Lorna Anguilano, Giovanni Piredda, Cinzia Saba, Danny Aryani, Laura Marras, Elisa Grassi

Working Together and Learning Together: The Study of the Metallurgical Remains of San Tommaso, Pavia, Italy

Introduction

Working together and learning together: the study of the metallurgical remains of san tommaso, pavia, italy. Study San Tommaso, Pavia's metallurgical remains and a multidisciplinary archaeometallurgy teaching experience. Learn about analytical findings and the impact of early interdisciplinary education.

Abstract

The metallurgical remains of San Tommaso, Pavia were used as teaching collections for a multi-disciplinary archaeometallurgy class  held by the first time in the academic year 2016/2017 at the University of Sassari. This paper, written by the lecturing academic, the academic advisor, and some of the students attending the course, wants to bring to the archaeometallurgical community some of the  observations and reflexions on this teaching and learning experience. The varied metallurgical assemblage recovered from the  excavation in 2013 of the Monastery of San Tommaso (Pavia) is a very useful teaching tool. In all, 23 samples were analysed and are  presented in this paper from at least six different metallurgical processes: cupellation, silver recovery, iron making (by the direct and  indirect method), copper alloying and casting. This variety also poses more complex questions for the archaeological/historical re-contextualisation of the findings which require a strong interaction between archaeologists and scientists in order to ensure the  “Pavia”most plausible reconstruction of events. In particular, we aim at introducing the importance of different perspectives in “questioning” the materials and in turn the scientific results.While presenting the results of the archaeometric investigations the main aim of the paper is to introduce the idea of the importance  of multi-disciplinary teaching in archaeometry, more specifically in archaeometallurgy, early on in the academic development (master or even undergraduate) instead of being the result of research at a later stage (PhD or even post-doc). The experience here presented,  shows that differences in languages and perspectives and peer-to-peer teaching offers an enhanced learning tool. 

Review

This paper, "Working Together and Learning Together: The Study of the Metallurgical Remains of San Tommaso, Pavia, Italy," presents a compelling case study on the integration of archaeometallurgical research with pedagogical innovation. It details the use of a diverse collection of metallurgical remains from the Monastery of San Tommaso as a core teaching tool for a multi-disciplinary archaeometallurgy course at the University of Sassari. Authored collaboratively by faculty and students, the paper outlines the analysis of 23 samples revealing a remarkable range of processes including cupellation, silver recovery, iron making (both direct and indirect methods), copper alloying, and casting. Beyond simply presenting analytical results, the primary thrust of the work is to reflect on the significant educational benefits derived from this practical, hands-on engagement with complex archaeological materials. A key strength of this paper lies in its innovative approach to teaching archaeometallurgy. By advocating for the introduction of multi-disciplinary perspectives early in academic careers (master's or even undergraduate levels), it challenges the traditional model where such integration often occurs much later. The abstract highlights the pedagogical value of "questioning" materials from different disciplinary viewpoints, fostering a deeper and more nuanced understanding of archaeological contexts. The collaborative authorship, explicitly involving students, is particularly commendable as it embodies the paper's central theme of "working together and learning together," demonstrating how diverse "languages and perspectives" and peer-to-peer instruction can significantly enhance the learning experience. The inherent complexity and variety of the San Tommaso assemblage itself are expertly leveraged as a powerful teaching resource, allowing students to grapple with real-world archaeometallurgical challenges and the intricacies of re-contextualisation. While the abstract effectively conveys the paper's dual focus on material analysis and pedagogical innovation, a full paper would benefit from a more detailed exploration of certain aspects. Specifically, elaborating on the structured methodologies employed for "peer-to-peer teaching" and the concrete ways in which "differences in languages and perspectives" were managed and harnessed would provide valuable insights for other educators. Further detailing the specific contributions of the students to the analytical process and the subsequent "reflexions" would also strengthen the paper's message of collaborative learning. Given the abstract's mention of "more complex questions for the archaeological/historical re-contextualisation," future work, or perhaps a dedicated section within the paper, could delve deeper into how the student-led investigations contributed to, or grappled with, these broader historical interpretations, thus fully closing the loop between scientific analysis and archaeological understanding. This would further demonstrate the practical application of the multi-disciplinary approach.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.