no 64 presenting archaeology to young people

No 64

PRESENTINGARCHAEOLOGYTO YOUNGPEOPLE

Edited by

S Cracknella n dM Corbishley

Presenting archaeology toyoung people

edited by

Stephen CracknellandMike Corbishley

1986

Research Report No 64 Council for British Archaeology

Copyright © 1986 the Authors and the Council forBritish Archaeology

ISBN 0 906780 61 6

Published 1986 by the Council for British Archaeology,112 Kennington Road, London SE11 6RE

Printed and made in England byHenry Ling Ltd, Dorchester, Dorset

British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataPresenting archaeology to young people—(CBA research

reports, ISSN 0589-9036; 64)1. Archaeology—Study and teaching—Great BritainI. Cracknell, Steve II. Corbishley, M. J.

III. Series 930.1'’07'1041 CC97.G7

ISBN 0-906780-6 1-6

Contents

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Notes on the contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Stephen Cracknell

Archaeology, monuments, and education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Mike Corbishley

What does archaeology have to offer? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Peter Clarke

The use of video in the introduction of archaeology in the primary school . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3Peter Stone and Peter Phillips

The Prestatyn excavation: education, presentation, and video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Marion Blockley

Sandwell Adventure: an educational computer package . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4David Breedon

Site visits for schools: the experiences of the Sandwell Valley Archaeological Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6Michael A Hodder

Tales of Troy: recreating the past in the classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8Rayna Andrew

Experimental archaeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3John Steane

A paper-based package: academic accuracy or popular appeal? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 8Christina Parker

Wasperton Archaeological Project: educational package . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1Gilles Crawford

Look and learn at the Lunt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5Margaret Rylatt

The Crickley Hill mobile exhibition of archaeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 8Marjorie Imlah

The Schools Committee of the Council for British Archaeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 9John Steane

Acknowledgements

The editors are grateful to English Heritage, Warwick-shire Museums, and Oxfordshire Museums for financialassistance towards the publication of this volume. Thanksare also due to Veronica Yuill for assistance with the copyediting, Alan Cracknell for typing part of the text, andValerie Horsier, the CBA’s Managing Editor, for her help

and comments. Michelle Draycott drew the cover illustra-tions which are based on photographs in Teachingarchaeology in Schools by James Dyer (Shire, 1983). Illus-trations are by the author of the article in which theyappear unless otherwise stated.

v

Notes on the contributors

Rayna Andrew graduated from Birmingham Universityin Ancient History and Archaeology and supervised theMycenae education project for two years. She is now doingpostgraduate research on Mycenae.Marion Blockley started working on archaeologicalexcavations in 1970 and is currently doing post-excavationwork for Cadw. She was employed as an Education Officerfor the Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust during theexcavations at Prestatyn.David Breedon has been teaching at Parkside JuniorSchool in Smethwick, West Midlands since 1972. He isHead of Mathematics and is responsible for promoting theuse of computers in subjects across the whole range of thecurriculum.Peter Clarke trained as a graphic designer and hasworked in industry and as a teacher in a CommunityCollege. He is now Keeper of the Education Service forWarwickshire Museum.Mike Corbishley has been both a teacher and aprofessional archaeologist. After some years as theEducation Officer of the CBA he is now an EducationOfficer for English Heritage.Stephen Cracknell has worked as a field archaeologistsince 1976. At present he directs urban excavations forWarwickshire Museum.Gilles Crawford i s a Pro jec t Director wi th theBirmingham University Field Archaeology Unit. He iscurrently engaged in writing up the excavations atWasperton, Warwickshire.

Michael Hodder is Director of the Sandwell ValleyArchaeological Project and Secretary of the Birminghamand Warwickshire Archaeological Society. His principalinterests are landscape archaeology and the publicpresentation of archaeology.Marjorie Imlah has been involved with the CrickelyHill Mobile Exhibition since 1983 and is the Manager ofthe Crickley Hill Archaeological Trust Agency.Christina Parker graduated in archaeology in 1984 andhas worked as an Education Assistant at WarwickshireMuseum’'s Alcester Office.Peter Phillips has made films and videos since 1963working in the broadcast and commercial fields as well asin education.Margaret Rylatt has been the Coventry City MuseumField Archaeologist since 1973. She is responsible for theLunt Roman Fort development programme.John Steane was Headmaster of Kettering GrammarSchool from 1964-76 and is now Keeper of EnvironmentalRecords at Oxfordshire County MuseumPeter Stone is a qualified teacher and archaeologist. He isa t p r e s e n t m a n a g i n g S o u t h a m p t o n U n i v e r s i t y ' ’ s‘Archaeology and Education’ project and researching intothe teaching of archaeology and the public perception ofthe past.

vi

Introduction Stephen Cracknell

Why should archaeology be presented to young people andhow can it be? This book contains practical ideas, reportson work in progress, and analyses of the problemsinvolved. It is aimed primarily at people working inarchaeology, but it will also appeal to teachers who want toknow what archaeologists can provide, and museumworkers who often have to act as intermediaries betweenthe two groups.

Most of the papers printed here were first given at aseminar organized by Warwickshire Museum in Septem-ber 1985. A wide variety of approaches is represented,ranging from the ‘traditional’ site tour to the use of com-puters and videos, covering most of the methods currentlybeing used to present archaeology to young people.

Archaeology has a great deal to offer children, even in theprimary school. As part of environmental studies it canincrease children's awareness of their surroundings. Lin-ked with history, it provides a framework for judging theachievements (or otherwise) of the present. Studying thearchaeological method encourages children to look atevidence and interpret it, both of which are essential learn-ing skills. Also, as archaeology uses a host of otherdisciplines, for example, computer science, chemistry,biology, and geography, studying it can be united with thestudy of many other subjects.

The teaching of most subjects in schools has no directinput from those involved in academic research, so whyshould archaeologists involve themselves in schools? Theanswer is that it is the only way to ensure that children aretaught accurate and up-to-date archaeology. One problemis that archaeology is a rapidly developing discipline; bythe time information has filtered into school books it is outof date. Teachers cannot be expected to read archaeologi-cal reports and text books to keep themselves abreast of thelatest developments, let alone digest and regurgitate theinformation in a suitable form.

A second point is that many people's initial experience ofarchaeology is at school, probably between the ages ofeight and thirteen. For all too many people it is their onlyexperience of archaeology. Yet the subject is oftendismissed in a few lessons at the start of a secondary schoolhistory course, and even the distinction between historyand archaeology may not be made clear. The limited selec-tion of materials available to teachers leads to a concentra-tion on stereotypes such as the caveman, the Romansoldier, or the Egyptian king (deceased) to the detriment ofany understanding of what archaeology is really about. Inorder to counter these misconceptions, and fill in the gapsin children's knowledge of the past, archaeologists need tobe involved, at least indirectly, in the teaching process.

Over the past few years, many archaeologists have indeedstarted working in education, partly because they ack-nowledge the need for an input from those most closelyinvolved in the subject. However, a number of newinfluences have also begun to shape their perceptions ofthe public at large and to encourage more educationalwork.

The government policy of introducing commercialmanagement into the state sector of the economy has had asignificant effect on archaeology. In 1984, EnglishHeritage and its Welsh equivalent Cadw were set up toreplace the state archaeology service in England andWales. These 'quangos'’ are semi-independent of thegovernment but still rely heavily on it for their funds. Theinevitable result, and indeed part of the original brief of thecreation of the agencies, was to increase their interest inthe presentation of archaeology to the public and, ofcourse, to children. For example, where there was oneEducation Officer in the old Inspectorate of Ancient Mon-uments there are now five in English Heritage.

A second factor has been the increase in the number ofunemployed people, and the resulting birth of job-creationschemes. Although it is probably largely unaware of itsinfluence, the Manpower Services Commission (MSC),which now controls the schemes, has been responsible fora considerable part of the growth in archaeologists'’involvement in schools. The MSC puts several millionpounds a year into archaeology, most of it via its schemefor the long-term unemployed, the Community Pro-gramme. Its support has released field archaeologists fromthe stranglehold of rescue archaeology funding in whichthe pursuit of efficient excavation and academic publica-tion had dominated all other considerations. Not only hasthe MSC increased the total pool of money available, thusallowing more scope for the inclusion of educational work,but also, over the years, it has become steadily more insis-tent that Community Programme Schemes should have'visible community benefit'’. Academic research no longerqualifies for grants unless it also includes provision for thedissemination of information to a much wider public,including children. Despite the reservations about theCommunity Programme which many archaeologists hold,the pot of gold has proved too large for them to ignore.

Another influence on the use of archaeology in teaching, inthis case a negative one, comes from a change in ideasabout the rôle of education. Some sections of theeducational establishment have come to believe thatschool subjects should be more 'relevant' to the needs ofindustry and life in the high technology world of thefuture, and this has led to the view that science andt e c h n o l o g y s h o u l d b e a l l o t t e d m o r e t i m e i n t h e

2 Presenting archaeology to young people

curriculum. The effects are only just beginning to be feltbut the result is likely to be pressure on the humanitiesincluding history (and therefore archaeology). Anotherconsequence will be that where resources are scarce(another symptom of Britain’'s economic difficulties) theywill be diverted to the sciences.

In an attempt to reassert the value of history, HerMajesty ’ s Inspectorate (HMI) o f Schoo ls recent lypublished a discussion document, History in the primaryand secondary years (HMSO). This excellent book arguesstrongly that history, and particularly the historicalmethod, are relevant and of great value to today’s world.The HMI'’s arguments for the importance of the study ofhistory can also be applied to the study of archaeology.The war over the future of education has yet to be foughtbut the next few years are likely to be decisive.

Individual archaeologists cannot hope to have muchinfluence on the nature of the major forces which are shap-ing both their world and that of education. Nevertheless, itis clear that the positive aspects of the framework withinwhich we have to operate outweigh the negative ones.There is much scope for the introduction of archaeologyinto schools, as the articles which follow demonstrate.

In the first paper, Mike Corbishley discusses the public'sperception of archaeology and how this should affect theway the subject is taught. He also shows how the recordingof gravestones can be a useful archaeological exercise forchildren. Peter Clarke argues that archaeologists workingwith primary and middle school pupils should concernthemselves more with helping the children to developbasic learning skills and rather less with trying to turnthem into young archaeologists.

New technology can be integrated into school-basedstudies of archaeology. The next two papers demonstratecontrasting approaches to the production of videos, as wellas reviewing other aspects of their authors’' educationalwork. Another product of new technology, the computer,is becoming increasingly important in the separate fields ofarchaeology and education. 'Sandwell Adventure' is acomputer-based learning package which is attempting toprovide a link between the two fields. The reasons behindits creation and how it works are detailed by DavidBreedon. When complete, the computer package will bepart of an integrated service for children based around theexcavations at Sandwell Priory. The following article, onthe other work at Sandwell, notes how little children gainfrom the passive learning situation of conventional site

tours, and how site visitswork in the classroom.

can and should be integrated with

The subject of archaeology lends itself to a variety ofeducational methods and many people combine several int h e i r w o r k . O n e e x a m p l e ( a n d t h e r e a r e o t h e r ssummarized under different headings) is the work of theMycenae Project members who are based at BirminghamUniversity. They have used exhibitions, drama, art, andstorytelling to bring the past to life. Another interdis-ciplinary approach is the experimental reconstruction ofkilns and furnaces by schools. This is a way in whichchildren can take part in valid archaeological research,reports John Steane.

One problem with educational projects which are tied toarchaeological units is that there is often no guarantee ofcontinued funding. Christina Parker, who has been pro-ducing a series of pamphlets on Roman Warwickshire,shows one way in which this problem can be eliminatedthrough suitable project design. Gilles Crawford, who wasalso looking for a product that would continue to be of usefor some time, has designed a series of models basedaround the theme of the disposal of the dead which will beadded to the County Museum's school loans collection.

Two major long-term research excavations have hadeducational spin-offs, which are described here. Thou-sands of children visit the Lunt Roman Fort each year.Crickley Hill, on the other hand, visits the children, ormore accurately the Crickley Hill Bus carries an exhibi-tion to their schools.

Finally, John Steane, chairman of the CBA Schools Com-mittee, looks at its achievements over the ten years since itwas founded.

Many people, myself included, have only relatively recen-tly been drawn into the educational side of archaeologyand this obviously generates problems. Much of the workhas been done in isolation which has resulted in a remark-able diversity of approaches. Unfortunately, I have thefeeling that on occasions we have been '‘reinventing thewheel', going through the same processes that others havetried before and making the same mistakes. In the shortterm, the articles printed here should help to reduce thiswaste of time and materials and improve the quantity andquality of educational resources available to teachers andchildren. In the longer term, archaeologists working ineducation need to put more effort not only into com-municating with children but also into communicatingwith each other.

Archaeology, monuments, and education Mike Corbishley

In this paper I will discuss the attitudes of archaeologiststowards their public and the attitudes of the publictowards archaeology and archaeologists. I believe that weneed to understand and appreciate these attitudes beforewe decide how to present archaeology to young people.

I begin by taking two examples which illustrate thepublic's perception of archaeology and archaeologists. Thefirst example is one of the well known and, I think, cleverseries of advertisements for Benson and Hedges cigarettes.It shows a modern archaeological dig. But is it really mod-ern? Where do you see digs like this today with boxes andbaulks? Even those contemporary archaeologists who stillbelieve that the vertical section tells us something about

complex below-ground stratigraphy would be hardpressed to get away with an excavation like this.

Today the public is more likely to see open area excava-tions. But it would be difficult to make this advertisementwork on an open area system. The idea of digging downinto the ground to reveal the mosaic floor would not comeacross. An open area excavation here would not ring anybells of recognition in people's minds. I believe the publicstill sees excavation in terms of the holes and trenches theywere used to seeing in the well-publicized excavations ofthe 1940s and 1950s. The memory is preserved by themedia who frequently present the 'hunting for objects'view of archaeology. The idea of using vertical sections to

Archaeology today or archaeology yesterday? (Photograph courtesy of Benson & Hedges Ltd)


explain below-ground archaeology can also be seen insome museums, where vertical section models aredisplayed. In addition, many archaeologists who dig andrecord the site 'horizontally’' insist on translating this intovertical sections when presenting their work to thepublic.

Look at another detail of this advertisement. Thearchaeologist's tools here are all familiar - thewheelbarrow, spades, trowel (?larger than usual to showup in the photograph), and the wallpaper brush. The factthat these are correct suggests to me that the advertisingagency has taken professional advice. However, if they did,then why choose to use a basket rather than the familiarplastic or metal bucket? Where have you seen baskets likethis (apart from Habitat)? Answer: in photos of excava-tions in the Near and Middle East, for example in theTutankhamen excavation accounts (Carter & Mace 1923,pl XLIII) or in Wheeler’s influential book Archaeologyfrom the earth (1956, pl 4b).

I would sum up this advertisement, which first appeared in1982, by saying that it presents a particular view ofarchaeology - a view which the public still holds andwhich the advertising agency has cleverly exploited.

My second example is based on another attitude held bymany members of the public and in particular by somedevelopers and landowners. Many people think that:

archaeologists are eager to excavate as much as theycan lay their hands on; and

they have enormous powers to carry out theirwishes.

This misconception can be illustrated by one episode inthe Young and Gersher cartoon Blondie. The storyline,told in twelve 'boxes' in the March 13 1983 edition of theRichmond (Virginia) Times Dispatch, has an archaeologist,called Professor James Hartley Nichols, wanting todemolish Blondie'’s house in order to excavate the tomb ofan 'ancient Indian princess’' and preserve it in a state park.The replies of Blondie and her husband are interesting.'Our Home! Excavate! It would ruin our neighborhood!Think of all the traffic! Nobody'’d have any privacy! Popcorn vendors! Side-shows! Hot dog stands!' Not once doesBlondie demand to know by what right the professor wantsto excavate their home.

How do archaeologists contend with attitudes or ideas likethis and put their own point of view to the public? Onearchaeological attitude is summed up in a book about thearchaeology of Georgia (Dickens & McKinley 1979) whichexplains both the results of the archaeologists’' work andthe methods currently being used. The book finishes withthis statement:

Always remember, archaeological sites are an'‘endangered species’'. Once they are destroyed, theyare destroyed forever. Only trained archaeologistsshould dig in sites. Help archaeologists preserve thepast. It belongs to all of us!

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement and plea and,like many archaeologists, hold strong views about what

needs to be done in the future. Nevertheless, we must findways of presenting our views more sympathetically to thepublic if we want them to take notice and begin to think aswe do.

Excavation

In the case of excavation there seem to me to be two pro-blems to overcome. One is that most excavations,especially complex urban sites, present the non-excavatingpublic with a picture that is too difficult for them tounderstand. The picture is often of a large open area whichlooks superficially like a building site with deep holes,machines, and workers in boots and hard hats. A closerlook reveals a whole series of holes, walls, and layers of dif-ferent material. What has actually happened on the site inthe past is rarely obvious even when a guide takes you pastthe postholes, rubbish pits, and structural features.

The second problem with excavation is that the very act ofscraping the ground with a small trowel is clearly littleshort of lunatic in some people’'s eyes. The public is oftenenough told that archaeologists dig into the ground but isless frequently told why. Archaeologists usually attempt toprovide explanations but they don’t translate across thegreat divide between the archaeologists and the media, andit is the media who filter the information for thepublic.

These are the difficulties of presenting excavation as awhole but we should now look at some of the details. Here,I think, we must look at the problems of interpreting fea-tures, stratigraphy, and objects.

Features

There are clearly difficulties in explaining what somethingwas like in the past from mere remnants. As archaeologistswe frequently meet the remains of floors, walls, andditches. We ‘'translate'’ these remains into architect-typedrawings - plans and elevations. Neither the remains northe plans are normally encountered by the public, exceptby architects, builders, planners, and the like. There are,therefore, inherent difficulties in explaining a feature like aposthole, which is, after all, only archaeological jargon fora hole where a post once stood. Do people other thanarchaeologists use the word '‘posthole' when they put uptheir garden fence? Explaining rather than naming fea-tures helps people to understand them. Reconstructiondrawings which match archaeological drawings or theactual features that appear in the ground can help to tran-slate our archaeological reality into a reality which thepublic can understand.

