The technical abilities and possibilities of prehistoric construction were at a much higher level than it was, until recently, presumed. The possible variations in the construction and plans were influenced by natural environment and cultural factors. This caused a limited number of stable construction systems to gradually crystallise. Single construction elements therefore can indicate certain systems.

The foundation structures are the most common elements found and consist of point (post holes) and linear (foundation ditch) remains of load bearing elements or foundation platforms and pylons. Sometimes the presence of houses may be indicated by groupings of stones, interpreted as post supports, or floor remains. The absence of post holes is often interpreted by supposing timber-frame or box-frame buildings.

Sporadically there is evidence of upper floors. Their presence might be indicated by a double load bearing structure or excessive bulk of the walls. They could also be interpreted as a loft.

There are basically two types of walls: skeleton and block built. A skeleton wall is commonly perceived as wattle-and-daub structure but there is a little concrete evidence for this. There is also the possibility of rebated construction, frame with clay infill or timber-frame construction. The block built walls consist of box-frame construction, stone, brick or mud brick walls and monolithic clay walls. The full height of walls is very rarely preserved. All the walls would probably have some sort of surface finish.

Roof construction can be defined on the basis of the load bearing elements, depending on if the load is carried by post or by walls and their organisation. The question of roof covering is an issue.

We know very little about openings. There is occasionally evidence of entrance openings - remains of thresholds or door frames but quite often the entrance is placed into an exceptionally large interval between post holes.

The remains of buildings uncovered by archaeological excavation create, at most, a more or less continuous complex of partial features, elements and traces. The interrelations are not always possible to clearly determine, influenced mostly by the level of preservation and the possibilities of recognition during excavations. The polycultural sites represent the biggest problem. It is also necessary to point out that the preserved plans delimited by post holes or foundation ditches don't need to correspondent exactly with the original plan of the house.

An attempt of reconstruction has to solve three problems: 1 Fullness (if the uncovered remains give information about all fundamental elements of the building), 2 Belonging (if all the finds, we are using, are of the same dating and culture) and 3 Reliability (if the data is reliable, how much the interpretation and reconstruction are influenced by our modern natural and cultural environment, including current level of knowledge).

Experimental reconstruction should create new information and make the results of archaeological research accessible to the wider public. But it is necessary to avoid a confusion of proved facts with hypothesis and clearly differentiate between them because a firm image is created subconsciously from the reconstruction. Irresponsible presentation is the exact opposite to education, on top of which it can also influence archaeologists in the future.

Fingerprints are the most "natural" structures of parallel lines found on the surface of any artefact created or used by human hands. Plastic clay can be easily impressed by the dermal ridges, which are then made permanent when the clay is fired. Dermatoglyphics can provide many biological properties of human individuals. Therefore, ceramics frequently contain valuable information about their creators. The term "paleodermatoglyphics" has been proposed for the study of dermatoglyphics through antiquity on archaeological and anthropological (mummies) materials, as well as on ancient texts. It is not possible to use traditional dermatoglyphic reference books as they deal only with complete two dimensional prints made with ink on paper. The unintentional fingerprints on pottery differ from those in many ways.

Commonly the fingerprints on ceramics are fragmentary. They reflect heterogeneous regions of skin friction. Mineral grains can distort the details of epidermal ridges. As a consequence, an application of standard dermatoglyphic methods is not possible. Experiments can help us to overcome these difficulties. In technical experiments the influences of clay characteristics on dermatoglyphic features are studied. Biological experiments serve to state the variability of dermatoglyphic features frequently present in fingerprints on ceramics.

While studying fingerprints on pottery it is necessary to continually reassess the methodology and propose new ways. Experiments give us a possibility to discover regularities in fingerprint origins and to correct methodology. The technical experiments deal with the interrelations between dermatoglyphic elements and the technical parameters of ceramic mixtures. We imprint one known papillary terrain and change the parameters of ceramic mixture and its processing. The biological experiments analyse the relation of dermatoglyphic elements to other human characteristics. A number of people with known characteristics imprint their hands onto identical ceramic tablets which are processed in identical ways.

The chosen methodology is tested on recent pottery. In co-operation with studios and workshops we analyse recent products where it is possible to trace back all the necessary data but where the producers themselves don't know beforehand about the project. This ensures that the fingerprints are a natural result of the process.

Prime data from historical fingerprints, combined with experiments and verification may lead to a development of useful methods for the estimation of number, age, sex and ethnicity of the imprinted individuals. As a whole, if archaeologists pay attention to fingerprints, paleodermatoglyphics might reconstruct basic social patterns of ceramic production in a particular culture or locality.

On May 11th, 2000 a unique exhibition "Face to Face with our Ancestors" opened, which was a realization of the Scientia-Ars-Humanitas project. The exhibition presents sculptural facial reconstructions of 9th century Slavs from Pohansko, a cemetery dated to the Great Moravia period. The exhibition contains sculptural reconstructions of the faces of five individuals. Also includes graphical facial reconstructions, replicas of the archaeological finds and the original documentation.

The cemetery contained 407 graves with 412 skeletons and many grave goods. At first a detailed anthropological analysis was done. For sculptural reconstruction there were chosen three adults (two men and a woman) and two children (a boy and a girl). The classical Gerasimov method based on the reconstruction of muscles was used. For graphic reconstruction we chose four adults (two men and two women).

The importance of the exhibition is not only scholarly (cultural and historical research), but also highly pertinent for the general public. It provides an opportunity to learn about history in a highly visual and attractive way. This exhibit significantly enriches both teaching and general education. Looking into the eyes of people who lived at the same time as the first prince of the Great-Moravia (one of the first state in Central Europe) is very interesting for people from Central Europe, who are exploring their identity and through it an incorporation into contemporary Europe.