The aim of this research is to understand what the effect of archaeological reconstructions (specifically iron age farmsteads) is (or has been) on both the scientific and public relations side of...Show moreThe aim of this research is to understand what the effect of archaeological reconstructions (specifically iron age farmsteads) is (or has been) on both the scientific and public relations side of archaeology and how these reconstructions can be used in the future. The main reason for this research is the implementation of the Faro agreement in the near future, which aims to include the public deeper into the archaeological research. To achieve this, I have studied 11 reconstructions in the Netherlands and 6 more in North-Western Europe. The reconstructions are all based on archaeological data, such as house plans and findings in the vicinity of these house plans. This study shows that multiple reasons for reconstruction exist, ranging from scientific questioning (usually as a part of an archaeological experiment) to nationalistic tendencies. Most reconstructions started as an archaeological experimental project, but have evolved overtime to serve different purposes. The different purposes range from archaeological education and public outreach to the protection of in situ archaeology at archaeological sites that experience a high influx of tourism. In the Netherlands reconstructions can be found in open air museums, parks and urban area’s. The reconstructions serve different purposes in the Netherlands, being a museum exhibit, a group location or a landscape element. The location and usage of the reconstructions is determined by the goal the builders had in mind. Usually reconstructions made for museums are build specifically for the purpose of visiting the reconstruction, making it durable and accessible for larger groups. This means that the reconstructions face concessions in construction, such as the use of bolts in the construction and foundations reenforced with concrete. The different purposes impact the construction of the reconstructions. A reconstruction that works mostly as a group location or landscape element should meet different demands then an archaeological experiment with scientific aims, which tries to limit the concessions. The upcoming implantation of the Faro agreement requires changes in perspective regarding the reconstructions and usage of this reconstructions. The reconstructions allow for public outreach and should be incorporated into the way the public experience archaeological research. The reconstructions are way to show what archaeologist do, and by combining them with events or life experiments it allows the public to get acquainted with archaeology and the past. This however does require extra steps to show not just the result of the research, but also allow the public to interact with the research itself. Steps in that direction have been taken, but at this point it is not enough. Allowing the interested public to join in experiments, fieldwork opportunities and exhibitions based around the archaeological research with the reconstructions in the centre could make the reconstructions relevant in the changing field of archaeology.Show less
The main question of this research is about which of two models about urnfields and Late Prehistoric land division fits best with the data around the sites Baarlo de Bong and Venlo-Zaarderheiken....Show moreThe main question of this research is about which of two models about urnfields and Late Prehistoric land division fits best with the data around the sites Baarlo de Bong and Venlo-Zaarderheiken. In the first model from Roymans and Fokkens (1991), it is suggested that burials were moving together with the settlements during the Middle Bronze Age (new burials at new places), whereas later burials from the Late Bronze Age (urnfield period) were formed in central locations within the landscape together with one or two families. In the other model, burial landscapes are suggested; these are zones without connection to the settlements were burials are placed in large areas stretching up to several kilometres in length (Arnoldussen and Fontijn 2006, 301). To answer the question, information was gathered from the Dutch national archaeological database known as Archis, from which information was gathered regarding the locations of former urnfields, burial mounds, Roman burials etc. This information was combined with information from the AHN; a Dutch elevation map from which small round hills could be identified as potential burial mounds around sites. The combination of the locations of supposed former burial mounds/urnfields and the hills of the elevation map can be used to make special correlations between the observations and the two archaeological sites. From this research, it could be concluded that at the site of Venlo- Zaarderheiken, there are a lot of observations of Prehistoric and Roman burials in close vicinity of the site. At Baarlo de Bong however, there are only a few observations of burials in the vicinity of the site. Because of this, Venlo-Zaarderheiken seems to be a candidate for a burial landscape, because of the many observations in close vicinity of the site, which also stretch out over a much larger area. On the other hand, both models could fit for Baarlo de Bong, because of the relatively small size of the burial site. The model of Roymans and Fokkens could not be rejected, thus both models are possible.Show less
Sinds begin jaren 1990 zijn er in het Nederlandse rivierengebied ongeveer 40 inhumatiegraven uit de vroege en midden ijzertijd gevonden. Dit is opmerkelijk, omdat men voordien dacht dat er in deze...Show moreSinds begin jaren 1990 zijn er in het Nederlandse rivierengebied ongeveer 40 inhumatiegraven uit de vroege en midden ijzertijd gevonden. Dit is opmerkelijk, omdat men voordien dacht dat er in deze tijd alleen sprake was van crematiegraven en urnenvelden uit deze tijd. Het inhumatieritueel verschilt in vele opzichten met het crematiegebruik, hoewel het hier wél om dezelfde bevolkingsgroep lijkt te gaan. Er zijn onder andere verschillen te zien in de grafgiftenset. De inhumatiegraven vertonen echter opmerkelijk veel overeenkomsten met het grafritueel dat in de Noord-Franse/Zuid-Duitse Marne-Moezelregio in gebruik is. Er zou dus sprake kunnen zijn geweest van Noord-Franse immigranten, die hun gewoontes mee hebben genomen naar het rivierengebied: ook zou het gebruik door de lokale bevolking kunnen zijn overgenomen. Het lijkt om een combinatie van deze twee elementen te gaan. Bepaalde elementen uit Noord-Frankrijk zijn overgenomen, andere zijn weggelaten, aangepast of vermengd met de Hunsruck-Eifel-Kultur.Show less
