CAA SIGARKWORK Archaeological practices and knowledge work in the digital environment

A special interest group Archaeological practices and knowledge work in the digital environment in Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology International Organisation

A comprehensive understanding of emerging digital practices, their underpinnings and implications is a key to understanding and developing the potential of computational archaeology, new methods, technologies and approaches, effectively managing the rapidly accumulating archaeological data and using them all for the benefit of archaeological scholarship and the society at large. CAASIG ARKWORK consolidate the on-going work relating to digital archaeological practices and knowledge work affiliated with the CAA community and forms a platform for developing and discussing research on digital archaeological practices and its repercussions both within and outside of archaeology with a direct benefit for the work of the CAA community and its members.

Organisers; Isto Huvila Uppsala University; Anne Hunnell Chen, Bard College; Stephen Stead, Paveprime Ltd

The recent years have seen a growing interest in conducting empirical, theoretical and reflective research on contemporary and past archaeological practices. Such research has created new knowledge on the practicalities and underpinnings of archaeological work in the past and at the present, update of digital technologies and their impact on archaeological knowledge production, and much more. At the same time, as it has enhanced our understanding of archaeological practices, it has informed development of new tools and infrastructures, and creation, organisation, management and dissemination of archaeological knowledge. Beyond the domain of archaeology, the research on archaeological practices has resulted in insights that have transferred to other domains.

The aim of this roundtable is to invite researchers of archaeological practices and archaeological practitioners to discuss what next steps the studies of contemporary archaeological practices should take to advance the understanding of present, past and future archaeological work, use and development of existing and new digital tools and infrastructures and practices. Each participant is asked to propose and give a brief lightning talk highlighting one specific aspect of archaeological practices that needs to be studied in more detail in the future, a particular knowledge gap, a potentially useful method or theory in advancing the understanding of archaeological practices, or a issue or problem that could be addressed or solved by inquiring deeper into how archaeological or archaeology-related paid or voluntary, professional or non-professional practices are enacted, what are their underpinning factors, or implications. The invitation is especially extended to both senior and junior scholars and practitioners representing all genders and backgrounds, disciplines, and perspectives to studying or engaging with archaeological practices. After the lightning talks, the roundtable continues with a discussion on a future research agenda of archaeological practices in the digital era with the panellists and the audience, and closes with an invitation to continued work on developing the agenda.

The panel is organised on collaboration with the research project CAPTURE (www.uu.se/en/research/capture) and the CAASIG ARKWORK on archaeological practices and knowledge work in the digital environment.

Panellists

Katharine Watson, Christchurch Archaeology
Alex Brandsen, Universiteit Leiden
Anne Chen, Bard College
Stephen Stead, Paveprime Ltd
Leigh Anne Lieberman, Princeton University
Isto Huvila, Uppsala University (moderator)

Knowledge of archaeological work – from fieldwork and post-excavation and laboratory analyses to visualisation and beyond – is crucial for understanding and using its different outputs independently if they are digital or non-digital data, reports, or monographs, digital visualisations, or models. There is a growing corpus of empirical and theoretical research and accounts of practical work on documenting, capturing and keeping information pertaining to archaeological, scientific and scholarly practices. These studies range from the documentation of traces (e.g. Morgan & Eve, 2012), paradata (e.g. Gant & Reilly, 2017; Denard, 2012; Huvila et al. 2021) and, for example, provenance metadata (e.g. Huggett, 2014) and how information can be preserved as a part of the archaeological record. This session invites presentations of evidence-based, theoretical and reflective work relating to archiving of information that describes and documents digital archaeological practices. The session is open to quantitative and qualitative evidence-based studies of archiving and re-use of archived information on archaeological practices and knowledge work, as well as theoretical work shedding light on different, for example, epistemological aspects of the topic. Further, the session welcomes reflections and descriptions of how such information has been archived or is planned to be archived in practice. Relevant contexts for presentations discussing archiving and the implications of different types of information archived on archaeological practices and knowledge work in the digital environment range from archiving and preserving fieldwork, to the documentation of data creation (for example, database design and management), working on legacy documentation, metadata and paradata, automatic and manual archiving and beyond. Proposals are welcome from the entire CAA community including archaeologists, social and computer scientists, heritage, museum and information studies researchers and practitioners. The format of the session (Standard session) consists of paper presentations and discussion, including a concluding open forum for sharing and collecting ideas for future research on and in relation to traces of digital archaeological practices. The session is affiliated with the CAASIG ARKWORK on archaeological practises and knowledge work in the digital environment.

References:

Denard, H. (2012). A new introduction to the London Charter. In A. Bentkowska-Kafel, H. Denard, & D. Baker, A. Bentkowska-Kafel, H. Denard, & D. Baker (Eds.), Paradata and transparency in virtual heritage (pp. 57–71). Farnham: Ashgate.

Gant, S., & Reilly, P. (2017). Different expressions of the same mode: a recent dialogue between archaeological and contemporary drawing practices. Journal of Visual Art Practice , 17 (1), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702029.2017.1384974

Huggett, J. (2014). Promise and Paradox: Accessing Open Data in Archaeology. In C. Mills, M. Pidd, & E. Ward, C. Mills, M. Pidd, & E. Ward (Eds.), Proceedings of the Digital Humanities Congress 2012. Studies in the Digital Humanities. Sheffield: HRI Online Publications.