Stratigraphy

Some of the problems outlined above also apply to theexplanation of stratigraphy. We must somehow get awayfrom the simplistic view that you can cut a section throughcomplex stratigraphy and by showing it to the public,explain what happened in the past at a particular site.When did you last see a non-archaeological section?Answer: when you cut a piece of a jam-sandwich cake.These vertical sections rarely occur in real life yet we

Archaeology, monuments, and education 5

e x p e c t t h e p u b l i c t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e c o n c e p t s o fstratigraphy from them. What often occurs (on modernhousing estates, for example) is that buildings are altered,demolished, added to, and replaced many times. Thepublic is used to seeing complete phases of building, one ontop of another, and our method of explanation should bearthis in mind.

Objects

Objects, I think, very often get in the way of ourunderstanding of the past because they have often been lif-t e d o u t o f t h e i r p r o p e r c o n t e x t s b y a n t i q u a r i a narchaeologists, museums, the media, or treasure hunters.The '‘What have you found today?’' question usually means'What valuable/exciting/ significant finds have you made?’'Leaving aside a particular object's possible significance orbeauty, we often need to point out that this object is onlypart of the debris from the past: it forms the evidencewhich we hope will help us to work out what happened inthe past. The object, like the feature, needs to be explainedin non-technical language so that people can relate to andunderstand the evidence. For example:

Drag 27 samian bowl = nice bowl for fruit

urn = casket supplied forBronze Age collaredgrandma’'s ashes

Objects are often found in rubbish pits which are, after all,only what people used before the advent of dustmen. I usea real plastic dustbin cut in half with a glass front to makethis point. The analysis of the real rubbish inside isinteresting and informative. It shows:

shrouds to be admired by future generations. In a fewplaces, like the Archéodrome near Dijon in France or ourown Butser Ancient Farm, people have sucessfully con-structed replica sites for the public which can be admiredand understood. There are, of course, upstanding walls insome monuments but even the apparently well-preservedsites (such as Dover Castle) are actually only the remnantsof what was once there. In many cases, such as the publicbaths at Wroxeter, the outline of the building survives likea sandstone and concrete architect’s plan. It has to bebrought to life in people’s minds from what little remains.An exercise I often use with children and adults is to takethe plan of a building they know, for example a house. Ifthey can build up a picture of the house from the founda-tions this will help them with the remains on a site.

Education

I have been using the word 'public'’ above even though thispaper is part of discussions about presenting archaeologyto young people. I do not see a clear distinction betweenthe way we should present archaeology to the adult publicand the way we should present it to young people. There isa clearer distinction between what we might present toyoung people on their own or with their parents, and whatwe might present children to do as part of their schoolwork.

What can we do ‘'educationally'’ with the archaeologicalremains we are left with? We are fortunate in that we haveremnants of structures and buildings for almost all theperiods of occupation in Britain in the past. We certainlyhave objects from all periods. We do, however, have tostart with the remnants and make them '‘tell'’ us what thepast was like. We must begin with an archaeologist'’s eyes:we are working from the evidence to the interpretation, orto use a more familiar phrase, from the known to theunknown.

Stratigraphy - if the dustbin is emptied on a Friday morn-ing, what is the date of the layer at the bottom?

Survival of material - how much would have rotted awayin the ground before archaeologists could discover it in thefuture? If the label rots from a tin how would you know ifthe tin contained dog food or baked beans?

Interpretation - what can the rubbish tell you about thefamily? Can we discover how many there are in the family,and if there are any children or pets?

I think an important point to stress is that we do notnecessarily know what happened in the past; beware ofhistorians bearing facts. What we have is evidence which isusually very biased - bias which some archaeologists arereluctant to admit. On the basis of this evidence we makei n t e r p r e t a t i o n s - w h a t m y L a t i n t e a c h e r c a l l e d'intelligent guesswork'.

Monuments

Let me now turn to the second part of my title - monu-ments. Ten thousand people queued to see the remains ofthe Temple of Mithras on a City of London building site in1954. They went to see an archaeological excavation. Lit-tle did they realize it would soon become an ancient monu-ment, to be displayed in a remortared form, in QueenVictoria Street courtesy of the Legal and GeneralAssurance Society. Sites which have come alive again dur-ing excavation are entombed in fresh mortar and glass

‘'An archaeologist's eyes’' - ie being the archaeologicaldetective looking for clues - means beginning with thelandscape, looking for evidence of past activity, narrowingdown to an individual site, and then beginning to take thatapart stone by stone, as it were. The questions are: '‘Why isthis stone a different colour?'’ or '‘Why is this earth moundhigher at this end?' We should not ask '‘What was this siteused for?’' until we have gathered the evidence to enable usto make that sort of enquiry.

The good detective and the good archaeologist will makeaccurate records of the crime/scene of the past. Young peo-ple should be encouraged to do this too. One useful projectis graveyard recording. There are now good books to helpthe teacher (Jones 1984; Dix & Smart 1982; Powlesland1985). Such a project encourages clear thinking andaccurate recording in the field and allows the class toanalyse a mass of data back at school. It can be used formaths and computer work, creative writing, artwork, andmany other aspects of '‘normal’' curriculum work. An extrabonus is that children are doing real archaeological work -collecting and analysing data which probably no one hascollected before. It is also non destructive work., or shouldbe if the flora and fauna of the churchyard are respected -yet another area for study.


Graveyard recording by pupils from Great Oakley Primary School, Essex. This recording was the first stage in an ecologicalsurvey of the churchyard (photo: Mike Corbishley)

Some teachers have completed work on field monumentsat professional level. For example, Derek Hunter, ateacher at Warout Primary School in Glenrothes, led agroup of pupils to record formerly unnoted medievalremains on Barrinton Muir and won the CBA SchoolsAward sponsored by Lloyds Bank in 1981 (Hunter1982).

Experiments and drama

Some teachers have taken the interpretat ion o farchaeological evidence a stage further and created in theirown schools or on playing fields experimental or scientificsites. One aspect of this work, experiments with potteryand iron is discussed by John Steane elsewhere in thisvolume, and the work of several schools has now beenbrought together and published (Croft 1982). Bringing thepast to life can also be achieved by drama and role play.The pioneers of this technique on ancient monuments andhistoric buildings have now published their experiencesfor teachers to use (Fairclough & Redsell 1985).

I will end this paper with a brief outline of a project carriedout at Gosbeck's County Primary School in Colchester.The project was devised by Lillian Welsh, the assistanthead. The idea was for the school, of 170 pupils, to find outabout archaeological methods, the Romans in general, andthe Romans in Colchester in particular during an 11-weekperiod in the summer term of 1985. Apart from wanting tostart from an archaeological point of view there was noth-ing too unusual about this type of project in a primaryschool. What was unusual was that Lillian Welsh wasdetermined that all the children in all their lessons shouldbe working on this Roman theme. The children used theevidence collected (from research in the classroom, visit-ing 'experts'’, demonstrations, and visits to excavations,the museum, and various monuments) to form the basisfor their everyday maths, writing, art and model work,environmental studies, and so on – even games.

Here are two examples of the sort of work done by these 5-11 year olds. One, illustrated here, was done by ten-year-old Catherine Gildea who was encouraged to put herself

Archaeology. monuments, and education 7

‘'The broken pot'’ by Catherine Gildea


into the ‘'mind'’ of a potsherd. The amount of detailed infor-mation she has gleaned from the project is clear. What shehas produced is a very acceptable piece of primary schoolwork, good enough to satisfy any parent, school governor,or Her Majesty’s Inspector of Schools.

The other piece of work, not pictured here, was mathswork carried out by the youngest class. They collected, bymeasurement at the Castle Museum in Colchester, infor-mation about the steps leading up to the Temple of theEmperor Claudius. This information was then used as anexercise in block measurements and areas.

At the end of the project the school was literally full of thechildren’s work. The whole school bubbled with excite-ment one Saturday as they showed their work to theirparents together with a play called ‘ 'Beryl and theRomans’', a Roman religious procession, '‘Roman' songs,chariot races, and even a slave auction.

Conclusions

I think there are three main conclusions to be drawn:

Archaeologists should rethink what they present tothe public/children/schools, making sure that theway they convey the information/ideas/attitudes isunderstandable.

Archaeologists should emphasize that to attempt to

understand the past we must begin with theevidence.

Archaeologists should encourage schools to gatherthe evidence and use it to carry out curriculum workinstead of just using a visit to an excavation or monu-ment as an addition to the study of a particularperiod.

References

Carter , H, & Mace , A C, 1923 T h e t o m b o fTutankhamen

Croft, R, 1982 Archaeology and scienceDickens, R S, & McKinley, J L, 1979 Frontiers of the

soil: the archaeology of GeorgiaDix, B, & Smart, R, 1982 Down among the dead-

m e n , i n A r c h a e o l o g y i n t h e t o w n ( e d M i k eCorbishley)

Fairclough, J, & Redsell, P, 1985 Living history:reconstructing the past with children

Hunter, D, 1982 Archaeological field study of apastoral settlement in the Lomond Hills, Fife, inCBA Bulletin of archaeology for schools, 10

Jones, J, 1984 How to record graveyards. 3 ednPowlesland, D, 1985 Tombstone: a project for

s c h o o l s , i n A r c h a e o l o g y a n d c o m p u t e r s(ed D Powlesland)

Wheeler, M, 1956 Archaeology from the earth

What does archaeology have to offer? Peter Clarke

Archaeology, presented well, offers a wealth of materialthat is relevant to the school curriculum. Archaeology pre-sents real evidence and artefacts relating to real peoplefrom the past, it fuels the natural inquisitive instinct ofmany young people, and it provides a unique mixture ofscientific method, practical work, and imaginative conjec-ture based on the evidence of real things. Archaeologyspans academic disciplines in a unique way, encompassingaspects of a variety of subjects, thus making itself ideallysuited to project-based work in schools. Perhaps itsgreatest advantage is that to most young people it seems tobe a very exciting subject.

Notwithstanding these potentially wonderful attributes,however, archaeology presented poorly can be esoteric,dreary, and full of the kind of mumbo-jumbo that is likelyto build a wall between the archaeologist and the thepublic (and is certain to switch off the enthusiasticyoungster). The subject suffers from a dichotomy betweenits public image and the reality of archaeology on theground. The public media image of spectacular archaeol-ogy is composed of the grand project patronized byroyalty, the heart-throb presenter in search of an enigma,the eccentric academic in the sands of Egypt, and themisinformed news report. The local archaeologist visitinghis local school or teachers'’centre is likely to have thesepreconceptions forced upon him and he may find himselfexpected to perform as the all-knowing expert on theRomans, the Neolithic, and probably the Victorians too,when he only wants to be able to talk about his consuminginterest in postholes or whatever. To avoid these conflicts,archaeology must be presented to young people for theright reasons and in the right way. There must be a com-m o n understanding between educationalists andarchaeologists about what is expected and what can beoffered. The archaeologist must be aware of how hissubject can be integrated into schools in a useful way - andmust adapt his approach to facilitate this - while theteacher must be given the opportunity to become aware ofthe wide range of skills and approaches that have directrelevance to work in schools. The discovery of commonground is not an easy process. It follows that a degree ofreal commitment is required from both sides and that bothsides must be prepared to make compromises. Presentingarchaeology for the wrong reasons (as a hollow 'com-munity' element in a Manpower Services Commissionproject proposal, for example) without the commitment tothe long-term development that is required is likely to beless than successful.

In this paper I am concentrating on how archaeology canbe used at the primary and middle school levels. The pur-pose of presenting archaeology to this age group is not to

recruit and train young archaeologists (although thismight be a consequence), nor is it to provide a set of ready-made answers and facts for project work in history lessons.The popular image of archaeology needs to be brokendown and replaced with a flexible approach to specificskills and methods that can be relevant at different levelsin schools. The archaeologist needs to see his subject as aseries of unique elements that can be used for their ownvalue as educational tools, as well as being studied for theirrelationship to archaeology as a whole. He needs to be ableto relate these elements to the educational development ofchildren and perhaps allow the links with archaeology tobe temporarily suspended. In this way the skills that areneeded to cope with the complex concepts contained in'grown-up'’archaeology can be built up slowly, leading to abetter understanding of the subject as a whole by bothchildren and their teachers.

The following examination of some approaches to thesubject, particularly with primary and middle schools inmind, is an attempt to identify specific skills that may beuseful for this age range. The approaches are interlinkedbut can be introduced independently according to theneeds of the teacher and the school.

Using evidence

Understanding the nature of evidence, being able toevaluate it, and use it to make hypotheses and reachinformed conclusions are skills that have uses beyondarchaeology. The importance of evidence is indicated bythe emphasis it is receiving in new history syllabuses andin science and technology lessons. Archaeologists areskilled at handling a wide range of evidence drawn frommany different sources. Much of this evidence is veryabstract in nature despite the fact that it has been gleanedfrom material remains. The sophisticated and complexspectrum of evidence to be seen on an archaeological site,for example, is likely to be far too complex for young peo-ple to understand easily. It is, in my opinion, best avoidedif children are to be given a chance of grasping the actualnature of evidence, what constitutes good evidence, whatis subjective and objective evidence, and how sensible con-clusions may be reached by examining different sets ofevidence in different ways.

The archaeologist must choose suitable types of evidencedepending on the age range of the pupils. Actual finds arebest. The use of pottery sherds (if they are available) giveschildren a kind of material to handle that is alreadyfamiliar. The task of looking for 'clues' in the pottery canbe presented in different ways. Sorting and grouping willprovide different clues depending on the criteria used.Assembling sherds that might fit together will help

1 0 Presenting archaeology to young people

children to respond to similarities and differences in shapeand texture. Grouping colours, rough and smooth, largeand small, etc will help to show how the same material canbe used to produce different clues that might change theconclusions drawn from the evidence. Assembling '‘fake'collections of artefacts to demonstrate different types ofsorting and grouping seems to me to be perfectly justifiableprovided that the children are told what has been done.Using new artefacts is just as good if old ones are unavail-able. Mixing old and new sherds would give opportunitiesfor sorting based on ideas about chronology. Mixingmachine-made with hand-made sherds could also helpchildren to perceive the differences between the two. Ifpossible, though, the use of '‘fake'’ evidence should lead onto a set of real evidence so that the complications andinconsistencies of real archaeology can be pointed out atan early stage.

The variety of children’'s conclusions based on evidence infront of them may be alarming to some archaeologists. Inmy experience, this is a problem that can lead to catas-trophic misunderstanding between archaeologists andeducationalists. It is very difficult for a knowledgeablearchaeologist to sit back and allow a group of children toreach conclusions that are wildly unrealistic and '‘untrue'.While I am not suggesting that children should ever beknowingly allowed to retain misinformation about thepast, I feel that the process of learning about evidenceincludes coming to '‘wrong’' conclusions. Provided that theconclusions have been reached by reasonable means, it isquite acceptable to leave them unchallenged. I am assum-ing, though, that learning to test one's conclusions is anelement of learning to use evidence, and that by doing thisa closer approximation to the truth might be reached. It isimportant too that children learn that archaeological'truths' (or any scientific knowledge) are not necessarilyfixed and can change as new evidence becomes available.In some instances, therefore, a child's conclusion based onthe evidence available to him is just as valid as that of theexpert with his wider knowledge.

Evidence such as photographs and maps needs to beintroduced with care. The conventions of archaeologicalmaps can be quite complex for these age groups and oneneeds to be sure that the concept of evidence is understoodbefore they are used.

Dramatic reconstructions

As a slight diversion, dramatic reconstructions deserveconsideration here. There is understandable controversyas to the validity of reconstructions using costume andreplica artefacts. As an end in itself, I doubt if the dramaticreconstruction has much value to archaeology. It probablyhas more relevance to drama and historical ‘empathy’unless it is used as a device to encourage children to makepositive decisions based on evidence of different kinds. Asimple reconstruction based on the children'’s use ofevidence is a good way to stimulate decision-making and isa very good way of testing wrong conclusions. There is alsosomething to be said for the use of the imagination inthrowing up quest ions based on smal l amounts o fevidence. Drama forces the imagination to come up withunexpected ideas in ‘'real' situations and this can be a veryimportant way of bringing evidence into focus. Drama isalso great fun, especially for very young children, and aslong as the drama can be centred round the children'’sideas rather than using them as small actors in an adultgame, it can be a very useful approach.

Understanding materials

As someone who is concerned with presenting museumobjects to groups of children, I am always aware of howessential a knowledge of materials is for the appreciationand understanding of artefacts. I am also aware thatchildren (and many adults too) lack basic experience of dif-ferent materials and are unaware of their significance andqualities. The story of man’'s relationship with materials isthe history of technology and is directly related to his cul-ture. The understanding of materials is, therefore, an

Children fieldwalking (photo: Mike Corbishley)

What does archaeology have to offer? 11

important aspect of knowing about man’'s past from astudy of his remaining artefacts. It is easy to overestimatehow much experience children have of different materialsand to assume that knowledge of the differences betweenstone, pottery, metal, and organic materials can be takenfor granted. The vocabulary associated with the apprecia-tion of materials has to be available before any usefuldiscussion of many aspects of archaeology can take place.Experience of textures, weights, etc and the subsequentexpression of those qualities and quantities in verbal, writ-ten, or visual terms provides the basic concepts andassociated vocabulary that are needed to articulate thefiner points of using other evidence. A child who is able todifferentiate not only between stone and pottery, but alsobetween crude and finely-made pottery, and is able toarticulate those differences, can draw more meaningfulconclusions from a collection of sherds than one who can-not differentiate. A child who has handled hand-built,thrown, and moulded pottery sherds and has noticed theirdifferent qualities and applications is in a better position toguess the function of the pot from which they came thanone who has not had this experience. It is important,therefore, that the basic understanding of materials andtheir nature is built up. There is no reason why this has tobe done with archaeological material but I suspect that theadded interest of handling old artefacts is an importantconsideration in stimulating work of this kind. There is noreason either why particularly fine material has to be used;the finds from a good fieldwalk should provide amplematerial to work on.

