at cutting whic. The main suggestion was reducing the number of blades because the wood seemed not very efficient, and it is hard to work with copper, and the main question about his experiment was what is measurable in his results in his experiment. Jaden and Emma are recreating a famous cave painting from Lascaux (bison and horse). One of the concerns was the skill difference in painting, and how much this mattered. Joseph and Jeremy's project is about remaking a dish; the purpose is to make a realistic version of a dish based on historical description. They, too, are still working out the question of how the results are going to be measured. Giara's project is recreating Victorian toiletries; her main question is how the soap and cold cream will be tested. Giara suggested that the product be used to remove makeup or dirt.

The class was very helpful in different ways: people were interested in giving their opinions to other students to make their projects a better fit for experimental archeology and clear some things up in the proposals that may have been unclear or misleading. This class was a good lesson to understand how people have different views on certain experiments, and how working with others can lead to better results and more appropriate anachronisms.

-Andreh

Wed. Feb. 26 - Project Planning II – literature review and presentation of proposals

This week on Wednesday, we explored each other's experimental archaeology project proposals, each testing ancient tools and materials. Chris, Mark, and Zach are comparing wood, bone, and stone tools for tasks like cutting meat and piercing leather. They’ll measure how long tasks take, tool wear, and how hard the tools are to make. Some wondered if cloth was an appropriate substitute for leather, as they had suggested in their proposal. Class brainstorming provided the idea to source leather from thrift stores in the form of belts or handbags.

Andreh is recreating ancient painting techniques using natural pigments like ochre and charcoal, testing binders such as egg whites and animal glue. While his controlled indoor setup helps with consistency, some thought using modern brushes might affect results. Jaden and Emma, who are also working with ancient paints, may be able to share ideas.

Annette is testing ancient tattooing tools, recreating a bone awl used by the Iroquois and a thorn-and-bamboo tool. They planned to use pigskin and orange peel instead of human skin, testing how well the tools work and how they wear down. Some students questioned how pig skin may be difficult to come by and Annette mentioned the potential to use silicone instead.

Karen’s project focuses on making beaded jewelry from dried flowers like roses and marigolds without chemicals or resins. Some wondered if modern tools like eye pins would change the process. There also seemed to be a need to find the question being answered by this project.

This class provided crucial discussion with helpful input going forward. Across all projects, we discussed the challenge of balancing historical accuracy with practical limits and expected adjustments as the experiments continue. We also emphasized the need to shape the projects around potential knowledge about the past rather than knowledge about the present.

-Andrew D

Experimental Archaeology as Heritage

Week 9

Monday the 10th was the first day back after spring break, and there is no more fitting way to welcome students back than with a midterm. This test encompassed all of what we as a class learned to this point. We looked back on our readings, discussions, and experiments to successfully demonstrate our comprehension of experimental archeology. Of course, the medium in which this was done was two essay questions. One had us assess an experiment using Reynolds' typology. We gave the experiment a letter grade and then evaluated it using Saraydar’s eight criteria of a good experiment, while relating it to previous readings and experiments. Having done this a number of times in class. It was a familiar task for me and my peers. The second question had us not only define experimental archaeology but also defend our personal definition with the use of class discussion and readings. Morale seemed somewhat mixed but overall everyone came out pretty unscathed.

Unfortunately, with the previous class being taken up by the midterm, there was no time to introduce an experiment for Wednesday. This was not at all to insinuate nothing was explored. "Experimental Archaeology Within the Heritage Industry" by M. E. Crothers and "Linking Experimental Archaeology and Living History in the Heritage Industry," by Carolyn Forrest were great jumping off points for class discussions. These articles expand on a common theme, the reconstructions of sites and the role open air museums play in experimental archeology. We did this by looking at the differences between sites like the West Stow (shown), the Experimental Centre in Lejre, Butser Ancient Farm, England, and the Crannog Centre, Scotland. We compared aspects such as the time period(s) portrayed, whether it did living history, was more experimental or experiential, and whether there were signs and tours to inform visitors. These differences allow us to assess the pros and cons of different interpretive choices more easily. We also discussed the meaning of “heritage,” as these sites are often referred to as heritage sites and our own school hosts a Heritage Day. Heritage is a fraught term that can and has been used to bolster claims that some groups are superior to others. Class opinion seemed iffy about the use of heritage, since Moravian University is not part of what we consider our personal heritage. I might even describe it as a type of assimilation with a morally grey motive of promoting school spirit.

Submitted by: Annette D.

Ceramics

Week 10

This week, the main area of focus in class was ceramics, and in the lab we made clay pots. We learned about the process of producing ceramics that could be fired in a kiln. Then we discussed the concept Chaine Opératoire, which describes the materials and techniques that go into the process of making a product. To exemplify this concept, we looked at multiple ways of make an Andean drink, Chicha, which at some stages can also be used as furniture polish. In class, we applied the Chaine Opératoire to making ceramics. The Chaine Opératoire includes the steps of clay extraction, purification, tempering, kneading, shaping the clay by making pinch pots or using a wheel, surface treatment, drying clay, slip/glazing/smudging, firing the clay, and then deposition as sherds. Ceramics are important in helping archeologists interpret things from the past such as use, material, cultural values, societal structure, and ceramic style evolution over time periods.

