Teams From Around the World Make Waves at SUBMERGED Opens
August 1, 2025
Calling all archaeology explorers! The FIRST® LEGO® League UNEARTHED™ season is a part of the 2025-2026 archaeology-inspired robotics season FIRST® AGE™ presented by Qualcomm. This year’s season theme is all about discovering the past to uncover the future. Keep reading to dig into real-world archaeology problems and solutions to get inspiration for your Innovation Project.
Just breaking ground on your season? Check out the UNEARTHED Welcome Video for details about what to expect. All season materials are available on the Game & Season page.
This blog post was written by the REVERSEACTION team, an international group of archaeologists based at the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge, UK, who work closely with collaborators at the Museo del Oro, Colombia. In this blog, you’ll meet some of the team members, learn about their experiences working in archaeology, and get answers to frequently asked archaeology questions.
Q1: Do archaeologists do anything other than digging?
Answered by Marcos Martinón-Torres, Spain, Professor of Archaeological Science, who has a background in History, Archaeology and Science.
“My favourite thing about Archaeology is that I’m always meeting new interesting people, both in the present and in the past.”
A1: For archaeologists, digging is often just the beginning, and many of us work in other spaces such as museums or laboratories, studying archaeological remains to obtain clues about the past, or sharing our results with the public. For example, in the REVERSEACTION project, we are investigating how societies without kings or emperors cooperated to learn and develop goldwork, textiles or ceramic production. A large part of our work involves analysing artefacts in museums and laboratories to understand how they were made and used, or where they come from.
A key practical challenge for us is keeping track of all the samples and their whereabouts. For example, we may study an object in Colombia, do photography or create a 3D model, then take tiny samples of it to send across the world for radiocarbon dating, or back to the UK for chemical analysis... As we work with hundreds of objects, we must be very careful that samples are not mixed, that we always know where they are and which object they belong to.
Q2: How can archaeologists investigate where an object has come from?
Answered by Agnese Benzonelli, Italy, archaeological materials specialist, who has a background in science, archaeology and conservation.
“What I love most is the thrill of discovery: revealing the hidden world behind each piece – the technology, the tools, the hands that shaped it, and the knowledge people of the past shared to create it. I also feel privileged to be able to look at artefacts up close using challenging ‘toys’ (aka scientific instruments), travel to fascinating places, work with inspiring colleagues and learning something new every single day – it's a job you can never grow tired of!”
A2: When archaeologists want to discover where an ancient object originated, the investigation begins much like a detective story. We first study its appearance: a leaf‑shaped bronze blade might suggest northern Italy, whilst a deep‑blue bead could point to Egyptian workshops. Under a microscope we can also examine the surfaces of objects to see things like tiny hammer blows, file lines, air bubbles, or polishing grooves – these are all scars remnant of the production process, and because workshops in different regions followed distinct craft traditions, each microscopic scar can point to a place where the object was finished.
Looks, however, can be deceiving. So, to test our first lead, we can apply further scientific techniques such as portable x‑ray fluorescence (pXRF). Using a pXRF analyser, we zap the surface of an object with a beam of x-rays. These X‑rays excite the atoms in the object’s outer layer and when excited, electrons become displaced, releasing energy (x-ray fluorescence radiation). Each element releases a different, known amount of energy, which the pXRF analyser can read, revealing the elements present. Within seconds we know whether a dagger is mostly copper, brass, or tin‑rich bronze, or whether a bead’s colour comes from cobalt, manganese, or iron. As different materials were favoured by different people at different times in the past, this information may offer a broad provenance.
Nonetheless, to be certain we can then take a small sample of the object, a speck smaller than a breadcrumb, and undergo more testing. An even more sophisticated machine—laser‑ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA‑ICP‑MS)—weighs every atom and uncovers a trace‑element fingerprint (elements present in minuscule amounts). This ultra‑fine signature can link a spearhead to a specific Alpine mine or a bead to desert sands carried down the Nile. Finally, the mix of slightly heavier and lighter versions of certain elements (lead or strontium isotopes) acts like a regional chemical postcode that cannot be faked. Matching that postcode to samples from known quarries or beaches pinpoints the object’s geological birthplace.