Fieldwalking

Fieldwalking is a particularly useful activity since it com-bines the use of evidence with an understanding ofmaterials. It is a real aspect of archaeology that can beundertaken by children who can feel that they are con-tributing something positive to their local field archaeol-ogy unit. An understanding of materials has to be gainedbefore the walk (otherwise the whole field tends to end upin the classroom!), so the children are given some incentiveto learn the differences between natural and man-madematerials. As an exercise in archaeological observation,fieldwalking is ideal and, linked with simple map work andfollow-up help from the archaeologist, it can form anexcellent introduction to the subject.

The use of archaeological material inschools

The danger of damage to archaeological finds as a result ofbeing handled is one of the major problems that has to beresolved before archaeology can be presented effectively inschools. Archaeologists and museum curators are rightlyconcerned about using collections for this purpose. It iswrong, however, to extend this concern to all archaeologi-cal materials. There is no way to make handling collec-tions and loan items completely safe but the level of hazardto which they are subjected has to be evaluated andweighed against the value of the material to education.The level of hazard is sometimes overestimated andshould be seen in perspective. The Warwickshire Museumloan collection includes several cases containing stone andbronze tools, Roman sherds, painted wall plaster, tesserae,

and reconstructed pottery vessels. Over the last ten yearsthese have been to schools in Warwickshire up to six timesper year and have been used in a wide variety of situationsand with all age groups. Some of the items are packed infoam and can be easily removed from their cases. Othersare in 'display'’ cases with removable perspex lids to allowlimited handling. During that period, despite almost cons-tant use, there have been no losses and only a little damageto one flint flake tool. One case of Roman pottery has beenin circulation since 1950 with no losses that I can detect. Itis salutary to note that a case of replica Bronze Ageweapons has suffered considerable damage because of thebrittle nature of the resin from which they are made. Acomparable case of genuine tools is in perfect condition. Iknow that one event might change this good record but Itrust that teachers are well aware of potential security pro-blems in their schools and use our loans intelligently. Thesecurity in most schools is at least as good as in somearchaeological stores that I have seen although this may beno fair comparison. If there is to be a commitment to pro-moting archaeology in schools, then there must be anequal commitment to consider which artefacts may bewithdrawn permanently or temporarily from archaeologi-cal collections to be used as handling material. Weighingthe disadvantages to the collections against the advantagesto education must provide some common ground to thebenefit of both archaeology and children.

Approaches and strategies

The assumption may be made that I am expectingarchaeologists to spend a great deal of time in theclassroom working directly with children. I am notadvocating this unless, of course, archaeologists want tobecome teachers. It is essential, though, that anyone whowishes to present his subject to young people gets to knowhis market. The best way to do this is to meet them on theirown ground rather than on visits to archaeological sites.This can be done as a one-off visit, but a regular involve-ment in the work of a class or school can be of much morebenefit to both sides. As I have suggested, presentingarchaeology in schools needs much preparatory work onbasic skills before the subject can begin to be understoodon a higher level. It would perhaps be over-idealistic toexpect archaeologists to combine forces with otherenvironmental and historical disciplines but this would bethe best way to integrate archaeological work into a muchbroader project.

There is much that needs to be done to teach teachersabout the potential of archaeology as an effectiveeducational tool. Presenting archaeology to teachers sothat they can adopt the aspects that seem most useful isperhaps where most work needs to be concentrated. Isuggest, however, that the same constraints that apply toadapting the subject for young people also apply when pro-ducing information for teachers - not because they arecomparable to young people but because it is wrong toassume that they have the basic understanding of the skillsthat they will be expected to pass on.

It may be worth emphasizing here that the purpose of pre-senting archaeology to young people is not to recruit ortrain young archaeologists. The main aim of the exercise isto decide which particular aspects of the subject are useful


in the general education of young people and how those already convinced). Providing support and materials is theaspects can be presented in a meaningful way. Convincing next requirement, combined with the will to continue ateachers that archaeology has something useful to offer is long- term commitment to the deve lopment o f thethe first step (assuming that archaeologists themselves are relationship between archaeology and education.

The use of video in the introduction of archaeologyin the primary school Peter Stone and Peter Phillips

Introduction: the archaeology andeducation project

The Manpower Services Commission Community Pro-gramme Scheme 'Archaeology and Education' was set upby the Department o f Archaeo logy , Univers i ty o fSouthampton, in February 1985. I ts br ie f was todisseminate the experience and expertise of the Depart-ment of Archaeology to a much wider audience than wouldnormally be possible.

The bulk of the team's work is with local schools. Fourmajor objectives have been defined:

1) to demonstrate that there is evidence of the past inthe physical environment everywhere around us-

2) to show that this physical evidence of the past isunder continual threat from ever-present and everchanging human interaction with theenvironment

3 ) to integrate this unique category of evidence into thestudy of the past in local schools

4) to develop material that is in keeping with the'enquiry-based' curricula now favoured in manyschools

The Avebury Project

In an attempt to achieve all of the above objectives a pro-ject was developed for use with primary and middleschools. The project leant heavily on earlier work carriedout by one of the authors in conjunction with King Alfred'sCollege, Winchester, and Weeke Junior School, Winches-ter, and has been described in more detail elsewhere(Richardson 1984; Stone 1986).

During the project, which has become known as the'Avebury Experience', children are exposed to a series ofdifferent teaching methods in an attempt to develop theirunderstanding and enjoyment of prehistory and archaeol-ogy. The full project starts with the teachers being taughtabout prehistory and archaeology. The children thenreceive normal classroom teaching, both from theirteachers and from members of the team, before beingtaken to see the prehistoric monuments around Avebury.The project climaxes in a day of‘'experimental archaeol-ogy'’on the school field. With the help of experts, thechildren try out a number of skills which, they havediscovered through archaeological evidence, were avail-able to the builders of the Avebury monuments. They also

try out a number of activities that can be inferred, fromarchaeological and other evidence, as having been avail-able in the Neolithic.

The project relies heavily on a broad multidisciplinaryapproach to teaching that does not restrict the childrensolely to learning 'facts' about the past. It is the ease withwhich subjects such as mathematics and English can beincorporated into the work that has made the project sucha tremendous success with teachers at the primarylevel.

The video

As in all of the projects carried out by the team, it has beenour aim to leave behind enough material about any par-ticular project for schools to be able to carry out the workin the future without the assistance of the team. The usualmethod is for a short booklet to be written about the pro-ject, aimed at either the teachers or children (see eg Planel1986; Hill in prep). However, it was decided in this casethat something extra was needed. Many teachers hadoriginally been very sceptical about the worth of such aproject in the primary school, given the difficult andabstract nature of much of the material, and it was to com-bat this initial worry and to bring out the full flavour of theproject that it was decided to produce a video of thework.

Initially we intended that the video should be aimed atchildren, so that it could be used as part of the teachingmaterial for any further, similar projects. However, aftersome initial discussion, this idea was dropped and wedecided to concentrate on a video aimed at teachers on in-service courses and student teachers at college. There werea number of reasons for this change in emphasis.

Firstly, it was hoped that the work would eventually have awider audience than just Hampshire schools. It was hopedthat other schools, not geographically close enough to visitAvebury, would take up the ideas behind the project andmanipulate them for their own local environment. Theremay well have been interpretive problems had the childrenvisited one group of monuments and seen another groupon the video.

Secondly, and related to the first point, similar problemsmay have arisen had different activities and skills beenshown on the video from those carried out at school. Thiswould especially be the case if (as would be quite likely) theschool did not have as much manpower or expert help aswould be available from the Archaeology and EducationTeam. Some of the activities would also be different if the


Children at Avebury (photo: Philippe Planel)

chronological period had changed either as a result ofsyllabus constraint or because of the limitations of thelocal monuments.

Thirdly, it was felt that a video aimed at teachers could domore to break down the barriers blocking the introductionof archaeology into schools by explicitly explaining thepotential value of archaeology to the wide-rangingprimary curriculum. Had the v ideo been a imed atchildren, this potential value might have been lost becausesome of the wider-ranging educational points could onlyhave been introduced implicitly. The Avebury Projectapproaches both education and archaeology in new andexciting ways. It is the hope of the team that such work willeventually become the norm rather than the exception andthe use of video was seen as an excellent way to put theseideas across.

Technical aspects of the video

Once it had been decided that the video was to be aimed atteachers and student teachers its length, content, andgeneral production had to be decided.

We needed to make the video short enough to keep the fullattention of audiences, but long enough to put across all of

the messages we wanted to transmit. We eventuallydecided on 12-15 minutes so that it could easily be shown(after a short introduction) in lectures to teachers orstudents who could then spend the rest of the lecturediscussing the ideas put forward in the video.

The video medium is not ideal for the communication offacts; where it excels is in giving the flavour of an activity.In the Avebury Project video we particularly wanted to letteachers see children taking part in the different activities,and becoming excited about the past through what theydid. We knew the type of things we wanted to record, butrealized that we would have to wait and see what we gotbefore we wrote the final script.

To script or not to script

Filming without a script is an adventurous way to makeprogrammes, and not one that we would particularlyrecommend. It is so easy to end up with miles of worthlessshots and a very sloppy video. For most topics and produc-tion styles a detailed script (based on careful considerationof the programme’s aims and objectives, its targetaudience, and the changes it is hoped they will undergo asa result of seeing it) is the most important single element inprogramme making. But when filming non-professionals

Videos and archaeology in the primary school 1 5

in general, and children in particular, writing the scriptafter shooting is often the only way to work

For example, in the three most recent videos thatSouthampton University’s Department of TeachingMedia has produced on science in primary schools (Teach-ing Media 1986a; 1986b; 1986c), it was the only possiblemethod of working. For such programmes, where thevideo unit had to visit a number of schools, see what theywere doing, and incorporate the results into videos thatwould excite children and teachers - and where the spon-taneous comments, responses, and interview answers ofthe children were a key element in the video’s success - ascript would have been more a hindrance than a help('Right, Tracey, will you try and give me a spontaneousanswer in which you tell me how much you liked visitingAvebury because the v is i t showed up the s trongeducational potential for incorporating archaeology intothe primary school curriculum...’').

Avoiding self-conciousness

When filming in schools, we found that most childrenforgot about the camera and crew (director, cameraman,sound recordist, and sometimes camera assistant) afterabout half an hour, and then got on with their work withlittle or no distraction - so long as we took care to be unob-trusive (there were no shouts of ‘'Action!’' on this shoot).One of the ways the crew could keep a low profile was byusing radio microphones on the children. This was par-ticularly important when the children were moving about:it had been easy to conceal a microphone near the com-puter which a couple of children were using for word pro-cessing in the primary science videos, but on theexperimental day there were children working all over theschool sports field. In an ideal world, one would recordchildren by having an invisible sound recordist holding aninvisible microphone, which s/he could point at whicheverchild was speaking. But making a video is a series of com-promises, and the flexibility and superior sound qualitythat the hand-held microphone would undoubtedly pro-duce have to be sacrificed in order to get the childrenbehaving naturally.

The main criticism we have received of the video is that wehear too much talk from teachers and not enough from thechildren. This is partly because, at the time of shooting, wecould only record two channels of sound, so we put oneradio microphone on a teacher and the other on one of thechildren. Sometimes we were lucky with our choice ofsuch children; at other times these 'lively'’ ones would havenothing to say. On the Avebury Project, the childrenseldom knew when they were being filmed while they wereworking, but they obviously knew when they were beinginterviewed (we shot several interviews, but only oneappears in the final video).

When selecting which children we would interview or getto wear radio microphones, we found that the three mostimportant considerations were:

1) Could they give useful and sensible answers to theinterview questions? With careful editing one maybe able to tidy up some rambling or hesitant replies,but if they are too disjointed, even the best editing in

2)

the world will not salvage them. In such cases wefound it was far better to ask the children to think outtheir answer, with gentle prompting if necessary,and then ask the question once more and have thempretend they had never answered it before. Such anapproach gets as close as possible to the ideal of afully-scripted programme, given the constraintsunder which we had to work.

Could they speak clearly enough to be recordedsatisfactorily? One of the problems we have foundwhen filming in schools is that children will oftenonly whisper for the microphone instead o fprojecting their voices properly. We do not know ifthis is caused by peer group pressure, lack ofconfidence with strangers, fear of the camera, or acombination of all three.

3) We also selected children who, while not showing offfor the camera, did look as if they enjoyed being inthe video.

Finally, when dealing with children it is very importantthat the person who interviews them is really interested inwhat they are doing and saying, is able to get them relaxedin front of the camera, and encourages them to answer forthemselves. A series of questions that leave the children noroom to develop their ideas or to give their own opinionsmakes for a very flat and uninspiring programme.

Why shoot on video?

At the Department of Teaching Media we can shoot 16mmfilm, and a choice of video formats: ¾in BVU (Hi-Band),¾in U-Matic (Low Band), and ½in VHS. When money isno object, film has many advantages, notably flexible edit-ing of picture and sound and excellent picture quality,especially when the material is to be shown to largeaudiences (25 or more). Film costs us about £14 perminute to shoot, compared with about £0.60 per minutefor video. VHS video, while light and portable, does notgive satisfactory quality when you need to edit thematerial, or when you are having copies made of the pro-gramme. Hi-Band video gives the best quality (it is the for-mat used for Electronic News Gathering in the UK), but isexpensive for us to use as we have to hire the editing equip-ment. For the Avebury Project we used Low Band U-Matic, which gives acceptable quality and can be editedin-house.

The cost of materials (the fifteen 20-minute video tapes weshot, the ¼in audio tape, and the edit master video tape)came to £170.

Other technical matters

Apart from such routinely tedious matters as video camerabatteries which have the annoying habit of always goingflat just when you need them most and are furthest awayfrom mains (for example, on top of Windmill Hill), therewere other technical problems unique to shooting theAvebury Project.

Firstly, because of our constraints of time and money, wehad to fit all our shooting into just five school days. Whenwe went to Avebury, the video crew travelled on the same


coach as the children, so there was no opportunity to getthere early and have the camera and lights set up in themuseum before the children arrived. It was quite a strainto try to be one step ahead of the children as they encoun-tered each new artefact or monument so that we couldrecord their initial reactions, and still allow them to carryout their academic project.

Secondly, there was only one experimental day at theschool. We felt it would be boring to show the samechildren doing more than one activity. This could alsohave led to the accusation of our only filming the brightestchildren (despite the fact that many teachers have com-mented that it is often the less academic children whoreally blossom on experimental days). So we had toremember which children we had filmed doing what; asthe children circulated from activity to activity, we had todash round in the opposite direction.

The editing experience

Editing a programme that has been shot without a script ismuch more of a challenge than editing one where each shothas been planned to join neatly and naturally onto the pre-vious one. Our first step was to spend some time viewingthe rushes (unedited master tapes) and preparing a shotlist which gave a detailed description of each shot plus ourevaluation of how well it served the aims of the video.From this we wrote a script in two columns - a descriptionof the shots we wanted, with the narration to be spokenalongside them. When we had recorded the narration, edit-ing consisted of finding the very best section of each of ourselected shots, and joining the shots and narration togetherin the most effective way possible.

Even when working on a scrupulously planned and scrip-ted project, it is sometimes only when one sees how theshots that have actually been obtained fit together on thescreen that one discovers what the programme is reallysaying. This is much more likely to be the case when theprogramme has been shot ‘'on the hoof'', like this one. It iscertainly true that one'’s judgement can become a littleblunted after three days in the editing suite. We found ithelpful to have colleagues take a fresh look at the editedvideo, and decided on a number of changes after consider-ing their reactions.

The only other significant technical hurdle we had to over-come in making the Avebury Project video was whenshooting slide shows: add too much lighting and you wash

out the slides, and neither the class nor the camera can seethem; add too little and the camera will only register elec-tronic noise. We got round this problem by bouncing thelight from 800 watt quartz filming lights off the ceiling, iepointing the lamps at the (white) ceiling so that only dif-fuse light fell on the subject. A word of warning if you trythis approach - you need to take care with the type of ceil-ing and how far away you put these very hot lamps. Ceilingtiles can easily get overheated!

Conclusion

The project was seen (by both teachers and team) to haveachieved all of the objectives outlined above, especially thethird and fourth objectives; the video has alreadystimulated a number of teachers to begin to use similarm e t h o d s i n t h e i r s c h o o l s . I n t h i s t y p e o f w o r karchaeologists and teachers can create a greater awarenessof the archaeological heritage which is an integral part ofthe environment. It is through this awareness that a fullerunderstanding and appreciation of the environment - andof the past - can be developed.

References

Hill, J, in prep The graveyard project, Archaeologyand education, Curriculum Development Centre,Southampton

Planel, P, 1986 Southampton town walls, Archaeol-ogy and education, 1, Curriculum DevelopmentCentre, Southampton

Richardson, W, 1984 Bones, pots and boomerangs,unpubl pap, Theoretical Archaeology Group Con-ference, Cambridge

Stone, P, 1986 Prehistory through ears, eyes, andbacks, Education Bull, 1, Council for BritishArchaeology

Teaching Media, 1986a Let'’s look around, Let’'s getstarted series, Southern Science and TechnologyF o r u m o n b e h a l f o f t h e D e p t o f T r a d e a n dIndustry, 1986b Let'’s design and build, Let’s get

started series, Southern Science and TechnologyForum on behalf of the Dept of Trade and Industry, 1986c Let'’s use the computer, Let' ’s get

started series, Southern Science and TechnologyF o r u m o n b e h a l f o f t h e D e p t o f T r a d e a n dIndustry

The Prestatyn excavation: education, presentation, and video Marion Blockley

Excavations were carried out by the Clwyd-PowysArchaeological Trust on a Roman bath house and civiliansettlement at Prestatyn from April to December 1984 andfrom May 1985 to January 1986. The post of site directorwas funded by Cadw, which had been set up by the WelshOffice in 1984 as the Welsh equivalent to EnglishHeritage. In the first year, the excavation staff comprised ateam of twelve recruited through the Community Pro-gramme of the Manpower Services Commission (MSC).One post within this team was an Education Officer, fun-ded for twelve months, and I was appointed to the post.The following year, the team was expanded to 30 partici-pants and I was funded by Cadw to help supervise theexcavation. A new display/graphics officer was funded bythe MSC, along with a pool of guides chosen from theenlarged digging team. There was a limited budget foreducation, display, and presentation for both seasons,paradoxically without any specific input from Cadw, thebody created by the Welsh Office to increase publicawareness and improve presentation of sites and monu-ments in Wales (as well as to administer funds for rescuearchaeology). Nevertheless Cadw had made it clear invarious ways that they would like to see considerable effortput into the field of public relations at Prestatyn and other‘publicly accessible’ sites in Wales. With the commendableexception of Archaeology in Clwyd, published annually byClwyd County Council, archaeology in North Wales hasso far presented a somewhat remote academic profile, andCadw wished to counterbalance this.