Huvila, I., Sköld, O., & Börjesson, L. (2021). Documenting information making in archaeological field reports. Journal of Documentation, 77(5), 1107–1127. https:// doi.org/10.1108/JD-11-2020-0188

Morgan, C., & Eve, S. (2012). DIY and digital archaeology: what are you doing to participate? World Archaeology , 44 (4), 521–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/004382 43.2012.741810

Presentations

• 96. Successful archiving and management of paradata depends on your paradata-in-hand / Isto Huvila (SE)*; Zanna C Friberg (Uppsala university )
• 221. Research workflows, paradata, information visualisation: feedback on an exploratory integration of issues and practices / Iwona Dudek (CNRS)*; Jean-Yves Blaise (CNRS) (Slides PDF)
• 72. 25 years of archiving: Exploring what people see as deposit worthy / Teagan K Zoldoske (Archaeology Data Service)*; Becky Hirst (Archaeology Data Service)
• 126. HORAI: An integrated management platform for historical information / Pablo del Fresno Bernal (Sistemes de Gestió del Patrimoni SCCL); Sonia Medina Gordo (Universitat de Barcelona, Institut d’Arqueologia)*; Esther Travé Allepuz (Universitat de Barcelona, Institut d’Arqueologia. (Slides PDF)
• 140. A focus on the future of our tiny piece of the past: Digital Archiving of a long-term and multi-participant regional project / Scott Madry (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)*; Gregory Jansen (U. Maryland College Park); Seth Murray (North Carolina State University); Elizabeth Jones (UNC-Chapel Hill); Lia Willcoxon (North Carolina State University) (Slides, PDF)
• 347. Reconstructing Acquarossa - Reconstructing in 3D as a methodology for organizing and interpreting legacy data / Maarten H. Sepers (University of Amsterdam)* (Slides PDF)
• 30. Transforming the CIDOC-CRM model into a megalithic monument property graph / Ariele Câmara (ISCTE)*; Ana de Almeida (Iscte Instituto Universitário de Lisboa); João Oliveira (Iscte Instituto Universitário de Lisboa)
• 245. Text Parsing Archaeological Legacy Data: A Software Methodology to Generate Maps from Handwritten Excavation Documentation / Emily Fletcher (Purdue University)*

Abstract

Knowing about how archaeological work – from fieldwork to data collection, analyses, construction of models, visualisations and beyond – is conducted is essential for understanding its outputs whether they are 3D models, archaeological knowledge, digital or analogue data or books, articles or reports. There is an increasing body of research on the traces of archaeological, and in a broader sense, scientific and scholarly practises. These studies investigate how different traces— conceptualised, for example, as traces (e.g. Hug et al. 2011; Morgan & Eve, 2012), paradata (e.g. Gant & Reilly, 2017; Denard, 2012; Huvila et al. 2021) and provenance metadata (e.g. Huggett, 2014)—can inform data reuse, provide understanding and criticise archaeological practises, documentation and information, seek to understand the limits of archaeological knowledge, and much more. Thematically the work spans from the documentation of archaeological visualisations (Bentkowska-Kafel & Denard, 2012; Börjesson et al. 2020) to studies of the use (Wylie, 2017) and curatorial history of archaeological collections (Voss, 2012; Friberg & Huvila, 2019), archaeological documentation (Huvila et al., 2021), data reuse (Ullah, 2015; Sobotkova, 2018; Strupler, 2021), analysis of earlier data collection methods (Olson & Walther, 2007) and changing data practises (Montoya et al., 2019).

This session invites presentations of evidence-based, theoretical and reflective work relating to traces of digital archaeological practises. Theoretically, the session is open to perspectives drawing from the quantitatively oriented trace data analysis tradition and qualitative investigation of traces—including trace ethnography that enables identification and analysis of traces in semi- or unstructured documentary formats such as working notes, log files and oral communication (cf. Geiger & Ribes, 2011)—and beyond to bring different approaches and theoretical views into discussion with each other. Contributions to the session can, for example, describe qualitative and quantitative methods and experiences of collecting traces (including paradata, provenance metadata and beyond); discuss how traces can inform data reuse, analysis and use of archaeological information and knowledge in different forms; engage in theoretical ruminations of what counts and works as a trace; share experiences and considerations of e.g., what functions as a trace and why, what types of traces are informative and for what purposes, and what kinds of traces can be seemingly informative but in practice are less useful. Thinking of possible contexts, the discussed work can pertain to fieldwork and documentation of digital field practises, documentation of data creation (e.g. database design and curation), traces of practises in legacy data, metadata and paradata, automatic and manual documentation of practises in field and lab notebooks, databases and video diaries, annotation of 3D visualisations and documentation and archiving of software used in archaeological data capturing and analysis. The disciplinary background of proposers includes the whole CAA community from archaeologists to, for example, social and computer scientists, heritage, museum and information studies researchers and practitioners.

Presentations

Presentation slides for a part of the presentations are linked to the presentation titles.

40. Translations and path dependencies between sources, made and given data / Roesler* and Hofmann
57. Towards clarity and confidence in archaeological prospection and remote sensing archaeology / Banaszek*, Cowley, Geddes, Bjerketvedt and Killoran
63. Follow the money: Tracing Alexandrian coinage in the digital record / Isaksen*
84. Known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns: Strengths and weaknesses of reporting archaeological fieldwork and research in Scotland / McKeague*
94. Gathering and following traces: Towards a methodology of data reading / Sköld, Börjesson, Huvila* and Kaiser
124. Archiving the third dimension / Kruse* and Schönenberger
34. The impacts of digital devices on archaeological practices on field recording activities and archaeological archives production from 1980s: An historical and epistemological point of view / Tuffery*
70. From analogic and legacy data to the digital geonumismatic database of the AugustaGIS / Bettineschi*, Reuter, Rheeder, Gairhos and Sojc
96. 3D reconstruction of the early medieval stronghold in Santok: Educational and scientific significance of the visualisation in archaeology / Markiewicz* and Zamelska-Monczak