With a delay, the 2022-2 EXARC Journal is now published. This issue contains four reviewed articles and whooping nine mixed matters articles. As always, all articles are open access.
From the articles we would like to highlighted the article on the results of EXARC Twinning project by Lauresham, at the UNESCO World Heritage Site Lorsch Abbey, and CEAMC at University College Dublin (UCD) (Re)constructing an Early Medieval Irish Ard and among the mixed matter articles Discussion: Inclusivity in historical interpretation: Who has access and who is erased?
Matilda Siebrecht summarises the reviewed articles from the 2022/2 issue of the EXARC Journal. Read the Journal at https://exarc.net/issue-2022-2
Support the Show.
Welcome to EXARC Extracts with me, Matilda Siebrecht, as we summarise the latest reviewed articles from the most recent issue of the EXARC Journal. In this episode we will be looking at a summary of the second issue of 2022, released on July 8th.
The first paper in this issue of the EXARC Journal looks at Scored basins from late Minoan Crete: an experimental interpretation from construction to functionality, by Brianna Jenkins. The aim of the study was to assess what these scored basins might have been used for and the skill required in their construction, through the experimental reconstruction of mudbrick, a Minoan kiln, and a scored basin prototype. Unfortunately, that success of the study was affected by factors such as such as scheduling and location restrictions imposed by the pandemic, several unsuccessful kiln firings, and restrictions on time. Despite these setbacks, the experiments provided some interesting discussion points and data for future experiments.
The second paper is entitled Experimental archaeology of Iron Age firing structures from the Western Mediterranean, by members of the TRANSCOMB project. This transdisciplinary research project started in 2020 and aims to analyse Iron Age combustion structures from the region in order to gain a greater understanding of their function and efficiency. In this article, the authors reconstructed hearths and ovens of different shapes in order to compare how they may have been used and their associated properties. The results of their experiments shed a new light on the effects of fuel type, hearth location, weather conditions, and time of year. Further experiments are being undertaken, but if you’d like to read in more detail about the preliminary study here, check out the full article online.
The next article entitled (Re)constructing an Early Medieval Irish Ard presents the results of an EXARC funded twinning project from 2019 between Lauresham Open-air Museum and the experimental centre at University College Dublin. The project investigated the production and use of an Irish early mediaeval ard, which is a type of plough. The study included the creation of all aspects of the ard – from smelting iron ore for the blade, to carving the oak for the plough body – as well as testing its functionality in the soil. Not only did the study provide some interesting results regarding the importance of the smaller plough types to the groups that may have been using them in the mediaeval period, but also highlights the value of international collaborations between research institutes in widening our view of past society.
The third reviewed article from this issue is An experimental approach to assessing the tempering and firing of local pottery production in Nubia during the New Kingdom Period by Julia Budka and Giulia D’Ercole. The study looked at the use of dung as a tempering agent in ceramic materials, focusing in particular on the recipe for dung temper used by late Bronze Age potters at Sai Island in northern Sudan, and applying this to reproductions of Nubian and Egyptian style ceramics. The broader aim of the study was to provide further experimental references for the identification of dung in the archaeological record as markers of past ceramic technology. The results of their experiments validated and confirmed several archaeological interpretations of ceramic technological traditions during this time and region, and is a very interesting read!
That was a summary of all the reviewed articles from this second edition of 2022. Unfortunately, there are significantly fewer reviewed articles in this issue, however there were 9 unreviewed Mixed Matters articles. These included three book reviews: Experimentelle Archäologie in Europa, Jahrbuch 2021 reviewed by Stefanie Ulrich, A Handbook for Women’s clothing, Northern Europe, 1360-1415 by Ahlqvist and Neijman reviewed by Catharina Oksen, and Visitor Experiences and Audiences for the Roman Frontiers by Nigel Mills, reviewed by Jan Hochbruck. There were also two conference reviews: Green Museum Summit organised by MuseumNext, reviewed by Julia Heeb, and the EAS organised Experimental archaeology – how does it work? reviewed by Alex R Furger and Claus Detrekoy. The event NEMO Training Course ‘Rethinking Museum Practice for 21st Century Visitors’ by Lisa Baxter from The Experience Business was also reviewed by Thit Birk Petersen. In addition to these reviews, there is a discussion article from several authors considering Inclusivity in historical interpretation: Who has access and who is erased?, an overview of a TV-show making experience called Living history on Dutch TV at last – the making of ‘Het verhaal van Nederland’, written by Jaap Hogendoom, and finally a fun and informative article by Niel Peterson and Darrell Markewitz entitled Top 11 ways to annoy your reviewers.
This was EXARC Extracts. If you want to find out more about the research mentioned in this episode, check out the latest edition of the EXARC Journal, which can be accessed online at exarc.net/journal.