Twice-daily guided tours of the Prestatyn excavationswere provided throughout the two summers. For the dura-tion of the excavation, weatherproof display boards wereerected around the edges of the excavation and in par-ticular round a small and readily intelligible Roman bathhouse first uncovered in the 1930s; the display screenswere mostly at small-child level, tilted upwards so thatadults could read them easily without stooping. Theseboards contained reconstruction drawings and plans witha brief text explaining the views from each point, and wereregularly updated as the excavation progressed. An exhibi-tion was housed on site until the weather deteriorated inOctober, in a large reinforced polythene tent of the typegenerally used for wet weather digging during winterexcavations. This exhibition contained photographs andcoloured drawings as well as two models of the Romanbath house; the larger, at a scale of 1/20, was cut away todemonstrate the functioning of the hypocaust system.

It was intended that these displays would make the excava-tion and its aims more intelligible to visitors who came inthe evenings or between guided tours on weekdays, and atweekends. The exhibition tent and display boards also

served as useful visual aids for members of the diggingteam who showed visitors and school parties aroundthe excavation.

At the beginning of the first season’s excavation, threesmall booklets were produced. One was for adults, explain-ing the aims of the excavation, and two were for children(in English and Welsh), with a high proportion of illustra-tions to text, explaining the general principles of Romanbath houses based on the Prestatyn example. The Welsh-language version proved very popular, especially withWelsh-speaking school parties. A teacher’s guide was pro-duced at the end of the excavation as a valuable supple-ment to the Prestatyn video (see below). The pack includescopies oforiginal site and finds record forms and drawings,in particular a drawing of a dog skeleton at 1/5; copies ofbrooch illustrations prepared for publication; diagrams to

Local school children washing pottery and bone on site


Cut-away reconstruction drawing of the bath house

Prestatyn: education, presentation, and video 1 9

The open day: diggers dressed in Roman costume with the Ermine Street Guard and competition winners

amplify the film sequences about the grid system, plan-ning, levelling, and section drawing, and a bag of silica gelincluded for class experiments on packing, storage, andmoisture. Also included are copies of graphics used in thevideo, suggestions for further class work, and addresses ofuseful contacts in Wales and England. In addition, a pop-ular booklet with l ine and hal f tone i l lustrat ionsthroughout summarizing the site and finds is in press atthe time of writing (April 1986).

Several thousand people, including holidaymakers andlocal residents, were shown round the excavations. Schoolparties, brownies, cubs, and other childrens'’ groups weregiven special priority during evenings and at weekends. Onguided tours, children were allowed to handle robust pot-tery, bone, and tile, and were shown waterlogged Romantimbers and delicate small finds at close proximity.

Children of upper primary/lower secondary school levelwere allowed to wash and mark finds under supervisionand, in fact, carried out the bulk of this essential job duringthe summer holiday and at weekends during 1984. Olderchildren were allowed to work in small, closely-supervisedgroups on the excavation. Among the many helpers weremembers of the Young Archaeologists'’ Club on holiday,the local branch of the YAC - set up at Prestatyn HighSchool during the excavation - and older children from the

Intermediate Treatment Centre in the care of the SocialServices Department at Rhyl.

Open days were held each summer, and were a greatsuccess. A selection of the finds was put on display anddiggers, dressed in Roman costume, showed visitors roundthe site. The highlight for children was the Roman soldierfancy dress competition, judged each year by members ofthe Ermine Street Guard’1

. Children were provided with

instruction sheets and patterns to work from in advance,and helpers (local girl guides as well as members of theexcavation team) were on hand with raw materials duringthe open day to dress last-minute contestants. There wasconsiderable local and regional media interest in the com-petition. BBC Wales (Cardiff) broadcast a feature on it anddistributed pattern leaflets free of charge throughoutWales', whilst I broadcast on '‘Life for a Roman soldier inWales’ for BBC Wales' '‘Playday’ programme'.

As well as the on-site exhibition, a second display wasstaged in the foyer of the Prestatyn library from spring1984 through to spring 1986. Material was also preparedfor an exhibition travelling round libraries in Clwyd. ThePrestatyn library exhibition was regularly updated andcontained photos and coloured drawings as well as findsfrom the 1930s excavations at Prestatyn. A special featurewas the inclusion of a number of pieces of very fine,


Artist's impression of a Roman kitchen, featuring the portable oven or clibanus found at Prestatyn

coloured artwork, poems, stories, and a tape recording ofimpressions, all produced by primary school children as aresult of their visit to the excavations. I gave talks in NorthWales libraries during Children's Book Week, accom-panied by recent finds and the bath house models. On theIdes of March 1985 an evening talk, with slides and music,an exhibition, and a Roman banquet, were held in Pres-tatyn with brave souls tasting 'authentic' Roman foodfrom Apicius' ’cookery book (Flower & Rosenbaum1958).

To take all this work a stage further, and provide a morepermanent record as a supplement to school visits andslide shows, it was decided to produce a video of theexcavation. Preliminary work started late in the summerof 1984 but the slender resources available were fullystretched at that time in preparing exhibitions and displayboards, and in training guides. However, during 1985 thevideo project was taken up again and completed. Theoriginal intention was to produce a film of around twentyminutes'’ duration, using the Prestatyn experience toexplain the general principles and process of archaeologi-cal excavation. It was intended that the video would begeneral rather than 'site-specific' so that it would be ofmore use to teachers nationally2. It was hoped to aim the

video at upper primary/lower secondary school pupils;accordingly advice and technical assistance were soughtfrom a local teacher-training college. Sadly, this help failedto materialize and, after several delays caused by this andby the inclement weather of the summer of 1985, thefinished video was produced solely by myself, with pro-fessional technical assistance at the editing stage. Theresulting video would not stand comparison with the slickproducts of professional film producers, but it still pro-vides a valuable educational tool.

The production of the video proved a very cost-effectiveexercise. It cost less than £400 to produce, including twodays'’ hire of a video camera and recorder (£30), and thecost of three days spent in a fully-equipped editing studiowith a trained technician to edit the film and record thecommentary. The salary of the Education Officer has notbeen included in this estimate since it was an MSC-fundedpost. These labour costs would have included the cost oftime spent in preparing the script and sequence of shoot-ing, filming on site, editing, and recording the commen-tary, in all about two weeks'’ work. However, aboutthree-four weeks ought to be allocated to this task if theeducation officer is an inexperienced recent graduate.These costings compare favourably with the £9,000

Prestatyn: education, presentation, and video 21

quoted f or product ion of a similar video by a can save considerable time and frustration searching backcommercial company. and forward through tapes.

There is about four hours ’ film on the original videocassette which can be re-edited at any time in the future fora different audience or to serve a different purpose, forexample propaganda by archaeological units, or for Welshlocal history syllabuses.

Invaluable experience was gained in the production of thevideo, especially at the editing stage. For instance, evenbefore editing was completely finished, it was clear that thevideo could be re-edited immediately to produce a betterproduct, although only at a further cost of £200-£300 forprofessional editing help. It may therefore serve a usefulpurpose to pass on some of the lessons learned during theproduction of the Prestatyn video for those who are con-sidering producing their own3

. It is worth noting first of allthat I had no previous experience of using a video camera,only of 35mm camera work for recording and publicityphotos on an excavation; I had absolutely no experience ofthe process and potential of editing video films.

Before attempting to produce a film it is important toestablish well in advance who your intended audience isand what you wish to tell them. The content of the filmshould be kept simple and you should resist the urge tocram all the good sequences in just because the lightingwas terrific. Secondly, it is very important to prepare ascript and cartoon sequence of shots in advance andadhere rigidly to this during filming. The importance ofthis became clear to me during the editing stage when it

Excavations tend to be rather static and hence potentiallya dull subject for video, so it is important to try to film asmuch movement as possible and to make use of a widevariety of background noises. For example, a line of peopletrowelling or someone planning are both essentiallyimmobile subjects. To enliven them it is important to takea number of shots from a variety of angles and view pointsand to include some close-up shots. Several minutes’ film-ing will no doubt be edited down to an interesting andinformative sequence of only a few seconds’ duration.

Excavations progress slowly and , unless you haveunlimited access to equipment, it will be necessary to setup particular sequences so that they can be filmedeconomically. One such sequence could be the discoveryof a brooch on site, logging it, filling in the finds recordform, drawing the brooch in the finds hut, and placing thefinds tag in the ground or plotting the findspot. Before finalfilming, and in order to conserve valuable battery power, itpays to go through two or three ‘dummy runs’ to choosethe least self-conscious diggers. It is worth recording thecharacteristic noises and background atmosphere of anexcavation - bumping a barrow up the barrow run,earthmoving machinery in operation, shovelling glutinousmud, spraying wood, the noise of the water pump, trowell-ing stone, ‘tea break’, ‘clear up your loose’, gathering in thetools at the end of the day, and collecting the wages. If film-ing takes place in briefsnatches throughout the duration ofan excavation, care should be taken in editing to prevent

cartoon for sequences of shots prepared before filming commenced


breaks in continuitywarm/cold weather.

caused by changes of clothing in

The amount of time available for filming, the variability oflighting conditions, and the quality of the equipment arefundamental limiting factors when filming an excavation.The sort of equipment hired from television rental firmsrequires battery recharging every 20-30 minutes. It is vitalto arrange in advance a network of friendly neighbours torecharge batteries. If possible ask for the most recentequipment available as it will perform better at the lowlight levels frequently encountered on excavations. A fewextra pounds spent here will be repaid later in better filmquality. In an ideal world, excavations would haveunlimited funds and a video recorder and camera per-manently available, with someone who is familiar with theequipment free solely to record the excavation and its day-to-day running as well as unexpected and importantfinds.

If all else fails and important aspects are missed, use can bemade of good ‘action’ colour slides of the quality generallyexpected of archaeological record/publicity photos; theseare projected in the studio and filmed by video camera. Infact, the use of good slides taken under ideal lighting condi-tions can be more effective and require less effort thanattempting a video shot of a landscape (as we learned fromour own experience in heaving heavy recorder batteries,camera, and tripod to the top of the hills south of Pres-tatyn, only to find that the light had faded rapidly and theview had been rendered unfilmable!). It is possible in theediting studio to give a degree of movement to slides bypanning across and zooming in to focus on importantaspects or features such as cropmarks, or aspects of anexcavation’s contemporary environment. For example,the Clwyd-Powys Trust is currently preparing a briefvideo on aerial photography composed solely of slides,graphics, and commentary.

It is worth making full use of graphics and other pieces ofdisplay material such as models to amplify the video. Apiece of work prepared for a specific purpose or exhibitioncan have a variety of applications at no extra effort. Forexample, letters cut from Daler Board and mounted toform title blocks for exhibitions were used to form titleblocks introducing and ending the Prestatyn video.Through the incorporation of '‘fade-in/fade-out’' filmingtechnique, the titles produced a more professional finishthan computer-generated graphics would have done.

Commentary is not as difficult as one might imagine,especially if the owner of the voice is used to talking con-cisely in public on a particular theme. The important thingis not too talk too fast, and to avoid the temptation to saytoo much. It is perfectly easy to do a number of retakeswhen fitting a commentary to a particular film sequence -assuming you have a good working relationship withthe technician!

Good editing of the video is vital for continuity, and a basicknowledge of the process and some of its technical limita-tions is desirable before editing is attempted. In my state ofprofound ignorance, I assumed that one could edit downfrom four hours to 28 minutes and thence reorder and editstill further to 20 minutes without any noticeable loss of

quality. This is not the case! There is loss of quality infocus and colour mixing when recording VHS original filmonto Betamax to form the master tape. To edit down yetagain necessitates a further loss in quality as does thesubsequent making of extra copies from the master. As aresult, the finished length of the Prestatyn video was28 minutes rather than 20 minutes, and some sequenceswhich were too long have had to be provided with someform of non-essential commentary. This is, perhaps, themost important warning to offer from my experience. Iwould also emphasize once more the need to make use ofcartoon sequences and a pre-ordained order of shooting tomake the editing process less fraught.

As a result of producing a 28-minute video with longercommentary than I had originally intended, I feel the Pres-tatyn excavation video is more appropriate to upper secon-dary school or adult education groups4. However, all is notlost, since it is still possible to re-edit from the original tapea much shorter length video with a simpler commentaryfor primary school children. The master tape also providesan invaluable record for the archive; it serves as a salutaryreminder when writing-up, as one watches digger '‘X’'excavating a particular deposit up to his/her kneecaps inmud, to wonder about the quality of the evidenceretrieved.

I will conclude by emphasizing my opinion of the impor-tance of video as a means of conveying the fascination andexplaining the intricacies of archaeological techniques toschool children. Video can generate a high degree of com-munity awareness and involvement in archaeology andhence provide the ‘community benefit ’ which is thenecessary justification for further funding from the MSC.Excavations should be viewed as an important educationalresource. Although static in video terms, they are in realityever changing and therefore potentially more interestingthan the fixed displays of ancient monuments. It is,however, extremely d i f f i cul t to expla in fu l ly andimaginatively the potential of an excavation and fit it intoits wider context of sites and monuments management,development control, and the other tasks of regionalarchaeological units within the space of a one year MSCpost. It could be said that archaeologists have a duty to pre-sent their discipline to the general public, including schoolchildren, in order to give true return for the expenditure ofpublic money. On a purely selfish note, it is worth con-sidering that the future funding of rescue archaeologydepends on the informed opinions of the politicians, tax-payers, and ratepayers of the future who are the schoolchildren of today. Finally I look forward to the day whencentral government recognizes the importance of theeducational role of the regional units and sets a precedentby giving them educational budgets and by fundingeducational posts on a more permanent basis than is possi-ble through temporary MSC placements.

Notes

1 The Ermine Street Guard is a society dedicated toresearch into the Roman Imperial Army and thereconstruction of Roman armour and equipmentof the second half of the 1st century AD. Schoolvisits are made where one or two members helpchildren with their Roman studies. The Ermine

Prestatyn: education, presentation and video 23

Street Guard may be contacted c/o OaklandFarm, Dog Lane, Witcombe, Glos, telephoneWitcombe 2235.

2 One of the findings of a seminar on film and video 4 Copies of the Prestatyn video are available onin education held in Birmingham in February loan to schools and other interested parties for £21985 and entitled 'Archaeology in Focus'’. The to cover postage and packing. The video and otherseminar was jointly organized by the Council for publications may be obtained from the Clwyd-British Archaeology and the British Universities Powys Archaeological Trust, 7a Church Street,Film and Video Council (BUFVC). Welshpool, Powys, telephone 0938 3670.

3 A copy of the Prestatyn video has been, and allfurther videos should be, deposited with theBUFVC who publ ish an annual ly revisedcatalogue o f audio-v isual mater ia l o f a l l

Reference

Flower, B, & Rosenbaum, E (eds), 1958Roman cookery book

Apicius: the

disciplines available on loan. They may be con-tacted at BUFVC, 55 Greek Street, London,W1V 5LR.

Sandwell Adventure: an educational computer package David Breedon

'Sandwell Adventure' is an educational computer packagewhich is being developed for upper primary schoolchildren, particularly those living in or near Sandwell.There are a number of factors influencing its nature, onebeing the urban situation of the borough.

Sandwell lies within the West Midlands conurbation. Ithas a school population of about 50,000 attending approx-imately 120 schools. By virtue of its geographical positionas a neighbour of Birmingham, it has most of the problemsassociated with large cities. There are areas of Sandwellwhich are affluent but most of the borough is not, and aproportion of the work done in schools is designed to com-pensate for the disadvantages suffered by socially-deprived children. One of the problems is that the childrenhave little opportunity to travel. In general, they do notcome into contact with people from different backgrounds,nor do they have the chance to experience the ruralenvironment.

The second factor involved in the development of the pac-kage was the establishment of the Educational Mic-rotechnology Unit by Sandwell Borough Council. In 1979,realizing the need for children to have access to newtechnology, the government offered to match pound forpound any money raised for the purchase of school com-puters. The Microtechnology Unit evolved out of the needto organize the purchase of the computers and the need tovet the suitability ofcomputer programs (software). It alsobecame involved in software development.

The third factor is that children are fascinated by com-puters and in most cases prefer working with them toworking with books. The machines are seen as a par-ticularly powerful tool for encouraging learning. Forexample, children have asked me if they could use thecomputer in preference to playing outside on a sunny day,and have later been discovered deep in a program designedto teach punctuation!

The aim of the project which resulted in the 'SandwellAdventure' package was to build on children's fascinationwith computers and, us ing the resources o f theEducational Microtechnology Unit, to produce a simula-tion which would help alleviate some of the software pro-blems in local schools. I was seconded to the Unit for halfof each week during the school year 1984-5, and the pro-duction of 'Sandwell Adventure' was part of my work. Iwas given the help of two computer programmers fundedby the Manpower Services Commission.

There are hundreds of language programs and thousandsof mathematics programs, so unless our software was todrift into obscurity it needed to be based within aneducationally barren area. Investigation showed history to

be one of the subjects with a shortage of software and,within history-based programs, simulations of the histori-cal process were a minority group.