After learning about the process and art of pottery, we created ceramics in class. We were given clay and then got the air bubbles out. Next, we each shaped our clay into whatever we wanted. Students made things such as pots, heart and star shaped containers, and bowls. There was trial and error involved to get the clay into the shape we wanted, but everyone had fun creating a ceramic masterpiece. We implemented techniques we read about such as using clay coils moistened with water to build up the bowls. Some people also made pinch pots to start, which we learned about in our readings this week. Once we made our clay masterpiece, we then let them dry.

Submitted by: Emma P.

Cordage Making and Yarn

Week 11

This week in class, we learned about cordage making and its significance in both ancient and modern societies. We read about the process of making cordage, whether that be for basketry, textiles, or other everyday tools, and discussed how it is one of the many ways to understand prehistoric life. We explored how archaeologists use experimental archaeology to understand the techniques and materials used in crafting cords and yarn, especially since organic materials like plant fibers often do not survive in the archaeological record. Our reading for class on Monday highlighted the importance of wear traces on tools, physical impressions left in more durable materials, like pottery, and skeuomorphs. Each of these, along with thinking through the chaine operatoire, reveal how we can infer a "missing majority" of organic material culture from the past through the inorganic remains.

In our lab, we got the chance to try out cordage making for ourselves! Dr. Bardsley explained each fiber in detail before we began our experiment, which consisted of banana fibers, alpaca wool, sheep wool, cotton, felt, and many others, allowing us to create our own pieces of cordage. Additionally, we watched a helpful YouTube tutorial where we learned how to twist and shape the fiber cords correctly. There was some trial and error, but like many of these labs, it's okay to fail and try, try again!

Submitted by Jack D.

Dyeing Fabrics Lecture

Week 12

In this week of class we covered two articles that discussed dyeing of fabrics and how pigments were created. These articles gave us a glimpse into how two different societies -- Mayan and Iron Age European -- used pigments. Together, they reinforce the idea that pre-modern societies possessed sophisticated craft traditions that we are only beginning to fully understand. During our class discussion, we decided that the article by Hartl et al on reconstructing dyed fabric bands would have been a "probability trial" type of experiment according to Reynolds's Typology of experiments. The article provided a lot of information based on how the experiment was done, what materials were used, and possible reasons these materials and dyes may have looked 2000 plus years ago. Overall Harti's article was the best we have read, and we gave it an "A" grade.

In preparation for dyeing on Wednesday, Dr. Bardsley gave a run down on what we will be doing. She showed us examples of fabrics that have been dyed with indigo and treated with walnut powder. Once we have dyed our fabrics, we are able to take them home! She then gave us a history of dyeing, mentioning that modern dyes come from chemical processes derived in 19th-century Germany, which is remarkably recent in comparison with millennia of humans dyeing fabrics. In the past, plants and insects were used based on location; some places had more biodiversity, leading to more options in dye colors. It was more likely that those in tropical locations, such as Central America, Mayans had access to dye colors and chemicals enabling "Mayan Blue." Premodern Europeans did not have this and needed to import this color from Afghanistan to be used in paint pigments. They did, however, have woad, a relation of indigo. Purple, red, yellow, and blue dyes will be used for Wednesday.

Submitted by Mark

Dyeing Fabrics Lab

Christine Colvin

What We Did

After discussing the articles in class to better understand prehistoric dyeing techniques, especially the colorful woven bands from the Iron Age Hallstatt salt mines in Austria, we got to explore some of these dyes ourselves. We dyed different articles like beanies, scarves, and scrunchies using indigo for blue shades (which at first came out green, but oxidized into a true blue!), weld and osage orange for yellow, and cochineal for red. For purple, we had two options: a combination of dyes was used, layering red and blue tones, or logwood purple. We were able to choose our items and either dip-dye them for an ombré effect or fully submerge them into the pots of dye. Afterward, the fabrics were air-dried and taken home. This hands-on activity connected directly to what we learned from the Hallstatt textiles, where ancient people used natural dyes like woad, weld, and scentless chamomile to create vibrant colors long before synthetic dyes were invented.

Reflection

In the following class, some students noticed interesting differences in how their fabrics turned out depending on how long they let the items sit in the bags after dyeing, how much dye was absorbed, and whether they washed them afterward or left the dye to continue developing. This highlighted how ancient dyers had to master not just the choice of materials but also timing, environmental factors, and patience to achieve consistent results. Our experience mirrored the challenges prehistoric dyers would have faced in controlling unpredictable natural processes without modern tools. Learning about historical dyeing practices made me realize how much knowledge and skill went into what might seem like a simple task. Prehistoric and early historic dyers had to carefully control chemical reactions like fermentation and oxidation, relying entirely on practical experimentation and careful observation. It also became clear that colors carried social meaning: access to rare dyes like purple or deep blue often signaled wealth and trade connections (like the Mayans for their famous Mayan blue!). Preparing and dyeing our own fabrics helped bring these ideas to life, making the distant world of prehistoric textiles feel much more immediate, hands-on, and personal.

