Abstract This thesis examines and discusses a sample of the medieval hypocausts (stone-heating ovens) in the Baltic area. The medieval construction is thoroughly explained as well as the antique hypocaust in order to establish a base for the following discussion. The medieval hypocaust has been almost forgotten for a long period of time. The last time someone dealt with this category of finds were in the 1960’s by Swedish archaeologist Iwar Andersson and in the 1970’s by Danish archaeologist Johannes Hertz. Not one archaeologist, since the early 20th century, has tried to interpret these constructions in their social contexts. The focus has always been on the construction and the technique in itself, which doesn’t lead the research any further than to a functional interpretation.   The author applies a comparative method to the literary material that is used for the thesis and discusses the origins of the medieval technique, which types there are, what contexts they appear in, what buildings and activities they can be related to, if they represent status or necessity or both and who could afford to construct them in relation to the resources that was demanded and finally why the technique was abandoned.   Keywords: Medieval hypocaust, stone-heating oven, medieval, ancient technology, the Baltic area.

This thesis concerns the relationship between research in experimental archaeology and the intangible of the past. Only a quarter of technological experiments in a sample of 100 studies addresses the intangible of technological practice, and this project sets out to explore if there are conceptual or practical obstacles for this low rate. The thesis begins with an in-depth examination of experimental archaeology and the criteria, paradigms and theories that determine its practice. Through this study, elements of the dichotomy positivism/postmodernism are uncovered and discussed. To resolve this dualism, a third paradigm – philosophical pragmatism – is introduced as an alternative. This conceptual debate represents Part I, and is subsequently collated into a methodological framework for the creation of a typified experiment. Part II consists of the experimental segment of this study, in search for practical obstacles for the exploration of the intangible. Through experimenting with Iron Age Bucket-shaped pots, Mesolithic faceted pebbles and Middle Palaeolithic birch bark tar production, different components of an experiment are highlighted for investigation. An element that comes forward as problematic is the relationship between experimental archaeologists and science ideals that is underscored by experimental tradition. Conclusively, the final discussion leaves the conceptual and practical barriers that may prevent archaeologists from studying the intangible aspects of technology overturned. In sum, this may enable experimental archaeologists to take a fuller view of their own practice and that of the people of the past.