At this stage, it was decided that for our software to beattractive to the children at whom it was aimed, it wouldbe necessary to use as many different types of educationalmedia as possible. We decided that our children reallyneeded to be able to experience history 'through the solesof their feet', as well as experiencing it through the draw-ings, diagrams, maps, and slides which we intended to pro-vide. We considered ourselves to be competing withpackages like 'Expedition to Saqqara' and 'Mary Rose'.Both of these are very good in their own fields, but toexperience them 'through the soles of their feet' childrenwould require the use of daddy's airline or an extendedcoach journey to the south coast followed by a quickcourse in sub-aqua techniques. We concluded that ourpackage had to have a local 'flavour', so that it could beeasily accessible to the vast majority of the children inour schools.

The package could have been based around the historicalperiod covered by the Black Country Museum at nearbyDudley. This museum protrays life in the Midlands fromthe time of the Industrial Revolution up to about the1920s. Various buildings typical of the area have beenrescued and brought to the museum; they are staffed bypeople in costume who do tasks relevant to the period.However, we felt that it would be hard for primary schoolchildren to appreciate that houses similar to the ones inwhich they had lived all their lives were part of theirheritage. We really needed something completely divorcedfrom their normal lifestyle.

In the end a suitable piece of local history was discoveredeven nearer to the area. Slightly to the east of the centre ofSandwell is Sandwell Valley. Its main claim to fame until afew years ago was that it was 'that nice park that the M5nearly missed'. However, the Valley now has a real claimto fame in that it has its own archaeological dig. Thisseemed too good a chance to miss. It meant that if we couldproduce an educational package around the subject of thedig, not only could our children work in school on the pro-ject, but they could also visit the site and have first-handexperience of what it was all about, a rare opportunity totake part in the making of history. Once the excavation ofthe medieval Priory is completed, the ruins of the wallswill be conserved and open to the public. The children willbe able to visit the site again, with the understanding ofhow it all came into being.

After consultation with Michael Hodder, the excavationdirector, the decision was taken to simulate part of his jobin the computer package. The child must aim to excavate

Sandwell Adventure 2 5

the site within a limited budget. For the purpose of the pac-kage the area of the site is divided horizontally into squaresby a grid, and vertically into levels. The child starts workon the top level and '‘excavates’' one grid square at a time. Apercentage of each level has to be excavated before thechild can progress to the next level down. As it costs moneyto excavate each grid square, the idea is to pick squareswhich are likely to contain structures or finds and avoidthose that don’t. As on the actual site, artefacts are concen-trated in particular areas and walls tend to be linear, soinformation gained in the excavation of one square can beused to decide which other squares are likely to be produc-tive. The discovery of a structure or artefact credits moneyto the child’s account. The child must remain in credit inorder to continue excavation and progress through thelevels.

Information about the discoveries appears on the screen.As each section of wall is found, it is displayed in the cor-rect position in the grid square. At the bottom of the pic-ture, further details are given, for example '‘Wall runseast-west'’ (north is at the top), or '‘you have found a cor-ner'’. Alternatively, if artefacts are found, they are notdisplayed on the screen but the computer informs the childthat he or she has found (perhaps) Pottery: Type 1B.Further information about this can then be found in theliterature which accompanies the program. The languageused in the package has been deliberately kept simple tomake it intelligible to children with reading difficulties(some software which would otherwise be suitable forprimary school children is of no use to those with a below-average reading age).

Certain liberties had to be taken in the computer version ofexcavation methods in order to ease computer-related pro-blems. For instance, it is not possible to excavate trialtrenches vertically through the levels. Also, each level cor-responds to a particular point in time so that walls whichwere in use for many years may appear on several differentlevels in the package. However, in contrast to the situationon site, the screen clears completely after each level hadbeen excavated and the same structure has to be redis-covered. In fact, children soon learn that a structure seenat one level may also be present at a lower level. All thesechanges were discussed with Mr Hodder and he agreed totheir inclusion.

The program limits the length of time that a child canactually work on the machine at any one go to approx-imately 15 minutes. This ensures that they do theassociated paperwork: making records of how much wasspent and what was discovered, drawing the walls onpaper, etc. The length of time that children are allowed onthe machine may be reduced by variables generated ran-domly by the computer. They may have problems withlow funding or adverse weather conditions. Sometimesthey get rained off or the workers go on strike! The com-puter keeps each individual child’s records up to date sothat the session'’s happenings are stored and the child cancontinue on the next occasion from the point she or heleft off.

An element of fun has been introduced into the package tomaintain the child’s interest but not so much that it turnsthe learning into a game. The computer generates randomfactors. If luck is with you (and rich, generous Americantourists come around) this will generateextra credit, but ifit isn'’t your account will be debited.

The perceived benefits for the children are that the pac-kage gives them access to their heritage and broadens theirhorizons by introducing them both to archaeology and tothe rural Sandwell Valley. It gives them an insight into anarchaeologist’s job and its related problems. It encouragesthem to visit the Sandwell Valley which, besides archaeol-ogy, has many recreational activities to offer. It improvestheir spatial abilities (use of plans etc) and helps developlogical thinking. It is not intended to encourage computerfamiliarization: children below the age of 11 are alreadywell aware of computers.

The whole package will comprise the computer software,drawings, diagrams, maps, slides, etc. I must emphasizethat at the moment the package is still under development.Trials are continuing but they are drawing to a conclusion.Any enquiries regarding the software should be directed toeither Mr M Smith, Educational Microtechnology Unit,Charlemont Teachers' Centre, Connor Road, West Brom-wich, West Midlands, or myself at Parkside Junior School,Ballot Street, Smethwick, Warley, West Midlands.

Site visits for schools: the experiences of the Sandwell

Valley Archaeological Project Michael A Hodder

Introduction

The Sandwell Valley is situated between West Bromwichand Handsworth, about four miles north-west of Bir-mingham city centre. It is one of the few open spaces of anysize within the West Midlands conurbation and as such is avaluable recreation area for the surrounding population. Anature trail has been established in the valley and the18th century Sandwell Park Farm is being restored toserve as a v is i tor centre and as an urban farmcontaining livestock.

The Sandwell Valley Archaeological Project began in 1982as an extension of work on Sandwell Park Farm. It is finan-ced by the Manpower Services Commission through itsCommunity Programme. The aim of the project is torecord the archaeology and history of the Sandwell Valleyand to prepare the results for public display. The morevisible historic sites will be incorporated into a heritagetrail which will begin at Sandwell Park Farm, where amuseum is being constructed.

The Project's work has been concentrated on the excava-tion of the site of Sandwell Priory and Sandwell Hall. Thishas produced Mesolithic flintwork as well as features anddeposits resulting from continuous occupation of the sitefrom the foundation of Sandwell Priory in the 12th cen-tury to the demolition of Sandwell Hall in 1928. To thevisitor, the most obvious features in the excavated areaconsist of the footings of brick and sandstone walls, mostlyless that 1m high, and floors. In addition, features of thesurrounding landscape have been recorded, the most pro-minent of which are medieval fishponds and ridge-and-furrow, an 18th century ha-ha, and an ice-house whichhas been excavated and restored to its original form.

Other than in the Sandwell Valley, there are few visiblehistoric monuments in the area and there has been no pre-vious archaeological work. The Project's work thereforesoon aroused interest in local teachers and its value as aneducational resource has subsequently been promoted.

The organization of site visits

Teachers arrange site visits with one of two purposes inmind. On the one hand, the visit is considered as a 'dayout': it usually takes place towards the end of the summerterm and is combined with a visit to the nature trail andSandwell Park Farm. Such a visit is recreational ratherthan educational in character since it occurs in isolationand is not related to other school work. On the other hand,and preferably, site visits are made as an adjunct to work

done in the classroom. The studies involved tend to beeither 'understanding the locality' or 'how do we knowabout history' and the age group is generally upper juniorto lower secondary, ie 10-12 year-olds. At this age,children are old enough to understand the conceptsinvolved but have not yet started work on restrictiveexamination syllabuses.

For a site visit to be of value, both teacher and pupils mustbe well prepared beforehand. Ideally, the teacher visits thesite first alone and discusses the particular requirements ofthe class visit. He or she can then appreciate how muchtime will be needed, and decide how many children it isfeasible to bring at one time and, indeed, whether the sitevisit will be a useful exercise. A visit to the site of SandwellPriory and Hall is a visit to an excavation in progress: if theintention is to see a medieval monastery or an 18th cen-tury country house, then a site with more substantialremains should be selected. Following the teacher's visit,Project staff visit the school to give a talk illustrated withslides. The children in the classroom are told aboutarchaeological methods and what will be seen on the sitevisit. Objects that can be handled and discussed by thechildren are taken in to the school.

Conducting the site visit

If time permits, site visits normally include the Priory andHall excavation, the fishponds, the ridge-and-furrow, theha-ha, and the ice-house. On the Priory and Hall site, thestratigraphic sequence and excavation and recording inprogress can be observed and explained. Visible processesand structures are related to those seen on slides during thetalk in the classroom. As far as possible a question-and-answer approach is used, so that logical reasoning by thechildren themselves is encouraged. Some active participa-tion by the children is desirable, preferably producing atangible end-product. Participation in excavation canhave little value because the results are unpredictable andfew results can be expected in the time normally availablefor a site visit. Drawing, though, has proved to be a suitableparticipatory activity. Children are shown how to planusing a frame and each child plans part of an area. AtSandwell we have used an 18th century cobble surface forthis activity since it can withstand the trampling involvedwithout suffering damage. Several people are needed tosupervise this, one to each small group of children. Theresults of drawing can be taken back to school and used insubsequent classroom work or displayed.

Objects have a more immediate appeal to children thanexcavated features. At Sandwell we are fortunate in havingdifferent types of object from several periods. However,the objects could simply be taken to the school; there is noparticular value in visiting the site to see them. Humanskeletons pose a problem both in site visits and in theclassroom. Once these have been seen by children, eitheron slides or on site, they tend to distract attention fromeverything else, so we now do not mention or show

Priory and Hall (see the article by David Breedon), and weintend that it will eventually be possible to offer a com-bination of a talk at a school, a site visit, and computerwork. We are considering the creation of a mock excava-tion area adjacent to the actual excavation, where childrencan follow through the whole process of excavation,recording, and finds work.

Summarythem.

Our experiences at Sandwell have shown that:The fishponds and ridge-and-furrow adjacent to theexcavation can be used as an exercise in archaeologicalinterpretation: what are they and what do they tell usabout life at Sandwell Priory? The ice-house and the ha-hahave proved to be great attractions for children. They areboth clearly visible; the ice-house can be entered, and wemake the children run across the ha-ha to appreciate itsfunction. Again, both these sites provide interpretativeexercises: interesting responses have been received on thepurpose of the ice-house!

Future work

1) the site visit must be integrated with classroomwork

2) adequate preparation must be made for the visit

3) the children must be able to participate actively insome way.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Jacqueline Glew and Philip Baker, both ofwhom were responsible for organizing and conducting

A local teacher's centre has developed a computer-based visits for the Project, for helpful discussions about theirlearning package based on the excavation of Sandwell experiences, and to teachers for their comments.

Tales of Troy: recreating the past in the classroom Rayna Andrew

The Mycenae Project was set up in 1983, under the spon-sorship of the Department of Ancient History andArchaeology, University of Birmingham, and funded bythe Manpower Services Commission. It now employs ninepeople under the Community Programme Scheme.

The Project was devised with two major aims. The firstwas the compilation and cross-indexing of an archaeologi-cal archive of material from the British excavations atMycenae in Greece. This material included photographs,site notebooks, and small finds indexes of over 10,000objects. These have been fed through a microcomputeronto permanent storage on floppy disks, and a masterindex of all finds now exists. This index can be used byspecialists to study specific aspects of the finds, or certainareas, and hence facilitates the publication of materialfrom Mycenae.

The second aim of the project was to introduce MycenaeanGreece to a wide cross-section of the general public, and tocreate an exhibition designed primarily with schoolchildren in mind. The Project studied numerous museumdisplays but it was felt that few of them were exciting orattractive enough to encourage children actively to learn,and many were not designed with children in mind.Objects were displayed with lengthy captions in darkgalleries and the overall effect was often rather colourlessand dry. On the basis of this, an exhibition was designed bythe Project that would appeal primarily to children, butwould also be of general interest to everybody. The exhibi-t ion was ent i t led 'Homer 's Heroes : Dai ly Li fe inMycenaean Greece'.

We had several reasons for our choice of subject matter:the selection was not simply dictated by the material thatwas available in the archive being compiled by the project.The majority of primary schools, while teaching a numberof historical subjects including Classical Greece, theRomans, the Vikings, and even Greek myths and legends,do not attempt to teach in any detail the earlier periods ofGreek prehistory, such as the Minoan and the Mycenaeanperiods. We felt that an exhibition on the Mycenaeanperiod would be of benefit to teachers, as it could act as astarting point for them in teaching Greek history, andwould introduce the origins of certain Greek gods and god-desses and practices found in later Classical times.

We also believed that many periods preceding the Classi-cal era were thought to be uncivilized and primitive, and sowished to demonstrate that an earlier and very advancedsociety had existed. We found that a large number ofchildren knew a few of the myths and legends surroundingthe period, particularly stories from Homer: the WoodenHorse and Helen of Troy were names known to a large

number of children, and many knew the stories ofOdysseus and the giant Cyclops, and of the Sirens -strange creatures with the heads of women and the bodiesof birds who lured sailors to their deaths with hypnoticsinging.

Although the children had heard some of these famousstories, whether in class or from story books, there was ageneral lack of understanding of the origins of the legends- who the stories were actually about. We felt that childrenwould find it easier to relate to the people we were portray-ing if we could first provoke their imagination, so wedecided to link the archaeological background with Home-ric legend in the exhibition. The stories of Homer had littledifficulty in making this possible.

The exhibition was constructed on a limited budget. Ouraim was to produce something bold and colourful, withfull-size exhibits, in which children could see and discoverthings for themselves. A number of pictorial display panelswere designed, portraying various aspects of life inMycenaean Greece, including worship, buildings, food,clothes, and warfare, and we attempted to give a broadview of what life could have been like for all classes ofsociety.

One project member made two full-size costumes - courtdresses - of Mycenaean women for the exhibition, usingonly hand-spun and hand-woven materials with naturaldyes, bought in Greece. We felt that children would bemuch more attracted to full-size exhibits than to scalemodels, and would display a more marked interest andremember more if the 'real thing'’could be seen andfelt.

The Mycenaean period is fortunate in having the earliestcomplete suit of armour yet found in Europe, excavated ata tomb at Dendra, near Mycenae. The armour is made ofbronze and is clumsy and heavy. An exact reconstructionwas made for the exhibition by Bournville College of Artusing a copper alloy, and including a helmet, sword,greaves, and arm guards.

Other exhibits included a quarter-scale model of a shrineexcavated at Mycenae, a number of pots and bronzesloaned from the British Museum and the AshmoleanMuseum, Oxford, and a full-size working model of aBronze Age upright loom.

It was decided to hold a series of teachers' meetings, priorto the opening of the exhibition, to discuss how the exhibi-tion could best be of value to teachers and children onbooked working visits. These were very successful as wewere able to assess the varied needs of classes and the areason which to place most emphasis. For this purpose we pro-

Tales of Troy 2 9

duced worksheets, one for children under ten and one forolder children. Classes booked into the Museum to see theexhibition were first given an introduction to the exhibi-tion and a brief background to the period and the Homericlegends. They were taken around the gallery in groups todiscuss each exhibit and each aspect of daily life beforeworking on their own with the worksheets. All the answersto the questions on the worksheet could be found by read-ing the displays, which encouraged the children toexamine things closely. To encourage extra reading weproduced a quiz which required a little more thought andhad to be taken away and completed. Small prizes wereoffered for the best entries.

Using a worksheet was beneficial both to the children andto the Project. It made the children read the boards andcaptions closely, with the result that understanding of theaspects portrayed was greater, and we found that thechildren went away remembering a great deal about theexhibition. We learnt from their questions which areas weneeded to elaborate upon, and where we had not madethings clear on the boards. The captions in the exhibitionwere designed to be short but informative, since werealized from our own experience that most people do notread captions which are lengthy and too involved. Inseveral cases we used comparisons with contemporaryobjects and buildings.

We wanted to make the children’s visits to the Museumenjoyable and memorable while retaining the learning ele-ment and so we introduced a series of activities to accom-pany the exhibition. For many children, reading about thepast does not bring an understanding of life in those times.It is difficult to envisage the hardships of a life withoutelectricity, plumbing, and shops selling ready-madeclothes and toys without attempting to try out certaintasks which would have been common in the past. Wetherefore designed a small number of activities to helpchildren gain a closer understanding of MycenaeanGreece.

Children undertook the spinning and weaving of wool;most were surprised by the difficulty of the task, and wereshocked that this activity was necessary to produce theclothes that are now bought ready-made from shops - amodern convenience taken so much for granted. Forauthenticity we used an uncombed fleece from a Jacobsheep which has a coarse, shaggy coat similar to sheepfound in Greece, and for spinning we used simple dropspindles. The children wove the results of their spinning(mostly thick and lumpy yarn!) on hand frames, but wealso encouraged children to have a go at using the narrowupright loom in the exhibition.

Children also tried their hand at writing their own namesin Linear B, the ancient Mycenaean syllabic script. Wehad prepared a worksheet for this exercise, givingLinear B symbols together with their approximate corres-ponding sounds, and children looked through to find themost appropriate symbols. The part the children foundmost difficult was looking simply for the sounds in theirnames and not trying to spell their names with all the silentletters. The exercise helped children become more adept atworking out syllables and using a worksheet, as well asbeing a very interesting and unusual task for them.