Experimental Archaeology as Infotainment

Week 13

This week in class, we watched part of an episode of "The Great Human Race," as well as reading a review of it by Roeland Pardekooper. In this episode, they had to find a way to survive when placed in an area where premodern humans lived and had to survive only with the tools that humans of that era would have had. The show is an experiment to find how early humans lived in each chapter of our history and find what is possible. This episode took place in the Arabian Peninsula, representing homo sapiens from around 70,000 years ago.

In our discussion after watching the video, we discussed how it was not perfect experimental archaeology because the participants, Cat and Bill, were inevitably protected from life or death situations by the presence of a camera operator and crew. Some of the inaccuracies the class noticed were their skin and eye color, which was different from that of people from that area and time. Because Cat and Bill had lighter skin and light-sensitive eyes, they found the conditions of the desert especially tough. We also noted that the show may have exaggerated some finds, like that of camel bones they came across. We were impressed that Cat and Bill trusted each other in the show and really listened to each other, which makes the program different than other survival shows which often play up drama between individuals.

We also discussed the reading and video of Guedelon castle. This was a bit different as the Guedelon builders went in to see what would work and what wouldn't work, so this is actually similar to our projects. We are also finding different things that may or may not have worked in the past. They used techniques from the past to build the castle. In the next couple of weeks, we will read another article on Bill Schindler and his philosophy.

In class we also went over our upcoming project presentations.

Submitted by Jaden

Atlatls and Bows and Arrows
Week 13 continued

The Lab:

This week in Experimental Archaeology we had the opportunity to use throwing spears, atlatls, and bow and arrows. The purpose of this lab was to gain an understanding as to why some tools are better suited for certain types of hunting compared to others. We also were trying to understand how technology changes over time, and why people prefer certain tools over others. The lab took place on the lawn in front of Comenius Hall. We set up a target and a fake deer as a target for our lab. This lab was done in a series of waves. The first wave consisted of just throwing spears at the targets. After a bit of throwing the spears, we advanced to the second phase. In this phase Dr. Paxton demonstrated how to use atlatls and proper technique for throwing and equipping the spears to them. We were able to determine that this was much more efficient compared to just regular throwing spears. We then moved onto the final phase which was using bows and arrows. Some of the arrows had been tipped with stone and bone points that had previously been made by other classes. We then would soon learn that for many of us, this was the most effective method, as we had a better chance at hitting the targets.

Reflections:

Throughout this lab, we were able to see why it is theorized that atlatls were created, and why they were more effective compared to just regular throwing spears. They gave more power to the spear, and had a higher accuracy. Similar improvements were noticed when using the bow and arrow, as it had more power than atlatls and was also the most accurate of the three. Arrows might have been best suited to small prey, but they would have been more of a challenge for large targets like buffalo or deer. We saw a version of this earlier in the week in the episode we watched of “The Great Human Race”: Cat and Bill found that the stone points they employed when hunting mammals were of little use when foraging for scorpions, and they needed smaller tools. This lab helped us understand adjustments that people make over time when new technology is developed. It also gave the class much respect for paleolithic people, as using these was very difficult for first timers. In this lab, our targets were not moving, but paleolithic people would have had to hit moving targets; a feat that seemed impossible to most of us. This lab helped us understand the more experiential portion of experimental archaeology, as the use of these tools provided us valuable insights of the daily lives of past peoples.

Submitted by Zach

WEEK 15: EXPERIMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY AND CRAFT PRACTICE AS VIRTUE

Readings: The readings assigned for the final week of class were the following:

Alexander Langlands, Cræft: An Inquiry into the Origins and True Meanings of Traditional Crafts, ch. 1: Defining Cræft.

Download Cræft: An Inquiry into the Origins and True Meanings of Traditional Crafts, ch. 1: Defining Cræft.

Schiffman, R. 2017. Professor Caveman: Why Bill Schindler is teaching college students to live like early humans

Links to an external site.

. The Atlantic.

Peterssen, B. and Narmo, L. E. 2011. A journey in time.

Download A journey in time.

In Experimental Archaeology - Between Enlightenment and Experience (eds. B. Peterssen and L. E. Narmo). Lund: Lunds universitet, 27-48.

The first article explores the concept of "craeft" which is an old english word for skill, craftsmanship, and knowledge. The reading dives into the idea of how rooted these concepts are in ancient history and how they are passed down through the generations. The main argument is how society today has forgotten these concepts and how we are losing our cultural connection to ancient practices.
The second article is relating to ancient survival techniques where Professor Richard Schiffman reconnects his students with practical skills and experience in human history. Again the theme of society's detachment from ancient practices is vwery evident, as he dives into basic survival practices. The main idea of this reading is to show how ancient survival practices and the focus on understanding has been lost, and we should gravitate towards these concepts again to gain a more profound understanding of our environment and people as a whole.
The third article critiques the technological and hypothetical methodologies that are beginning to prevail in experimental archaeology. They hope to find a more tehcnical and emotional understanding of the past as they advocate for these methods to be utilized by using anarchronisms and the human body. They urge universities and mueseums to push their establishments toward this vision to enhance the understanding of these practices.

Report abuse