Today it's time for me to rejoice - my article about the Spinning Experiment (yes, that one back from 2009) has been published in Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. Here's the link.

It's not open access, since that requires the author (yes, the author) to pay a stupid amount of money which I can't afford (and even if I did, I would not since I am a strong believer in the Rule, or Yog's Law). I'd much prefer if it were free, or open access, or offered at an affordable price - but as things are, I am very happy to have the article out there, and published in a journal where it will be seen (and hopefully read) by a lot of people.

(If you would like to read the article, you may have access to it from a library computer if the library subscribes to the journal.)

Let's say you are thinking about running, or you are planning, an Archaeological Experiment. You have started with defining and phrasing your key question*, and you have done all the background research. Your outline is written and has been checked by someone else to help make sure that nothing is missing. You have made a list of the tools, materials, and other resources that you will need.

And now the actual experiment is drawing nearer and you have to prepare it. And do it. So here are the Rules for Experimental Archaeology...

Rule #1: Things always take longer than you expect.
This does not only apply to researching and writing the outline, but also to sourcing your tools and materials. And, of course, to the experiment run itself. Oh, did I forget the post-experiment analysis, synopsis, additional research and writing of the publication? That, too.
 
Rule #2: Something that you need is always missing.
If nothing is missing from the list you have written down beforehand, you will probably need something that was not on that list. Or you would have needed it twice and it's only available once. Or something is not working and therefore missing in regard to all practical purposes.

Rule #3: The only way to make sure things will not go wrong badly is by having enough surplus material available.
If you have just enough to make the experiment run... you are tempting fate. If something goes wrong and you lose some material, you will be right back at Rule #2, and in the worst case that will kill your whole experiment run.

Rule #4: You cannot document too much.
While having a huge load of photos and taking copious notes of everything (including subjective stuff) can be a real pain in the neck when finishing up the documentation and writing the paper, it's always easier to pick a sample of photos than do another run of the experiment because you lack documentation. Plus, in case of a repeat performance, one of those additional snapshots might be just the thing to remind you on how you did it last time... for example in case something is missing (remember?), and you have to find a substitute.

Rule #5: If you did not write it into your plan, chances are high you'll forget it.
Experiments tend to eat you alive, and they will suck up your brain capacity. It's even worse if you start the experiment run not really well rested (possibly due to Rule #1), or if it's a very long experiment (or becomes one because things take longer than planned), or a very complicated one. Thus it's immensely helpful to have a cheat-sheet, also known as The Plan, where you have written down all the single steps to do during the actual run, in order and with remarks of what you must document by taking measurements or photographs. A detailed plan is also a good way to make sure that everything is listed in your requirements list and a good way to estimate how long the single steps will take.

So... plan ahead, plan for more time and more material than you think you need, get someone (preferably with crafts knowledge in that area) or several someones to check your plan... and then go for it. Experimental Archaeology is a lovely thing to work in.


* If it has no key question that it's designed around, if it's not as objective as possible, or if it is not documented well enough to be repeatable, it's no archaeological experiment. It may be something else and it may be important or helpful... but no true experimental archaeology.

I have a hard time believing how time flies by - it seems just like yesterday that we left for our paddling holiday, and now it's weeks later and the Forum is almost upon us.

Time to take care of the last bits and pieces, which include the last bits of fine-tuning for the experiment that we have planned for this year. It's about Late Antique resist-dyed textiles... and among the things left to do is making a template for the application of the resist pastes we are planning to use. The materials, though, have not all arrived yet, a package seems to have gone astray. Which again proves Rule #1 for Experimental Archaeology: Things always take longer than you expect.*

That, and going through the whole thing together with Sabine who will take care of the actual dyeing process. We will dye using indigo - I'm really looking forward to that, I always love when fabric suddenly becomes blue!


* Rule #2, by the way, is Something that you need is always missing. Maybe I should do a whole post about the Rules...

One of the things I love about archaeology, and especially experimental archaeology, is how it keeps you on your toes and gets you to suddenly learn stuff about things you never tended to think about before.

As in - did you know that beeswax actually starts to melt at around 40°C, not the 60+ that are usually stated as its melting point? And that the temperature depends not only on the species of the bees and maybe their location, but also on who made the wax and how old it is? I learned about that yesterday. I was not as successful in finding out the melting point of natural pinus pinea resin, though (if you should have a helpful hint, I'd love to have it).

Today, I am trying to find out about the temperatures used in traditional batik techniques. Looks like they dye above the onset of melting of beeswax... and tomorrow, if everything goes according to plan, I will finish the thinking and planning and write down a plan to follow for the actual testing. There's a few sticky points still to solve - how to get the mixture out of the cloth again, how to make sure that everything is dyed at the same temperature but with no bad side effects from stuff touching, how to ensure an uniform temperature for the mixture application, and some more pesky details like that.

And now... on to more hunting of .pdfs, and finding out about melting points and possible sources and temperatures and processes. 

(For those of you who have not guessed it yet: It's all about the resist dye technique test runs at the Textile Forum.)

As you might know, the Textile Forum is a very experiment-friendly place. Last year, we had a little dyeing experiment looking at the influences of different metal kettles (simulated by metal plates in neutral pots) on dyeing, inspired by the question why the Romans in Pompeii had lead dye vats. (You can see pictures of the experiment, the dyed samples, and a poster of the preliminary results on the Forum's archive page, here.)

The experiment is now getting an add-on - a second test run, only with birch leaves as dye (due to time restrictions), but with the metal additions split between the mordanting only and the dyeing only. If all goes according to plan, it will be possible to see if there is more influence from the metal in the mordanting process or the dyeing process.

I have been preparing for this quite a bit already - the alum is ordered, the 80 m skeins are wound and tied off so they won't go knotty, and today will see my finishing off the outline and experiment plan. It takes a while to go through all this and type out, bit by bit and step for step, what is to do. But yay for a detailed plan like that - it's so helpful to have a sheet with the single steps all written out, and tables to put the measured values. Also helps a lot in making sure you don't forget to take a measurement, or a photograph.

And week after next will see the actual run of the experiment. I'm really looking forward to this!

Remember that I said food is a tricky thing for archaeologists? It has gotten even tricker very recently, since a group of archaeologists discovered, per experiment, that cooking fish can screw up radiocarbon dating. (They write about dating pots in the article; technically it's dating the organic residue trapped in the pot that is dated.) The article has links for more info in Danish.

Speaking of cooking: Daniel Serra and Hanna Tunberg are working on publishing their collaborate research about Viking food and cooking in a book, called "An early meal". There is an info page on facebook (you do not need to have an account for that) if you want to read more.

And now... coffee.