A Project member demonstrates primitive spinningtechniques

Many chi ldren were surpr ised to learn that theMycenaeans did not write with pens and paper, and wereintrigued by the use of clay tablets and writing imple-ments. We told the children how to create their own claytablets using self-hardening model clay and wooden sticks.We were able to discuss how Linear B tablets were tran-slated and what the Mycenaeans used them for: keeping aninventory of stock and slave duties, recording of militarymoves, and religious ceremonies, for example. On displayin the exhibition we had a genuine Linear 13 tablet detail-ing the possessions of one man.

Children find it difficult to understand how it is possible tolearn so much about a society that had no contemporarywritten history. Although our aim was not to teacharchaeological techniques in any detail, we decided that inteaching a period of prehistory to children it was impor-tant to tell them how archaeologists know about certainaspects of life. We therefore incorporated into the visitssome explanation of archaeological methods and inter-pretation. We explained how evidence such as Linear Btablets, remains of buildings, preserved cereal grains, andanimal bones can be used to reconstruct a partial picture oflife in the past.

The success of the exhibition was such that we decided toexpand our ideas and take them into schools. A large num-ber of the schools that visited the Museum wanted follow-up visits, and the short length of time that the exhibitionwas on show meant that many schools which wanted to


Children draw Mycenaean objects from postcards and templates

visit it were unable to do so. We needed to plan a packagefor schools, although we were restricted by a small teamand a limited budget. The package we designed started offas an offshoot to the work in the museum but has nowexpanded and developed into a series of visits to eachschool combining talks, activities, and drama.

It was not possible to take any form of large travellingexhibition around schools: the expense involved in creat-ing and transporting it would have been prohibitive. Wedecided to work from the Homeric legends as these cap-tured the children’s imagination, led to the desire to knowmore and also offered so much scope for art projects. Onthis premise, we designed four portable display boardswhich portrayed in photographs many of the stories ofHomer, from both the Iliad and the Odyssey. As well asintroducing and expanding upon the stories, the displayboards used pictures from all periods, ranging from Classi-cal Greek vases to 19th century paintings, showing howmuch influence these stories have had upon artists right upto the present day.

We hoped not simply to tell stories but to show the impor-tance of these stories, both for historical reasons and forthe influence of the Homeric epics over the centuries on somuch of western culture.

We found that talking to the children, using the displayboards, and asking questions, encouraged them to tell

much of what they knew about the stories. It was possibleto get them to take over in telling parts of the tales, and todraw even the shyer children out. There is something foreverybody in Homer’s poems, and we found that throughdiscussing the tales the children were able to look uponthem ob ject ive ly , and to accept that they d id notnecessarily represent factual historical accounts.

Once we impressed upon the children that the stories wereabout a real society, that of the Mycenaeans, we began tointroduce the archaeological background of the period,showing a series of slides of the buildings, palaces, tombs,and many objects created by the Mycenaeans. From thearchitectural remains of the period - the palaces, royaltombs, and fortification walls - it would have been easy togive a very one-sided view of Mycenaean society. Weattempted, however, to portray the society across the bor-ders of class, describing the luxury of the palaces, withtheir drains, baths, rich frescoes, and grand throne rooms,and the obvious poverty of those living outside the citadelwalls. By asking the children various questions, such aswhat the lack of remains of ordinary people’s dwellingscould mean, we were able to get the children themselves toarrive at a picture of what life could have been like.

Children have an active interest in how people used to live,and how their lives compare with those of children in thepast, with questions about school, toys, pets, and eventoilets! Many children were surprised to learn that

Tales of Troy 3 1

A member of the Project and one of the audience act out ascene set in Odysseus' palace

Mycenaean society was not as primitive as they believed,and that a sophisticated system of drains was in operationin some of the preserved buildings.

There is a firm opinion among many archaeologists thattaking part in activities concerning the past is irrelevant. Ifeel, by contrast, that any activity that involves children ina way that instructs can only be beneficial. Although thechildren learn facts from talks, books, and pictures, I feelthat this learning is reinforced when supplemented byactivities. A true understanding of how something is donecan only be achieved by doing it oneself . The difficulties ofa commonplace task such as spinning cannot be fullyappreciated unless it is tried out.

With this in mind a new part to the Project was set up, con-sisting of a drama team, originally two people and nowthree. Their aim was to prepare a series of short plays andworkshops based on the Greek myths and legends and onthe stories of Homer. There have been three main produc-tions, covering the story of Odysseus and his involvementin the Trojan war, the myth of the Cyclops and Odysseus,and the story of the Minotaur.

The reasons for forming a drama team were varied. We feltthat drama offered a very different form of instructionfrom talks and slides, and that it would link in very wellwith the activities sessions taken by the archaeologicalteam. We also felt that drama would be extremely helpfulas a way of 'bringing the period alive'’for children, andwere therefore keen to involve the children in the perfor-mance as much as possible.

Our original drama team consisted of two people, whoneeded to make the best and most economical use of theirbudget. Props were therefore kept to a minimum and wetried to use objects and materials that children could easilyfind or make themselves. Scenery consisted of a singlebackdrop which could be adapted to reflect differentsurroundings, and which we were able to use in differentperformances. Most props doubled up as other items laterin the play; for example, a sheet used as a tableclothbecame a burial shroud for Agamemnon. The plays relymuch upon the children’'s imagination, which is ideal as wecould partially involve the children in the storytelling.

We found it unnecessary to use many different and expen-sive costumes to differentiate between the various charac-ters in a performance, and instead relied upon the use ofmasks to define them. This was particularly successfulbecause not only could we make the masks ourselvescheaply and effectively, but we could also involve thechildren in creating their own masks. For this purpose weset up mask workshops with the children, using cardboardtemplates and archaeological evidence such as the famousgold death masks from the shaft graves at Mycenae. Byusing masks, two people managed to play up to fourteencharacters in one performance.

Involvement of the children was integral to the perfor-mances. Children played individual parts, includingAgamemnon, Clytemnaestra, and Helen of Troy, andcollective parts, from the sheep belonging to Polyphemusthe Cyclops and Odysseus' crewmen to the walls formingthe labyrinth that housed the Minotaur in the Palace ofMinos on Crete. Throughout all the performances thechildren were asked to contribute - in providing solutionsto problems, in answering questions, thus reinforcing thearchaeological background they had previously been told

Workshops encourage children to devise their own ideas on aperformance


about, and in devising methods of portraying objects andsurroundings, such as Odysseus’ ship and large battlescenes at Troy.

We found that involving the children in this way brokedown any ‘'shyness barriers'’ that existed and encouragedtheir attention as they watched friends performing certainparts. The children needed to listen attentively as theirparticipation was often required on cue, so certain phrasesrequiring a response were incorporated into the plays.After the performance, children were asked to devise theirown plays in a series of workshops. They were encouragedto think up ideas to portray props, such as the WoodenHorse, and to enact scenes of battle and sailing bythemselves.

Although the performance was designed to entertain, italso taught a great deal. The children learned throughinvolvement and there was a continual reinforcement ofthe archaeological background. As the children were ableto relate to the characters in the play, we also felt that theygained a greater understanding of ancient Greece and themyths and legends surrounding it.

The objectives of the drama team were not only to producea greater understanding of myths and legends, but also totry to put them into perspective. The drama workshopsaimed to achieve this by involving the children in a num-ber of games. One of these was '‘Chinese Whispers'’. In thisa phrase is passed around the group from person to personin a whisper and the final person to receive it speaks italoud. Almost invariably, the phrase had been changed,

often dramatically. This game helped the children tounderstand how easy it was for stories to change throughgenerations of storytellers and how legends could be builtup from sparse facts. All tales from the Mycenaean periodwere related through oral tradition until they were writtendown in the Homeric form we know today. After havingbeen shown the ease with which a sentence can beexaggerated and turned around in five minutes, thechildren could realize that Homer’s stories could not betaken as completely factual after a few hundred years ofbeing told and retold!

The schools package acted, in a lot of cases, as a startingpoint for teachers'’ detailed projects on Greece, and thoseclasses wishing to expand upon our work on their owncould make use of a project box containing worksheets,information, books, and equipment for activities. Wedecided to create this project box to go on loan to anyschool wishing to do project work on Greece.

The exhibition '‘Homer’s Heroes'’ and the schools packagehave both been extremely successful. '‘Homer’s Heroes’'has been on display at the Birmingham City Museum andArt Gallery, Manchester Museum, Bristol University, andthe University of Birmingham. The Project team hasvisited a large number of schools in the Birmingham area,and has followed up requests for lectures and activitiesfrom schools visiting the exhibition at all the venues.There has been a lot of demand for follow-up work fromthe schools visited, and the Project is continually devisingnew activities and performances in response to this.

Experimental archaeology John Steane

Introduction

Sine experimentia nihil scire potest (without experiment itis not possible to know anything). So says the inscriptionfound over the entrance to the Daubeny Science Library atMagdalen College, Oxford. We live in an age of technologi-cal innovation and our interest in the past is coloured by acuriosity to investigate past industrial techniques. Duringthe late 1960s and early 1970s the boys of Kettering Gram-mar School Local History and Archaeological Societywere engaged (with financial help from the Ancient Monu-ments Division of the Department of the Environment) inexcavating a deserted medieval village and industrial sitea t L y v e d e n b e t w e e n B r i g s t o c k a n d O u n d l e i nNorthamptonshire (SP 984861). They uncovered a com-plex of workshop, kilns, storeshed, and pits dating from the13th to the 15th century, in which pottery and tiles hadbeen made on an industrial scale. The pottery industryhere overlay evidence for iron smelting of the 11th-12th

Loading the first experimental pot kiln

Single flue pot kiln as excavated at Lyveden,Northamptonshire

century in this forest-edge settlement. In each of sixsummer terms, 1968-1973, attempts were made toreconstruct medieval industrial processes, the evidence forwhich had been revealed during the digging season ayear before.

Making medieval pottery kilns

The archaeological evidence for these posed a series ofquestions to which we could suggest some inevitablyspeculative but (we hoped) intelligent answers. We feltthat this encouraged an experimental approach. The firstand most important question was about the nature of thesuperstructure of the kilns, of which only the footings wereleft. Did medieval potters dome their kilns or did they fireopen-topped? Secondly, what was the purpose of the relin-ings and baffles which were noticeable features of the kilnstructures? Thirdly, what temperatures were necessary tofire medieval pottery?

The experimental programme took place on the schoolfield within the lee of a small copse and adjacent to thetechnical subjects wing (including engineering and metalworkshops). Three pottery kilns were built. The 1968 onewas a scaled-down version (two-thirds of the size of kilnexcavated), a single-flue oval structure made of blocks ofclay with a temporary dome of withies and clay. Noattempt was made to record temperatures but the load of


Firing the first experimental pot kiln at night

pots was success ful ly f i red dur ing open day andthroughout the following night. Considerable difficultieswere encountered during 1969 when an enlarged kiln wasbuilt on a similar single-flue plan, this time loaded withridge tiles, copies of those excavated at Lyveden. The tem-peratures attained during a further night firing were thistime recorded but proved to be disappointingly low, reach-ing 346 degrees C at the highest point. The main dif-ficulty was the roof structure which kept collapsing as thefire consumed the hazel withies supporting it.

The third firing

The third attempt, made in 1970, was attended with a goodmeasure of success and will be described in more detail.The kiln, this time, was essentially a replica of the Lyvedenkiln D1 whose distinguishing features included an apsidalend, central pedestal, and two arched flues. In this case theoverall size of the firing chamber and the flue was scaleddown from 12ft (3.66m) to 7ft 7in (2.31m) (at the time allour measurements were imperial) with all the otherdimensions in the same ratio and a kiln-sized hole was dug.The footings were built of flaggy cornbrash rubble broughtfrom Lyveden and laid on a thin bed of clay. Clay was usedas a mortar for this foundation and the central pedestal, 3ft(0.91m) long and 1ft 8in (0.46m) wide, was built in asimilar fashion. The two flues were each arched over bylimestone lintels. Eight narrow limestone slabs were inser-ted into the firing chamber as kiln bars, spanning thepassage between the pedestal and the outer walls. This wasone part of the structure not justified by archaeologicalevidence. We knew from picking up the fragmented rem-nants that the kiln bars used by the medieval potters weretapering bars of clay, tempered with crushed shell and

fired in the kiln. Fifty cubic feet (1.4cu m) of limestoneweighing six tons (6 tonnes) and seventy cubic feet(2cu m) of clay grogged with earth puddled on the fieldnearby were used for the fabric. A 10in (0.25m) thick claydome supported centrally by the pedestal was added. Pre-firing dried out, hardened, and stabilized the structure.With each experiment we became more expert at record-ing our results. This time thermocouples and Bullersrings, kindly provided by the London Brick Company (ourmain rivals in the field!), and a potentiometer lent by theShoe and Allied Trades Research Association were set inposition and the kiln filled with pottery made by a localpotter , Mrs Shir ley Phi l l ips , and the school artdepartment.

The kiln, as in the other experiments, was fired on theevening of the school open day and throughout the night.This had the advantage of being a focal point of interest forhundreds of parents, to balance the other attractions of thestaff v school cricket match and the latest achievements ofthe satellite tracking team. Extracts from the diary of theexperiment illustrate some of the problems we met:

51b (2.3kg) brushwood and 51b (2.3kg) of logs fed intoeach flue at approximately ten minutes intervalsthroughout evening and night.

Front of kiln now very black. Cracks in sides seem tobe increasing but not considered dangerous. Tem-perature on thermocouple B , 299 degrees C ,remains constant.

Vortex anti-clockwise from front of kiln. It is notedthat as we lower the fire in the right hand flue theflames go higher in the left hand flue and more heatcomes out of the back vent, the flames being suckedin further. When the right hand one is raked out thetemperature increases noticeably (rise of40 degrees C in ten seconds).

Pottery now visibly glowing red through the upperrear vent: left hand flue fire blowing outwards, sowood pushed further in.

Highest temperature reading 837 degrees C.

Kiln blocked off with rubble at stokehole.

What was learned

On dismantling the smouldering remains of the kiln thefollowing day, the load was found to be fired but the claywas not completely vitrified and the glaze in particular wasin places still unchanged in colour. The kiln structure hadstood up to the ordeal well and needed only minor repairsbefore a refiring was possible. Further experiments byGeoffrey Bryant and the WEA at Barton-on-Humber havedemonstrated that such a kiln can be fired satisfactorily atabout 1000 degrees C without a dome. It may well be thatour third experimental kiln suffered from having one.

The design, construction, and firing of the kilns wereunder the supervision of several senior boys who managedto enlist the support of the junior boys in the third andfourth year for the labour force. There was never any dif-ficulty in enrolling volunteers for the night firing and in

Experimental archaeology 35

Double flue pot kiln as excavated at Lyveden

the small hours sizzling sausages cooked over the vent ofthe kiln and washed down with cider added a gastronomicdimension to the experience. The school received adviceand the loan of equipment from the London Brick Com-pany and Spencers Ltd of Brigstock.

From pottery to iron

During the later stages of the excavations at Lyvedenevidence for iron smelting and iron working was found inthe levels underneath the pottery making complex.Included were remains of an 11th-12th century bowl-hearth and two shaft furnaces. Clearly, if we were tounderstand the nature of this process which had beenimportant to the early medieval inhabitants of this remoteNorthamptonshire village, we needed to reconstruct andfire different kinds of medieval iron furnaces. Theseexperiments also required considerable quantities ofcharcoal.

The charcoal kiln

A couple of dozen second-year boys helped by two sixthformers made a charcoal kiln in summer 1972. This con-sisted of a circular pit some 5ft 9in (1.75m) in diameter

and 9in (0.23m) in depth. In readiness for covering the kilnafter loading, turf was removed from the school field andstacked beside the pit. Next came the preparation of thefuel. A wood chopping rota was established. The boysspent their lunch hours over a period of a fortnight chop-ping timber, binding the sticks into faggots, and stackingthem vertically in the kiln around a central flue. A secondattempt which involved the addition of central postsensured that a sufficient central flue (6in (0.15m)diameter) was left to enable the kiln to draw properly. Theturf was placed over the dome, and soil covered the lot. On30 June 1972 the kiln was fired by introducing into the topvent of the flue hot embers taken from a bonfire. A con-tinual watch was kept thereafter from 1420 hours until1000 hours the next morning. Whenever it looked as if thefire might escape through to the surface, the outside of thekiln was damped down and earth sprinkled over the dome.Blue smoke issued from vents and cracks. It was visitedagain at 1600 hours and damped down. The next day it wasfound to have collapsed like a volcano near the stage ofextinction. The ring of turf stood intact but the mound hadlargely collapsed in on itself. On 3 July the ash was pickedover. Although it was clear that the outside stacks of fuelhad largely burnt right through with the increase of


oxygen which flooded in during the final stages, below theash lay over over a hundred pounds (45kg) of usablecharcoal.

Three iron smelting experiments

We proceeded by trial and error. The first of these experi-ments involved the construction of a clay bowl furnace andthe second was a shaft furnace. Certain difficulties wereencountered. The clay bowl was open-topped and this ledto too great a heat loss, whilst the shaft furnace was built ina pit and it proved difficult to provide it with sufficient airblast despite using a hand pump lent by a local smith. Inneither case could we claim that we had made a usablebloom of iron. One problem was the use of high grade ores(Swedish, provided by British Steel Corporation, Corby)and haematite from the Lake District. These had proveddifficult to smelt and we were advised on our third attemptto try a much lower grade of ore, limonite, derived from aRomano-British smelting site at Gretton,Northamptonshire. The blast was provided by a pair ofbellows, made in the school workshops following theinstruction of Agricola'’s De Re Metallica of 1556, a bookdevoted to ancient industrial processes, mining, andequipment. The third furnace was a beehive-type with a

Bowl furnace at completion of the experiment. Notetuyère into which bellows nozzle has been fitted

clay

domed top, with the blast being supplied close at handthrough bellows. A circular hole was dug 0.90m indiameter and 0.25 m deep. The base was made of limes tonecannibalized from the experimental pottery kiln of 1970.Clay was puddled in a nearby pit and the circular bowlbuilt up with clay ‘sausages’; the chamber had an internaldiameter of 0.35m and the walls were about 0.25m high.The whole structure was prefired and the cracks madegood. An arch was made at the base to permit the insertionof the clay pipe or tuyère which would receive and shieldthe bellows’' nozzle. A slag hole was also made about0.125m from the bottom of the furnace. A second furnacewas built in a similar manner and prefired. The domeswere added and circular vents left in the top for chargingand for providing the draught.

