Experimental archaeology and ships-bridging the arts and the sciences

Abstract

Marsden, 1993) has been centred primarily on problems of terminology in dealing with the various vessels built with the aim of broadening our knowledge of the maritime past. The Editor recently provided a suggestion for a standard for the nomenclature (Fenwick, 1993), and this may help to clarify some of the problems, even if several questions remain to be settled-such as what to call a vessel the hull of which is a 'replica' and the rig a 'reconstruction' in her definition. But terminology is not the only problem.Quite evidently there is a strong need for proper scholarly standards for the maritime branch of archaeology, consciously formulated to encompass the full range of research potentials. As regards the ships of the past these hold great potential for the study of several branches of cultural history, related on the one hand to their reflection of general aspects of society such as technology, communications, trade, warfare, fishing, settlement and even cults, and on the other hand to the individual history of the ship as far as this can be traced. I n order to be able to exploit the full potential of a ship find a multidisciplinary approach is needed, as well as a wide range of practical skills. To do so archaeologists have to supplement their own professional background with that of historians, wood specialists, environmentalists, naval architects, boatbuilders and sailors-not to mention the knowledge needed for the utilization of wood and iron in accordance with proper ancient standards, for the manufacture of ropes and sail in unfamiliar 1057-2414/95/040303+04 $12.0010 materials, non-instrumental navigation and weather-forecasting, as well as other skills.Few, if any, maritime archaeologists have a sufficiently broad base of knowledge and skills to cover this full range of capacities. Consequently a range of specialists must co-operate, under the responsibility of the excavator/ investigator, in the analysis and publication of a ship find. Methodology provides us with several means by which we can achieve results that are informative and relevant, and which at best can provide new insights into the cultural context of which the find is a part.One of these means is Experimental Archaeology. It provides the investigator of a ship find with an excellent opportunity to test the quality of the archaeological record and the relevancc of the documentation in general against thc challenge of creating a new vessel that will: ( I ) match the structural lay-out and the shape as well as the materials and techniques of the original in all its preserved parts; (2) have its missing parts recreated following the construction principles and lines of the preserved parts, possibly supplemented by evidence from other finds, iconography and other sources of information; and (3) function as a seaworthy vessel in the correct setting and with a crew capable of handling this particular type of craft.In carrying out such a project to a sober scholarly standard the investigator, as well as others involved in the experiment, ca...

Sailing Rock Art Boats

“…Experimental archaeology with regard to ancient seafaring and its relevance has been matter of much discussion in the past (Coates et al 1995;Crumlin-Pedersen 1995Crumlin-Pedersen and McGrail 2006;Edberg 1995;Goodburn 1993;McGrail 1992McGrail , 2006Weski 2006;Westerdahl 1996). Although such discussions have generally focused on the authenticity of reconstructions of excavated boat finds, a comprehensive paper on principles and methods of experimental boat archaeology by Coates et al (1995:294) argues that if the aim of a project is limited to certain aspects of performance of a boat, a suitably ballasted plastic hull of the authentic shape would do for carrying out tests.…”

Morgawr: an experimental Bronze Age-type sewn-plank craft based on the Ferriby boats

“…The aim of the experiment was to construct a full‐scale sewn‐plank boat using materials and tools available to Bronze Age boatbuilders, in an experimental project as defined by Ole Crumlin‐Pedersen (). Probably the most experienced experimental maritime archaeologist of recent decades, Crumlin‐Pedersen (1995; 2006b: 3) recognized that experimental projects have to bridge the gap between natural sciences and the arts. In this, he explicitly rejected an exclusively quantitative or ‘scientific’ approach, modelled on the positivism of the natural sciences, and advocated by John Coates and colleagues (Coates et al ., ).…”

“…Crumlin‐Pedersen (: 304) defined five characteristics of such a project which were adhered to, as far as was feasible, in the construction of Morgawr: 1) an archaeological base in substantial remains of an ancient vessel, documented to a rigorous standard; 2) a research strategy for the analysis of the potentials of the find; 3) a group of craftsmen and sailors with relevant skills; 4) documentation of the aims and the outcome of the experimental activity; 5) publication in relevant contexts and media.…”

“…One aim of the project was to test the feasibility of constructing a sewn‐plank boat using Bronze Age technology and replica tools. Following Crumlin‐Pedersen's () philosophy, the project was to gain new insights into the design of the boat through a dialogue between the shipwright and archaeologists. Specific questions that were to be answered were: What are the strengths, characteristics and limitations of using (replica) bronze tools in the construction of the boat?…”

“…Acknowledging that ‘recording the experience gained in the construction project is a continuous process, in contrast to an isolated test of a pre‐conceived hypothesis’ (Crumlin‐Pedersen, : 305), the documentation of the outcomes of the experimental activity reflected this idea. Thus, alongside the production of a set of archaeological plans of the completed craft, structured interviews of the shipwright and the volunteers who helped to build the boat and analysis of the tools at the beginning and end of the project, the dynamic process was documented through the use of a daily log of steps taken and decisions made kept by the shipwright, time‐lapse photography which provides a continuous record of the construction of Morgawr , digital filming throughout the project, and 3D laser scanning of the boat at various stages of its construction.…”