By weaving together visual clues, pXRF screening, ICP trace‑element analysis, and isotope “chemical postcodes,” we archaeologists can follow an artefact from the ore-seam or sand dune where its life began, through the workshops that shaped it, and into the hands that ultimately carried it across the ancient world.
Q3: Can archaeologists also learn about past people from broken objects?
Answered by Kate Klesner, USA, Ceramic Specialist, who has a background in Archaeology, Chemistry, and Materials Science.
“The best thing I have ever handled on a project was a lustreware bowl recovered from a medieval period trash pit. This bowl, which was made from clay, has a very unique type of decoration that creates a multi-coloured, metallic shine. When you move the object around in the light it looks like it is shimmering, and it was a made by a very skilled artisan. Before it was thrown away, the bowl had travelled thousands of kilometres along the Silk Road, all the way from what’s now Iraq to Central Asia. And this happened long before cars, planes, or trains even existed!”
A3: Absolutely! In fact, broken objects—especially broken pieces of pottery—can tell us a lot about the past. Pottery is one of the most common things archaeologists find when they dig at ancient sites. Whether it's from Bronze Age Greece (like the time of the Iliad and Odyssey), the great Mayan cities, or medieval towns in Britain, pottery shows up everywhere. But usually, when we find this pottery, it is broken into fragments which archaeologists called sherds.
Sometimes, we get really lucky and find a whole pot or bowl. These complete objects are very special, and when we study them, we try to avoid damaging them in any way. Oftentimes, we use these objects to understand the shapes (or morphology) of the other pots that we usually find broken. We use techniques like 3D scanning to capture their morphology in high resolution, to compare with other vessels and to learn how potters in the past formed the clay into the pot’s final shape.
But broken pieces (sherds) actually offer more research possibilities. Because they’re already damaged, we can take a closer look at what’s inside the pottery. For examples we can:
- Examine the chemistry of different materials in the ceramic to understand where it was made using everything from handheld tools like pXRF, to huge machines called particle accelerators.
- Study the tiny structures inside the ceramic using light and electron microscopes to understand how the pot was formed and decorated.
- Look for the residues of organic matter trapped in the pores of the ceramic, or on its surface, to understand what types of food people stored, cooked, and ate in the vessels.
One of the biggest challenges in our work is deciding which methods to use. Archaeologists have access to lots of amazing scientific techniques, and we often work with experts like chemists, physicists, and engineers to study how objects were made and used. But here’s the tricky part: the most powerful tools—the ones that give us the clearest and most detailed information—can be destructive, meaning we have to take a small piece of the pottery and destroy it during testing. That’s a big deal, especially if the object is rare or really well preserved.
We also have non-destructive methods that don’t damage the pottery, but those can take longer, might not be as accurate, and usually we need to study more examples to get good results. So, we always have to ask ourselves an important question: Is it worth damaging part of an object to learn something new about the people who made and used it?
So yes, broken objects can be like little time machines, helping us learn all about the people who made and used them, even if the object isn’t whole anymore.
Q4: What about people’s clothes, do they survive from the past too?
Answered by Anne Kwaspen, Belgium, Textile Specialist, who has a background in Textile Art, Fashion, Textile Conservation, and Textile & Fashion Museum Curation.
“What I love most is discovering clothing that people didn’t know about before. In Egypt, I found a type of hairnet from the Byzantine period that no one had seen before, and I also discovered a new kind of tunic, one that sits right between two well-known styles.”
A4: Textile archaeology is a fascinating but lesser-known part of archaeology, mainly because very few ancient textiles survive over time. Clothes and fabrics were made from organic materials like wool, cotton, flax (linen), and silk, and these materials break down much more easily than things made from stone, glass, metal, or pottery, which are inorganic. But in rare cases, we do find them!
