A Field That Does Not Yet Exist
Some time ago, before or around 2015, I saw a documentary following the journey of an archaeologist who wanted to answer the question, could the Vikings have been the first Europeans to land in North America? From a navigational perspective, the Polynesians have been navigating the Pacific for centuries, there is no reason to doubt that the Norse seafaring people had some similar skill. Unfortunately, there isn’t a definitive navigational tradition that has been passed down through Norse legend, but we can see it as a possibility. The next question is, could their vessels have made transatlantic crossings? This is a question that can be answered, Viking ships have been located and unearthed. It is known what they looked like and how they were constructed, there are examples available for reference. Likewise, there are references for the tools they had. To answer the question if it was possible, a ship would have to be built from materials like those available, with tools they had according to the historical record, and techniques evident in the example ships available. Assembling a team of woodworkers and sailors they embarked on building a historically accurate, to a reasonable degree at least, Viking ship. The process of building the ship provided a lot of insight into the process and provided some answers to questions about the building process. On completion of the build, the vessel was eventually sailed from Scotland to Newfoundland by way of Iceland and Greenland in an epic North Sea adventure. This was one of the first documented Experimental Archaeology enterprises. It was also the inspiration for some of the paths I have chosen over the years.
The Viking adventure above was a big project that took years to accomplish, had a good-sized team, and had a sizable price tag. It would be great to consider myself an archaeologist, and it is not completely out of the realm of possibility if I were to approach it from the experimental history direction. The concept of experimental archaeology is very appealing to a maker with a broad range of skills. As a historian, the thought of bringing more experimentation into the process is exciting. This post is inspired questions posed to one of my professors floating this idea of experimental history and his incouraging responses.
I prefaced my questions with this…
“My thoughts on the differentiation between the two fields are that experimental archaeology would involve fieldwork and unknowns whereas experimental history would be more of an archive-to-lab/workshop affair to reproduce a known to illustrate the function and operation.“
“As an amateur radio license holder, I am passionate about radio communications, and communications technologies in general. My vision of experimental history is conducting historical research and building the equipment that either no longer exists or is so rare that replicas or reproductions are the most practical path forward, documenting the process, and conducting operational experiments with the end goal of producing historical documentary products, papers, articles, books, documentary films, and exhibits. The technologies I am most interested in are the early forms of the electric telegraph through radiotelegraphy and the early forms of telegraphic printing to radioteletype.“
Is there a path to experimental history as a field, or is it too close to experimental archaeology?
“I think so, and I’d love to have you consider it.“
If it seems like it could be a distinct field, how does one promote a field like this?
“Maybe, but I don’t know. …Feel free to do research on items of interest, working on a functional model for experimental history“
Clarifying later in another email he said “I used the expression “functional model…” because this is a novel concept. … As you work on projects, you can refine your thinking and present this as a legitimate approach to dissertation research.“
What are your general thoughts on the concept?
He liked the idea of “experimental history” and would be happy to see this in practice noting that it would “draw heavily on historical sources and methodologies, albeit with some specialized skills” which I agree with entirly.
Also in a later email he said “As you think about “experimental history,” you will want to consider research approaches and methodologies that you would use in your dissertation research.“
This is all very encouraging, it also is a paradigm that affects my current class and well beyond, it could mean a significant shift in my dissertation topic. To what degree is yet to be determined, but it is clear I have a considerable amount of thinking to do.
~Jon