The total amount of ore used in the experiment was 2.8kg;6.4kg of charcoal was expended. The exterior of the fur-nace was badly cracked and much of the interior clay skinhad collapsed into the furnace. The inside was baked pink.After a second firing a few days later the furnace waschopped in half to enable a closer examination. Samples ofthe ‘iron’ were sent to British Steel Corporation, Corby,for analysis (see School Technology, Dec 1973, 7(2), (issue28), 17).

Evaluation

The projects demonstrated in a practical form the con-siderable difficulties in making simple things like pottery,charcoal, and iron. Although given much guidance frombooks and articles on the technology of smelting iron, inthe last resort the boys had to rely on trial and error. Theywere valuable group projects, involving many junior boysunder the leadership of sixth formers working for manyhours of voluntary activity outside lesson times, mainly inthe lunch hours and after school. The projects were inter-disciplinary and received much help from four schooldepartments (art, physics, chemistry, and engineering)and two school clubs (archaeological and camera). Theparticipants experienced contacts with people within thecommunity who were expert on various aspects and whowere kind enough to visit the school and offer advice.Detailed records, both photographic and verbal, were keptand the boys had the satisfaction of seeing an account oftheir work published. Finally, each experiment was able totake advantage of the previous body of experience built upin a long-term research programme.

References

The excavations at Lyveden are described in four issues ofthe Journal of the Northampton Borough Museums and ArtGallery, namely 2, 1967; 5, 1969; 9, 1971; 12, 1975.The experiments are described in greater detail in SchoolTechnology, Dec 1972, 6(2), (issue 24) and Dec 1973, 7(2),(issue 28).Other k i ln f i r ings are descr ibed in Bryant , G F,1973 Experimental Romano-British kiln firings, in CBAResearch Report, 10; and Bryant, G F,1971 Experimental Romano-British kiln firings atBarton-on-Humber, Lincolnshire, Barton-on-HumberW E A O c c a s i o n a l p a p e r s , 1 ; a n d B r y a n t , G F ,1977 Experimental kiln firings at Barton-on-Humber,South Humberside, Medieval Archaeology, 21, 106-23

Experimental archaeology 3 7

Iron and slag are removed from the beehive-type furnace after the end of the experiment

A paper-based package: academic accuracy or popular appeal? Christina Parker

The title of this paper reflects the main problem I encoun-tered in trying to present archaeology within the context ofa written educational package in a way that would satisfyboth teachers and archaeologists.

My job, on a Manpower Services Commission (MSC)scheme, was to present Roman Warwickshire to localpupils in the c 9-12 years age range. As it was my first jobafter graduating in archaeology, my archaeologicalexperience was limited and I had no teaching experience.Both archaeologists and educationalists had ideas andadvice to offer, but their respective aims and suggestionswere not always compatible. I found myself acting assomething of a 'piggy-in-the-middle'.

The first problem entailed deciding what form thiseducational project should take. The requirements ofthose teachers questioned varied. Some wanted a purelypractical approach with models, kits, etc, while one gram-mar school requested a purely academic approach andsomething that pupils could use on their own. Time was aproblem at the secondary schools, so something wasneeded that could fit in with an inflexible timetable. Otherschools expressed interest in a balance between the practi-

cal and the academic. Unfortunately there was a reluc-tance among some teachers to move away from thetraditional emphasis on the military aspects of theRomans. It was obvious that not all of these conflictingrequirements could be met, so something had to be devisedthat would be fairly flexible; the aim was to aid teachingand learning rather than to dictate the method.

It was decided that the project would have to take the formof a paper-based package. The limitations of undertakingthe project within the context of a MSC scheme were thatmodels etc would be too expensive and require morelabour and time than was available to us. There was alsothe problem of not knowing for how long the MSC wouldfund an educational post. We wanted to produce someth-ing which would continue to be of use after the scheme hadfinished and which could be expanded or reduced in sizeaccording to how long the scheme lasted.

The completed pack is in the form of a series of notes anddrawings for pupils, plus accompanying teacher's notes,on different aspects of Roman Warwickshire. Only topicsof local relevance have been included. Topics covered are:Before the Romans; Alcester - A Roman Town; Tid-

Where archaeological plans are shown, they should be clearly explained and/or reconstructed: ‘'The plan shows the remains of ahouse found at Tiddington. A picture was then drawn by studying the pattern left by the stones. The small building next to thehouse was found later.'’

Simple maps showing the position of Roman features in rela-tion to modern towns in the county are very useful

dington - A Roman Village; Houses; The Environment;Forts; Religion; Pottery; Metalwork; Making Clothes;Tile Making; A Roman Board Game. Each subject is prin-ted on different coloured paper and sections may bepurchased separately or as a complete pack They cantherefore be used in any order or individual sections can beleft out, at the teacher'’s discretion. The pack is designed tocater for variations in age and ability. Basic information oneach topic is given in the pupils’ notes, but work ideas,bibliographies, etc are included in the teacher'’s notes. Thelatter also expand upon points in the pupils’ text so thatwhile the pupils'’ sections can be used directly, the packagecan be adapted to suit the needs of the class.

The package is archaeology-based as this is the nature ofthe evidence. Archaeological terms and methods aredescribed either in the pupils' or the teacher’'s notes so as togive an understanding of 'how'’ rather than just 'what'’we know.

Questions were posed at the seminar '‘Presenting archaeol-ogy to young people'’ as to why we were bothering to teach'‘The Romans’' and why'‘The Romans in Warwickshire’'. Inanswer to the first question, ‘'The Romans'’ is an extremelypopular school history topic. Perhaps pupils would benefit

A paper-based package 3 9

from study of the sadly neglected prehistoric topics, butthat is not for the archaeologist to dictate. While we maymake suggestions in our contact with teachers, it is ourplace to help them to make the most of their syllabus. Infact, with a topic such as the Romans, where misconcep-tions abound, it is probably even more important forarchaeologists to help out.

As for the local approach, the interest expressed by schoolsin Warwickshire Museum exhibitions and excavations andthe local bias of questions asked by pupils on my schoolvisits seem to me proof of the value of this approach. Thereis rich evidence for the Roman period in Warwickshire, sowhy not make the most of it? To know that a Roman roadruns past your house or that a fort once stood on the site ofa local farm can be a greater stimulus to the imaginationand to further inquiry than facts about a distant town thatone has never visited. Most of the information on RomanWarwickshire is confined to academic journals or has notyet been published. The package provides this informationin an easily accessible form.

I am not advocating that the local approach be taught inisolation but it forms a useful background to a wider study,enabling comparison and the opportunity for moredetailed study with access to relevant sites and resources.Many pupils' text books on Roman Britain concentrate onthe large towns, villas, and the army; study of Roman War-wickshire shows pupils that these played little part in thelives of the majority of its inhabitants.

To return to my title,'‘Academic accuracy or popularappeal’', it was these requirements of archaeologists andeducationalists respectively that posed the basic problemin the compilation of this package.'As ‘popular appeal’' is, Ihope, self-explanatory, I shall concentrateon the problemsposed by the archaeologists’' requirements, with apologiesif it appears that I am singling them out for criticism.Perhaps '‘accuracy’' is not the right word; obviously no onewants to teach something incorrectly so accuracy isdesired by everyone, but there can be a danger of writing asimplified site report. Archaeologists seem to hate leavinganything out and have a fear of commitment to a specificinterpretation, but too many exceptions and uncertaintiescan only confuse pupils. It is surely better that pupils learnand understand one basic fact or concept without all thequalifications than nothing at all. The teacher’'s notescome in useful for placating archaeologists, since here allthose things they cannot bear to be left out can beincluded.

Perhaps it is not surprising that archaeologists have suchfears of inaccuracy. Some of the old misconceptions andprejudices are still being taught as an examination of somechildrens’ history books will show. The Britons are stillsometimes portrayed as hairy savages, for example, in con-t r a s t t o t h e R o m a n s a s b r i n g e r s o f p e a c e a n dcivilization.

Another problem where accuracy was concerned involvedthe accompanying illustrations in the pupils'’ sections. Thepictures are probably going to be of most interest tochildren and remain in their minds when they have forgot-ten the text. They need, therefore, to be informative andaccurate as well as decorative. A glance at some childrens’'


Roman and modern farming: ploughing, sowing, and harvesting. Comparison between past and present can help relate objectsand practices of the past to familiar modern ones

history books will show that trouble is not always taken toget the details right. Yet, at the cost of a little more timeand trouble, an accurate and attractive picture can beachieved.

‘'The Romans in Warwickshire'’ is available from Warwick-shire Museum Education Service, St John’'s House, War-wick, C V 3 4 4 N F , t e l e p h o n e W a r w i c k 4 9 3 4 3 1 ,ext 2034.

I can only conclude by emphasizing the need for coopera-tion between archaeologists and educationalists. If theskills of each are combined, archaeology can be presentedin a useful and enjoyable manner.

Acknowledgements

Jacqueline Leonard did much of the groundwork for thispackage. The illustrations reproduced here were drawn bySheran Hemming and Nick Havas.

Wasperton archaeological project: educational package Gilles Crawford

Introduction

Excavations were carried out at Wasperton, Warwick-shire, for a period of five years from late 1980 until the endof 1985. The site comprised a large cropmark complexspread over four fields, an area of some 45 hectares, ofwhich eleven hectares were examined archaeologically.The threat to the site came from a gravel extraction pro-gramme, which necessitated a rescue-oriented excavation.The site produced a wide range of settlement and cemeteryevidence dating from the Neolithic through to the paganSaxon period.

Owing to the scale of the excavation effort, sources offunding other than the Department of Environment (laterthe Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission)were sought. Additional support was gained from theManpower Services Commission, at first through theCommunity Enterprise Programme and latterly throughthe Community Programme - both schemes to help thelong-term unemployed. Indeed, the success of the excava-tion owed a great deal to the succession of MSC schemesinvolved. The amount of excavation work had begun todecrease by the end of 1984, accompanied by a correspond-ing increase in post-excavation. In order to enhance the'visible community benefit'’increasingly called for by theCommunity Programme organizers (and in an effort toensure continued MSC support) a variety of measures of'educational value' were included when the scheme was

Model of the Neolithic mortuary structure

renewed in April 1985; these were open days and exhibi-tions relating to the excavation and the creation of aneducational package for schools in the county.

The educational package:the background research

Although the educational package was originally includedin the proposal as a form of 'insurance', it was not treatedlightly, but attracted a considerable amount of attentionand thought. Close contact has been maintained with theKeeper of the Education Service at WarwickshireMuseum, Mr P Clarke. He runs the Museum's SchoolLoans Service, where the Wasperton package will behoused when complete. Discussions with him led to thebasic outline for a schools programme. It was to be direc-ted at children in the 10-12 years age group, who weredeemed to be the group most likely to be receptive, andconsequently the most likely to benefit, and was to bebased directly on material discovered during the excava-tions at Wasperton; it was also intended to complementthe paper-based package being produced by the AlcesterExcavation Programme (see the article by ChristinaParker).

The excavation at Wasperton differed greatly from Alces-ter; it was rural, as opposed to urban, and its mainemphasis was on the investigation of a large landscape. Inaddition, the Wasperton site, with its preponderance ofprehistoric features, proved to be poor in material finds,especially when compared to sites such as Alcester whichhad been a substantial Roman town. Thus it was decidedthat a paper-based package, with the emphasis on findsand material goods, would be inappropriate for dealingwith a site such as Wasperton whose major characteristicswere its scale, the range of settlement evidence, and therange of burial evidence.

As the basis for an educational tool, the scale of the excava-tion was thought to be of little value. Of the remaining twooptions, both seemed to offer advantages. Examination ofthe settlement evidence could concentrate on the changingform of houses through the ages, but could also takeaccount of changes in farming practice and socialorganization and how they affected the physical remains ofhouses discovered by archaeologists. Concentration on theburial practices of ancient peoples, as recorded at Wasper-ton, would give insights into the way individuals weretreated by different societies, as well as showing some ofthe workings of their religious and social practices. It couldalso tie in with changes in the economy and how theseaffected the burial of the dead. The burial record wasthought to exhibit greater diversity than the settlementrecord; the subject, death, was also regarded as being


much more likely to generate interest than a settlementstudy. In view of these and other considerations, this waschosen as the theme for the educational package.

Since the Wasperton archaeological project was a finiteproject, whose primary aim was the excavation and post-excavation of an archaeological site, the educational pac-kage had to fulfill certain criteria if it was to be successful.The project was understaffed and under pressure of time;it was not feasible to contemplate a package that required alarge and continuing input in terms of manpower andresources. It was therefore decided that material for thepackage had to be drawn directly from the results of theexcavation, or from research specifically related to the pro-ject, either already done or in progress. On completion, ithad to function as a finished piece of work requiring littleor no maintenance from project or museum staff. In orderto achieve the latter, the package had to be comprehensiveand easy to use.

The aim of the package

There appeared to be two ways of approaching theeducational package. The first was to use it to teach thetechniques involved in archaeology - how excavations arecarried out, how sites are interpreted, etc - and to presentthe results in terms of human history. The second was totake a set of scenarios culled from an archaeological siteand present them along with a series of questions designedto stimulate the imagination and promote ideas and con-clusions about the societies involved. It was realized thatsome of the results of this approach might be at odds withaccepted archaeological practice. Following consultations

with Mr Clarke at Warwickshire Museum, the latterapproach was adopted; the former would have requiredtoo much support from project or museum staff to havekept pace with changes in theory, and its educational valuewould have been limited by the need for absolute veracity.In addition, it was hoped that, by adopting the latterapproach, the educational package, although primarilyconcerned with archaeology, would have a wider relevanceto education in schools.

The educational package

The package is divided into five segments, one for each ofthe main periods represented on site: Neolithic, EarlyBronze Age, Iron Age, Romano-British, and pagan Anglo-Saxon. The package has been designed as a whole,individual segments forming the basis of a series of lessons.It is possible, however, for segments to be used inisolation.

The main problem with the presentation of archaeologicalsites, especially those dating mainly to the prehistoricperiods, is the scarcity of finds. Those finds which arerecovered are usually either too rare and precious in anarchaeological sense to be used in schools, or do not conveysufficient meaning to the layman. To sidestep this, theWasperton package is based on scale models and paintingsderived from the results of the excavation. There are fourmodels: a Neolithic mortuary structure, an Early BronzeAge round barrow, an Iron Age crouched inhumation, anda Romano-British decapitated inhumation; and two paint-ings: a pagan Anglo-Saxon male and a pagan Anglo-Saxon female.

Model of an early Bronze Age round barrow

Wasperton educational package 4 3

The mortuary structure has been reconstructed as apitched roof structure. It contains disarticulated remains(of rodents) to represent the burials. Outside the structurestands an excarnation platform, based on a setting ofpostholes. The round barrow has also been reconstructed;a quarter of the mound has been left open to show the man-ner of burial with inurned cremations placed at the centreof the barrow and a secondary cremation inserted into thebody of the mound. The crouched inhumation features agrave in the process of excavation. It shows a partly-cleaned skeleton, together with trowel, tape, and sectionline. The decapitation is also ‘as 'excavated'’; the skull isplaced at the feet of the skeleton. None of the above hasgrave-goods. Paintings have been made of the Saxongraves, which depict the bodies at burial, clothed and car-rying the appropriate jewellery and weapons.

There is an introduction to the package which sets out thebackground to the site and the aims of the project. Eachmodel and painting is supported by a set of teacher’s andpupils’ notes. These set out the background to the periodand contain notes on the specific model or painting, a set ofquestions relating to the society that originally created thegrave, and a bibliography for further research.

There is marked variation in the treatment of the dead asrecorded at Wasperton. It is hoped that the children will bestimulated by this and will reflect on how death is treatedtoday. For example, in the Neolithic period, c 2000 bc,burial was in a mortuary structure. This was a communalgrave which included parts, but by no means all, of severalindividuals. It is also clear that only a small proportion ofthe total population was interred in it. This begs a numberof questions: who was buried there? where were the othersburied? why were the bodies exposed before burial? whatdoes this indicate about the people of Neolithic Britain?

The round barrow was also a communal burial. Againquestions are raised about what sections of society wereburied there, and the significance of the monument itself:was a barrow primarily a burial place, or did it have awider social or religious significance? The burial riteshows a change from disarticulated interment to crema-tion and deposition in urns; what social, religious, andeconomic changes had occurred to cause this?

The Iron Age grave was a single burial. It indicates a shiftaway from communal burial places and the rise of theindividual, at least as far as the dead were concerned. Forthe first time, at Wasperton in any case, the dead weredisposed of in a way that is recognizable to people today.Cemeteries, as the term is accepted today, made theirappearance.

There is a large Romano-British and Anglo-Saxoncemetery at Wasperton. Although outwardly the form ofburial was as it is now, many of the Romano-British gravesdisplay strange rites. Principal among these was decapita-tion; other skeletons had had their limbs rearranged. Whatpurpose could such treatment have served? Was it carriedout on certain classes of people, or at random?

The Saxon burials were usually accompanied by gravegoods. These included brooches, beads, buckles, knives,and pins for the women, and spears, shields, and knives for

the men. This finery contrasts with the simple, unaccom-panied graves of the Romano-British and indeed with all ofthe burials from the preceding generations. What does thisindicate about changes in religion etc...?

A point worthy of note in all the foregoing, especially to theschool pupils, is the absence of child burials. Children onlyoccur with certainty in the Romano-British cemetery andeven here they are rare.