The best places for textile preservation are extremely dry environments like deserts, where the underground temperature stays stable and the humidity is close to zero. This is why large numbers of ancient textiles have been found in the deserts of Egypt, Peru, and China. Textiles can also survive through freezing (such as Otzi the Ice Mummy) and in anaerobic, waterlogged environments (without oxygen), such as bogs or wetlands, but only usually if they’re made from animal fibres such as wool. Plant-based fibres like linen and cotton normally rot in the damp conditions. One example of an archaeological site where plant-based fibres have survived is Must Farm, in Cambridgeshire, UK. At the Bronze Age site of Must Farm, a fire carbonised several large pieces of woven fabric, changing them chemically from organic to inorganic. These pieces then sank under the water and were preserved for 3000 years, before archaeologists found them.
Whilst finds like these are beautiful, they are very rare and pose a major archaeological problem: they begin to degrade very quickly once excavated and exposed to oxygen. As a result, these objects need to be kept constantly wet until they receive further treatment by conservators. They also have to be stored carefully. They need stable temperatures and humidity to prevent decay and mould formation. Light is another problem—textiles survive best in darkness. When they are displayed, the light must be kept low and display cases should have motion sensors or timers, so that light only turns on when someone is looking at them.
From the textiles, specialists can also learn a lot about the people who made and used them, from their fashion preferences, and production methods, to the materials being exploited for fabrics and dying. When we receive a textile in lab, specialists start by asking several key questions:
- What materials were used—wool, linen, cotton, or silk?
- What dyes gave the fabric its colour, and where did those materials come from?
- How were the textiles made from the raw material fibres?
Weaving was the most common technique in the past, but ancient people also used felting, knotting, looping, knitting and more. By carefully following the threads in a fabric, we can figure out how it was made and what tools were used. Microscopes help us examine the tiny details of the weave or fibre's structure.
Sometimes we don’t find any textiles at all, just tools like spindles, loom weights, or needles. When this happens, we work in reverse: we study the tools to guess what kinds of fabrics they could have made. For example, here at REVERSEACTION, as well as looking at the remains of pre-Hispanic textiles such as blankets, we are studying a very large assemblage of stone and ceramic spindle whorls, which were used for spinning cotton into threads for weaving.
Q5: Can we still learn about past people if none of their belongings survive?
Answered by Rosie Crawford, UK, Research Assistant in Archaeological Science, who has a background in Archaeology, Anthropology, Palaeopathology, Forensic Archaeology, and Forensic Anthropology.
“The coolest thing I’ve ever excavated was a 120,000-year-old stone tool from a cave in Spain, made by Homo neanderthalensis (a Neanderthal). This tool was likely made to help its owner prepare food to eat and the coolest part is that I was probably the first modern Human to ever see or hold it!”
A5: Whilst archaeology is primarily the study of ancient material culture, meaning the physical objects that people made and used in their everyday lives, we can also learn a lot about past people from the landscape and the remains of the people themselves.
For example, archaeologists can study the locations and organisation of human land-use, to learn about how humans were interacting with the environment, regional population densities (how many people were in a certain area), movement patterns, and social organisation. This can be done from satellite imagery and can be aided by machine learning to map different settlement or site types on a large scale, from space. Archaeologists can also use clues from the environment such as terrain, or proximity to water sources, to predict how people or animals may have moved around in the past; this information can then be used together with isotopic data to investigate when in their lives people were moving to different areas, or if certain members of society moved but others didn’t.
Isotopes are variations of a chemical element with the same number of protons, but a different number of neutrons. Archaeologists can measure the ratios of these different isotopes to learn about diet and provenance, by taking a tiny sample of bone or teeth and putting them into a machine called a mass spectrometer. You could also use nails or hair, but these generally don’t survive without mummification. Different types of diets leave different isotopic signatures, and so we can begin to understand what people were eating without any of the food surviving. Something REVERSEACTION is doing, along with collaborators in Colombia, is corroborating the results of isotope analysis with the types of artefacts found with each person. By doing this we can look into whether certain objects are more likely to be buried with people eating certain diets.
