Data Legacies, Epistemic Anxieties, and Digital Imaginaries in Archaeology

Abstract

Archaeology operates in an increasingly data-mediated world in which data drive knowledge and actions about people and things. Famously, data has been characterized as “the new oil”, underpinning modern economies and at the root of many technological transformations in society at large, even assuming a near-religious power over thought and action. As the call for this Special Issue recognizes, archaeological research is socially and historically situated and consequently influenced by these same broader developments. In archaeology, as in the wider world, data is the foundation for knowledge, but its capacity is rarely reflected upon. This paper offers just such a reflection: a meditation on the nature of archaeological digital data and the challenges for its (re)use. It asks what we understand by data: its etymology and comprehension, its exceptionality and mutability, its constructs and infrastructures, and its origins and consequences. The concept of the archaeological data imaginary is introduced to better understand approaches to the collection and use of archaeological data, and a case study examines how knowledge is mediated and remediated through the data embedded in grey literature. Appreciating the volatility and unpredictability of digital data is key in understanding its potential for use and reuse in the creation of archaeological knowledge.

Toward Standardised Vocabularies for Norwegian Archaeology

“…Such migrations are not only essential as software companies sunset ageing modules but are also driven by changes in society and market forces. All of these internal and external pressures, the long histories of establishments and the far-reaching and transformative effects they have on our interaction, understanding and appreciation of data are perhaps most succinctly described by Huggett's term 'Archaeological Data Imaginaries' (Huggett 2022). As more types of data are stored and published online and we find ourselves increasingly reliant on the eerie powers of complex AI we will undoubtedly discover new challenges of standardisation and perhaps new more complex definitions of what constitutes 'a vocabulary'.…”

The Use and Challenges of Spatial Data in Archaeology

“…More concretely, it means realizing that metadata and paradata are essential, being thoughtful in how we document (in consistent and unambiguous ways), for whom (and who is involved in that process) we document, and in what ways data will be accessed. Huggett (2022) proposes an archaeological data imaginary where open research and research infrastructure holds potential but remain parts of a journey full of frictions. Whether spatial data is too big to fail, or the opposite, provides a challenge and an opportunity.…”

Refining Archaeological Data Collection and Management

“…A great deal of archaeological data documents the location, characteristics, disposition, and context of material remains observed during field or laboratory studies. Archaeological data also include ethnoarchaeological studies, historical contexts, administrative topics, legal records, and computational data from analyses, experiments, and simulations (Huggett 2022; Kansa and Kansa 2021; Kintigh et al 2018; Marwick and Pilaar Birch 2018). By themselves, archaeological data have no inherent meaning.…”