It is thought that children in the middle school age groupwill easily grasp the concepts put forward. The principal

Model of a Romano-British decapitated inhumation


stumbling-block is the vocabulary of the archaeologist.Individual elements of the package - a single model andaccompanying material - have been ‘'tried out'’ in variousschools in the Leamington area; this was where problemswith the vocabulary, both with teachers and pupils, arose.However, the lessons learned in these 'field tests'’ togetherwith further consultations with Mr Clarke at Warwick-shire Museum should make the package easier for teachersand pupils to understand and use.

Conclusions

It can be seen that more is being attempted by thiseducational package than a factual account of life and

death through the ages, as exemplified by the site atWasperton. Its aim is to give the children an appreciationof the complexity of past communities, to show them thatpeople in the past lived in societies with a diversity of socialand religious beliefs, and to help them understand someaspects of their own culture. It would be extremely dif-ficult, indeed almost impossible, to convey this type ofimage using conventional archaeological material. TheWasperton educational package is an attempt to educatechildren about the past, on the one hand, without beingrestricted by the dead weight of academic exactitude, andon the other without parodying the past by attempting to‘recreate’ it for an afternoon.

Look and learn at the Lunt Margaret Rylatt

Introduction

Work on the site of the 1st century AD earth and timberRoman fort at Baginton, Warwickshire, commenced in1965 as a long-term archaeological research excavation.Even at this level of development, the site was soon attract-ing thousands of visitors annually, many of whom came inorganized educational groups. The unique nature of manyof the discoveries, and the excellent press coverage the sitereceived, were responsible for this upsurge of interest.

The overwhelming response from the public and thearchaeological profession alike encouraged the Field

Archaeology Section of Coventry Museums, which wasconducting the project, not only to continue with the pro-gramme of total excavation of the four and a half acresavailable, but also to embark on a series of experimentalreconstructions, which would provide a valuable databasefor academic research and give a vivid three-dimensionalpicture of what such an establishment may really havelooked like. It would also develop the already existingpublic interest in things Roman, and enhance the potentialexperience value of educational visits.

Alongside the full-scale research excavations, which arestill in progress, the experimental programme opened in

Reconstruction drawing of the fort by Alan Sorrell, based on the archaeological excavations prior to 1973 (copyrightCoventry Museums)


the winter of 1966 with the building of a short length of theeastern turf rampart. Further projects have included: in1970, the two-storey eastern gateway and additionallengths of rampart; in 1973, a timber granary, now the siteInterpretative Centre; in 1977, the unique timber gyrus, orcavalry training ring; and since 1984, the extension of theturf ramparts along the whole of the eastern perimeter ofthe fort, all rebuilt in situ.

The facilities at present

The site has been open to the public on a regular seasonalbasis since 1973, and has attracted annual average atten-dances of 15,000. This has been based on a summer seasonof only four months (June-September) with special out-of-season arrangements for pre-booked parties. Each newproject on the site has given a boost to the figures,demonstrating at least the potential for increaseddevelopment.

Once on site, the visitor receives a striking impression -which will become stronger still as more reconstructiontakes place - of the sheer scale and imposing nature ofRoman military buildings. The structures which awaitreconstruction are marked out in concrete to indicate boththe overall plan of the site and individual building types.The award-winning Interpretative Centre houses displayscovering life in the Roman army, military equipment andorganization, and the work of the archaeologists to date.There are also life-size models of a fully-armouredLegionary and a mounted auxiliary Cavalryman, and asection on the granary as it may have been. The displaysare concise, visual, and easily assimilable by all, from theaverage schoolchild (7 years and above) to the lay touristand the academic scholar. They are backed up by a con-sidered audio-visual display lasting just under tenminutes. A well-stocked publications counter offersmaterial which ranges from the serious academic publica-tion to school-orientated articles and, of course, the usualsouvenir items.

The results of this comparatively basic provision for visitsare nonetheless highly encouraging, and are largely theachievement of the archaeological staff. A low-budget pro-motional campaign is maintained through the press,poster display, ‘word of mouth’ publicity, and so on,

The solitary Education Officer, based in the Herbert ArtGallery and Museum, has not, on the whole, been able toprovide any effective back-up to the existing provisionsowing to her already substantial workload in the division.To date, the educational support has involved the produc-tion of sample worksheets and teacher’s notes, togetherwith some information sheets.

A number of educational workshops have taken place,though they deserved greater support and publicity; theywould benefit from being rerun as a regular service. Thefacilities for school visits are supported by a team oftrained guide-lecturers, available for a small fee to pre-booked parties. For more advanced groups, such as univer-sity students and archaeological societies, tours are givenby the field archaeologists themselves. City-based schoolsare regular users, though there is scope for considerablygreater involvement of the Lunt in the curriculum. Owing

to local arrangements, city-based schools have free accessto the site while those from further afield are required tomake nominal payments for their admission.

Activities on the site have also included regular trainingexcavations for local society members, involvement in thetraining of overseas students on summer schools at War-wick University, holiday scheme programmes for childrenfrom inner city areas, and so on. A regular events pro-gramme also creates a great deal of interest and generatespublicity for the site. Over the years, regular visits fromthe Ermine Street Guard, gladiatorial displays, Romano-British fairs, and experimental pottery firings havebrought in large numbers of visitors, the highest daily totalbeing as many as 2,500!

The geographical location of the Lunt Fort and its ease ofaccess are natural advantages. Only three miles from thecentre of Coventry, with all the facilities and other poten-tial elements for educational visits, such as the Herbert ArtGallery and Museum, the Whitefriars Museum, St Mary'’sHall, and the Museum of British Road Transport, theLunt is ideally situated. The village of Baginton alone canboast a fine 12th century church, the Midlands AirMuseum, and a small, local railway museum currentlyunder construction, as well as many walks in thesurrounding countryside. It is this geographical factorwhich already brings regular educational groups each yearfrom as far away as London, Bristol, and Stirling as well asthe many parties from the immediate counties of Leices-tershire, Northamptonshire, Worcestershire, and War-wickshire (including the West Midlands).

The Lunt is of international as well as national impor-tance. The site features in all reputable tourist literature,archaeological guide books, text books on the Romans inBritain, books on exper imental archaeology , andeducational books for schools, as well as being regularlyexploited by press, TV, and radio. These factors have allled to an increased desire for involvement from a widevariety of funding bodies.

The future

Plans are already in hand for a new, spectacularly con-ceived, long-term development, directed by this writer,which aims to reconstruct the entire site, creating both aunique, academic centre and the highest grade of visitorexperience. This new programme, which will make theLunt an absolutely essential element in any academicresearch on the Roman army, or school curriculum ortourist trail connected with Roman Britain, has grownfrom the realization of the Lunt’s enormous potential foreducational development in its broadest sense.

The new development plan for the site will include aneducation room and a well-stocked library of relevantmaterials. It is hoped that school visits will be extended,from their present average of only a few hours, to full-dayor even long-stay visits in the on-site accommodationwhich is to be constructed. These facilities will also allowfor long-stay teachers’' preparation visits, regular con-ferences and day schools, and a much wider-rangingeducation facility than is currently available at any otherRoman site. The programme will be radically advanced by

Look and learn at the Lunt 4 7

the appointment of an Education Officer and Assistant oting and developing the Lunt has been exceptional con-after the new project is established. sidering the relatively low-key resources allocated for this

The facilities offered at the Lunt are under constantarea, but in the next decade the Lunt Roman Fort is tobecome the ‘centre of excellence’ of Roman military

review and improvements are made as and when practic- studies.able in terms of finance and manpower. For many yearsthe achievement of the Field Archaeology section in prom-

The Crickley Hill mobile exhibition of archaeology Marjorie Imlah

At the time ofwriting, the Crickley Hill Mobile Exhibitionis well into its fourth year ofoperation, having been invitedinto at least 70 schools in Gloucestershire and many morebeyond the county boundaries, as far afield as Hampshire,Sussex, and Kent. It has also been visited by many thou-sands of members of the public. The bright yellow single-decker bus, flagship of the Crickley Hill Trust, is now afairly familiar sight around Gloucester and Cheltenham.But how did it all start, and when?

In 1982, two of the Trust'’s most generous benefactors,anxious to publicize and promote the findings from theexcavations, joined forces to provide a 30ft long, 45-seatercoach of 1972 vintage and to arrange for it to be convertedinto a mobile exhibition centre. The coach, currentlyvalued at £3000, is still serviced and maintained at aminimal cost by Warners of Tewkesbury. The value oftheir generous support is immeasurable, particularly asage and wear and tear begin to take their toll. Theoccasional breakdowns always occur at the most incon-venient moment and can bring the programme to ahalt.

Westbury Homes heads a long list of companies andorganizations whose support and sponsorship helped tobuild and furnish the initial exhibition (planned anddesigned by Philip Dixon, Patricia Borne, and RichardSavage), and to launch it in the spring of 1983. Duringthose early months, it visited Nottingham University,Kent, and even the august forecourt of the BritishMuseum. It was driven in those pioneering days byenthusiastic volunteers, but the Crickley Hill Trusteessoon realised that, to be effective, the exhibition had to bedriven and manned by a permanent, full-time staff. Anapplication was therefore submitted to the ManpowerServices Commission in the summer of 1983 for funding toemploy five staffunder the Community Programme. Theywould be responsible for three areas of work, the major onebeing the promotion and presentation of a unique mobiledisplay of general archaeological methods and techniquesand specific information based on seventeen seasons ofexcavation on Crickley Hill.

In January 1984, the exhibition was completely refur-bished and updated to its present state. The walls anddisplay panels on the coach were covered with maps,diagrams, photographs, and plans; on the shelves wereplaced scale models showing the development of many ofthe communities that lived on the Hill, from 4000 BC tothe Dark Ages (the Dark Age dwellings are to be inves-tigated during the summer of 1986). An invaluable dimen-

sion was added to the exhibition by the inclusion of acomprehensive selection of artefacts, ranging from StoneAge axe heads and Iron Age flints and pottery to skulls andmodern animal bones.

Schools are the major clients for the mobile exhibition andexperience has shown that the junior school age group isthe most receptive, offering at times a most rewardingenthusiasm and thirst for knowledge.

In practical terms, the coach is manned at all times by twostaff (both of whom need to be able to drive, but who do nothave to hold a Public Service Vehicle Licence as the vehi-cle is not allowed to carry passengers). An advance plan-ning meeting is essential to place a proper value on theforthcoming visit and provide an opportunity to plan atimetable, prepare worksheets, brief staff, and check coachparking facilities. On the day of the visit children andadults are invited to'‘board the bus' in groups of no morethan 10-12, and to stay there on an initial visit for 20-30minutes in order to have a first look and gain a first impres-sion. They are encouraged to return a second time to havea longer look, to draw or paint some favourite object orscene, to prepare a model, to answer a quiz, to complete aworksheet, or just to question the guide/organizer. Whilethis is going on, the second member of the exhibition teamis usually busy in a classroom with the other members ofthe group, encouraging them to handle and work with theartefacts. A classroom can be used for associated activities,both group and individual; such as a child trying tounderstand stratigraphy, a group painting a mural of anIron Age village, creating papier mâché skulls or stone ageweapons, flint knapping, or even trying to build a basicpottery kiln. The potential for creativity from such aneducational resource as the Mobile Exhibition is consider-able. Some of the 'thank you'’ letters from the schoolsreflect an interest and enthusiasm which is, in itself,rewarding.

It may be argued that the Exhibition is only as good as thestaff who operate it. Their motivation and commitment toa job which can make great demands on them have beenessential ingredients in the success of the project todate.

One o f the pr ime ob ject ives o f the Cr ick ley Hi l lArchaeological Trust is to ‘advance the education of thepublic in archaeology...’'. The Mobile Exhibition and itsteam have endeavoured to carry out that aim and will con-tinue to do so while the yellow bus still rolls.

The Schools Committee of the Council for British Archaeology John Steane

The beginnings

The CBA has concerned itself with education for the lastten years and it is an appropriate moment to review theachievements, to admit to the difficulties, and to map waysin which advance might be made. An Education Boardwith three constituent committees (Universities, Schools,and Adult Education) was set up in 1975 with the instruc-tion to promote the development of archaeology in allfields of education. I was a member of the Schools Com-mittee from the start and we were fortunate in that theExecutive and Council recognized that Schools was thearea in which the greatest effort should be made.

Membership of the committee

This is made up of representatives from schools at primaryand secondary level, with a concentration on teachersworking at the senior end of the school age-group. Thereare in addition representatives from the Inspectorate ofSchools, the Education Advisory Services, the HistoricBuildings and Monuments Commission (HBMC), theBritish Museum Education Services, and other museumservices. Dr Kate Pretty, fellow of New Hall, Cambridge,was chairman for the first eight years which proved a veryfruitful period in the committee’s life. She has now retiredas chairman but remains as representative of the univer-sities. Dr H F Cleere, director of the CBA, is present atm e e t i n g s . T h e p r e s i d e n t o f t h e C B A i s a l s o i nattendance.

The post of education officer

Until 1984 the committee had the services of an EducationOfficer who provided the necessary support and con-tinuity while at the same time acting as a powerful link bet-ween the committee and the headquarters of the CBA.Mr Mike Corbishley, the first holder of this post, did agreat deal to promote interest in archaeology in schools byreplying to queries, talking at conferences to teachers andstudents, preparing information, writing in archaeologicalmagazines, preparing written material for teachers, help-ing with the administration of archaeological awards, andin numerous other ways. One difficulty the committee hashad to contend with over the years has been the uncertainmethods of financing the post of Education Officer. Dur-ing the last part of his employment, Mike was partly paidfor by a grant from the Leverhulme Trust. As a result ofthis arrangement he has been producing educationalmaterial for secondary school level students in archaeol-ogy, which will be published shortly by Longman. Withthe transfer of Mike’s services to the HBMC, the SchoolsCommittee has suffered a vital blow, in that for the time

being the post of Educational Officer has been abolished.The CBA naturally, through its director, is exploring waysto repair this notable gap.

Publications of the schools committee

The most permanent aspect of the Education Officer'’stenure has been the production of a spate of booklets andpapers on the teaching of archaeology and the provision ofresources for reference. The committee believes that thedissemination of these materials will encourage teachers totake up the teaching of archaeology in schools. TheBulletin1 of the Schools Committee is published two orthree times a year and recent issues have had articles ont o p i c s s u c h a s ' ‘Integrating archaeology into thecurriculum'’, '‘Archaeology abroad'’, 'Books for schools inarchaeology'’, ‘'Museums and collections’', and 'Experimen-tal archaeology'. The editors are trying to move towards apolicy of deeper involvement of students and teachers byproviding practical examples of lessons and classroomwork in the articles. Other publications by the SchoolsCommittee have helped the CBA central office to answerspecific questions sent in by teachers and students. Theseinclude Jobs in archaeology and the Guide to universitycourses in archaeology. Probably the most influentialpublication was the Archaeological resources handbook forteachers (ed M J Corbishley). Now in its second edition, itsets out to provide a full review of archaeological resourcesfor schools such as books, films, slides, videos, addresses oflearned societies, and so on. A pioneer work which has nowsold out was Peopling past landscapes (by J M Steane andB Dix) which provided a guide to fieldwork techniquesuseful to schools in rural areas. The committee ack-nowledges the generous sponsorship from Lloyds Hank oftwo series of booklets aimed at teachers who are interestedin introducing archaeology into the curriculum. The firstseries (now in their third printing) includes titles such asArchaeology in primary schools, Archaeology in theclassroom, and Archaeology in the countryside. The secondseries has just been published and includes The archaeol-ogy of death, Archaeology and the sea, Archaeology andcomputers, and a bumper volume on recording buildingsentitled Upstanding archaeology.

Curriculum development

Early on in the life of the committee, initiatives were takento promote an archaeological component in curriculumdevelopment. A subcommittee produced a draft CSEsyllabus in the late 1970s which had some influence inshaping syllabuses adopted by a number of schools. Morerecently, in the mid 1980s, another subcommittee hasproduced draft preambles and specimen papers for the


GCSE which have been submitted to the London Univer-sity examining panel. I have mentioned Mike Corbishley’'ssterling work in secondary school curriculum develop-ment. A parallel effort, thanks to the funding of aLeverhulme Fellowship for one year (1985-6) is now beingdone for the 5-10 age group. The Fellowship is held byMs Frankie Dale.

The future

Some very worrying trends have been noticed recently inthe educational field. The most serious has been thegeneral decline in the status of Human History (in itsbroadest sense) in education which has led to a reductionof history teaching in our schools. Paradoxically there hasbeen no comparable decline in the interest of the popula-tion at large 'in ‘the past’'. In fact, fuelled by such successfultelevision programmes as the BBC’s '‘Chronicle'’ and‘'Timewatch’' there has probably never been such a livelyinterest in the past, particularly its more tangible aspects:ruins, country houses, churches, castles, and excavations.The committee is attempting to influence the governmentto respond to this flowering of public interest on a numberof fronts. It is supporting the efforts of the government-funded HBMC to make monuments more accessible to thepublic by allowing activities such as those described byMike Corbishley in another paper in this volume, by pro-moting monuments through the media, by writing up-to-date guidebooks, by running well-stocked site shops, andso on.

The committee might well consider linking archaeology in

schools more closely with environmental studies ratherthan with history, ie to enroll with the conservationistsrather than with the documentary historians of this world.The conservation lobby has well and truly organized itselfand is now in the market buying or leasing Sites of SpecialScientific Interest.

Archaeologists have been setting their own professionalhouse in order (founding the Institute of Field Archaeol-ogy, for instance), and this has had the unfortunate effectof distancing them from the general public and theenthusiastic amateur who has traditionally played asupremely important role in British archaeology. The pro-fessional units have realized that they need to display theirexcavations and finds to the fact-hungry public. Educationis vital if the tax-paying electorate is to get its money'sworth from archaeology in the future.

Acknowledgements

I have benefited by reading recent reports and papers writ-ten by Mike Corbishley, Robert Croft, and Dr John Alex-ander about the work of the Schools Committee and theEducation Board.

Note

1 The CBA now publishes an Education Bulletinwhich has articles and information for teachers inschools, universities, and adult education.

no 64 presenting archaeology to young people

Documents