A person’s skeleton can also tell us a lot about how they lived, because it undergoes changes during life in response to growth and development, physical activity, and physiological stress (e.g. illness or malnutrition). These skeletal changes occur because our bones are dynamic in nature, naturally modelling and remodelling as we grow and heal. During periods of illness or in response to trauma (for example if you break your arm), this normal process of remodelling is disturbed and these periods of disturbance can become visible on the skeleton in the forms of abnormal bone formation, or destruction. What this means, is that archaeologists can often see when a person was poorly or broke a bone during their lives, and with this information we can start to think about how their communities cared for them. Certain illnesses also appear in characteristic patterns on the skeleton, and so we may even be able to suggest possible diagnoses.
It is extremely important for archaeologists, especially when studying human remains, to consider the ethics of their work. Each archaeologist will follow a set of guidelines for ethical practise devised for their country, for example in the UK we follow the Code of Conducts set out by the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology (BABAO) and the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA). For example, we must always prioritise non-destructive approaches, and devise thoughtful methodology, with clear aims, before undertaking any analysis.
This is a key challenge that archaeologists across the globe are facing: How can we continue to study objects and people from the past, in the most ethical way – in a way that is caring, considerate, and with knowledge sharing and community engagement at the centre. This should also be a central aspect of your investigations throughout the UNEARTHED season.
Q6: Do archaeologists ever use coding in their work or work with large amounts of data?
Answered by Jasmine Vieri, Finland, GIS and Spatial Analysis specialist, who has a background in archaeology, computational archaeology, and science.
“The most interesting thing I ever excavated was a post-Medieval ‘witch bottle’, designed to protect the owner against witchcraft. I also once excavated an archaeological cesspit (a pit used for the disposal of human waste…) and found a tiny leather shoe, which someone in the past must have lost down the toilet!”
A6: The work we do does not stop in the field or even in the lab! A lot of the data processing and interpretation happens in front of a computer, and coding is one of the most powerful tools we use. Its applications range from database use and management, data classification and visualisation, statistical analysis and modelling to test hypotheses, and the mapping and spatial analysis of excavation sites. Another fun application is simulating imaginary archaeological data underneath different scenarios to see which scenarios best match what we have found. So, although we might not always be digging in the dirt, we’re still digging – through files, code, and clues hidden in data.
A key challenge relates ensuring the interoperability and reusability of all this work. What this means, is that we have to agree upon shared standards of practice and always carry out coding work according to these standards. Code is only as useful as it is publicly accessible, well documented and easily readable by others! This will make the computational analyses readily reproducible and comparable to work done by others. Other practical challenges relate to the long-term storage of large datasets, and sometimes even the limits of computational power available to researchers. For instance, analysing pixel-based data like satellite images or 3D scans requires a lot of computer brainpower, in which case we may need to turn to high-power computing.
Uncover more information and follow the team on social media:
https://www.instagram.com/reverseactionp/
https://www.facebook.com/ReverseactionP/
https://www.youtube.com/@RosieCrawford
https://www.instagram.com/justalittleroo/
https://www.tiktok.com/@justalittleroo
https://www.instagram.com/museodeloro/
Museo del Oro, Colombia: https://www.banrepcultural.org/bogota/museo-del-oro
Want more inspiration from the experts? Check out our Career Connections playlist, available now on YouTube!
Don’t forget to dig into the Game & Season page for all the UNEARTHED season resources! Be on the lookout for upcoming Team Blasts and social posts announcing new blog posts.
What questions do you want to dig into this season? Let us know on social media using #UNEARTHED and be sure to tag @FIRSTLEGOLeague!