Theoretical framework for the scientific study of archaeological and

2.2.3.1. Contextual studies for chymistry

One major aim of this study is to understand past metallurgical processes and reactions within the specific cultural and technological system in which they took place. This science-based archaeological study needs to bear in mind the historical context of the case studies considered when explaining the results of such a scientific research and suggesting intentions behind facts, in order to avoid anachronistic interpretations (Martinón-Torres 2005; Martinón-Torres and Rehren 2005a). The Renaissance perception of matter was indeed different from our own, and it is critical to acknowledge this when looking at archaeological materials and technologies. Despite apparent similarities, processes will most likely not have been carried out with the same mental framework by a sixteenth-century chymist or metallurgist as by a modern scientist. In the changing era of the Renaissance, there were variations and differences in the way of looking at materials and objects, depending on very diverse criteria such as social and cultural contexts, professional background, or purpose of the operations. A good example is shown by Renaissance chymists, some of whom believed that chrysopoeia and argyropoeia – the transmutation of base metals into, respectively, gold and silver –, was not a conceivable operation, while others believed it was feasible and repeatedly attempted to produce gold.

Alchemy and chemistry have generally been studied separately by historians from different schools of thought. Historians have often wondered whether alchemy – in its modern meaning following the definition given in Diderot and d’Alembert’s

Encyclopédie of 1753 – was to be regarded as a science or as a philosophy (Principe

and Newman 2001; Martinón-Torres 2005: 40-48) and therefore the extent to which it contributed or not to the history of chemistry and science. However, it appears that when looking at both disciplines in the sixteenth century, this differentiation cannot be made and alchemy cannot be studied “as a uniform and constant monolith” (Principe and Newman 2001: 419). To avoid these biases in the historiography, Principe and Newman (2001) suggested to rewrite this history on the foundation of specific case studies and therefore on contextual investigations rather than doing “broad surveys of alchemy” (Principe and Newman 2001: 419).

In the case of Oberstockstall, closely linked to chymistry, it is therefore crucial to refer to the temporal and cultural contexts when interpreting the results from the archaeometric and archaeological study and suggesting intentions and purposes behind practical and technical actions. Also in the Angertal, even though the ultimate purpose of the metallurgical operations may be easier to infer, we cannot assume that their understanding of the process was the same as ours. Overall, this epistemological framework highlights the need for high-resolution contextual studies such as these presented here.

2.2.3.2. The study of past technology

Technology can be defined in various ways, which has led to divisions in the methodologies applied to its study (Ingold 1999; Schiffer and Skibo 2001). After a long period of ‘static’ investigation of technology, which was restricted to the artefacts or to some extent, to acts, but considered as purely technical and practical (Ingold 1990; Dobres 2000), new approaches have emerged to incorporate the human agent (Schiffer and Skibo 1995; 2001) and therefore give a ‘dynamic’ dimension to the notion of studying past technology. One such approach is that of the chaîne opératoire, which is not only a mere description of a “series of technological operations which transforms a raw material into a usable product” (Cresswell 1990: 46), but also takes human beings, society, and culture into account (Sellet 1993: 106; Dobres 1999: 125). It seems then that embedding the study of technology in the concept of the chaîne opératoire could avoid these notional dissensions and lead towards more interdisciplinary research (Martinón-Torres 2002). In the case of the assemblages from Oberstockstall and the Angertal, one primary aim is to correlate disconnected materials and tools into a technological sequence, always bearing in mind the context in which these materials were found. The use of the chaîne opératoire seems therefore a useful strategy here when trying to ascertain both practical knowledge and intentions, as long as present-day perceptions and assumptions are not directly applied to past technological sequences.

It is increasingly acknowledged that the anthropological component of technologies is as important as their material element (Lemonnier 1993; Stark 1998; Dobres 2000). Technologies are largely influenced by human agents, who have to be regarded both as individual and social. Even though limitations due to various

practical and technical constraints do exist, the particular knowledge, skills and intentions of humans together with their social and cultural environment greatly influence their technological choices (Lemonnier 1993; Dobres 1995; Sillar and Tite 2000). The purposes behind objects and techniques may be directly reflected in the material culture when technological styles can be identified, and artefacts and their manufacturing technologies can be seen as a medium of personal and social expression (Lechtman 1977; Lemonnier 1993; Ingold 1999). However, when this is not so obvious, the interpretation may be clarified by combining historical studies with archaeological research. Such an approach is intended to be applied to both archaeological sites in this project, and completed by the scientific analysis of archaeological materials. The full integration of the context of each site should allow an optimum interpretation from the combination of history, archaeology and science (Martinón-Torres 2008).

This research project will therefore aim first at reconstructing processes embedded and interpreted in specific contexts, and building on this, at more widely contributing to the history of technology and science taking into account the various approaches introduced above, in order to avoid the direct application of modern presumptions, and therefore misinterpretations, to the past.