Viggen Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Archaeologists are bringing past worlds vividly to life on the computer screen. But are the high-tech graphics helping science, or are they just pretty pictures? Michael Bawaya takes a look. full article at Nature.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 22, 2006 Report Share Posted December 22, 2006 What is needed instead is the development of ground penetrating radars that allow to make an accurate registration of layers and archaeological remains below ground. In this way we could make a digital excavation in computers without the need of digging with shovels. This would be revolutionary because it would speed archaeological work and would allow us to have access to an enormous number of past remains and , as such, to have a better idea of the past, much of which is still fragmentary and speculative. This would also allow to a lot amateurs to be archaeologists since anyone can do a digital excavation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 22, 2006 Report Share Posted December 22, 2006 This would also allow to a lot amateurs to be archaeologists since anyone can do a digital excavation. No, it will still take highly trained professionals to interpret the results. If your suggested technique becomes readily available to anyone with a passing interest, it would be a disaster for archaeology. What's with all the thread necromancy by the way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 23, 2006 Report Share Posted December 23, 2006 This would also allow to a lot amateurs to be archaeologists since anyone can do a digital excavation. No, it will still take highly trained professionals to interpret the results. If your suggested technique becomes readily available to anyone with a passing interest, it would be a disaster for archaeology. Not really. Notice that in a "real" excavation, mistakes frequently occur; the problem is that such excavation is not reversible because excavation is destruction, which means that all we have at the end of the day is the data provided by the archaeologist, including its mistakes. Now, the great advantage of a digital excavation is that it is reversible, which means that you can make as many virtual digs as you wish and you can compare your results with others. From such comparisons lots of mistakes can be removed and a richer view of the past can be obtained. This means that amateurs can also participate, because any "mistake" that occurs is reversible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 23, 2006 Report Share Posted December 23, 2006 Not really. Notice that in a "real" excavation, mistakes frequently occur; the problem is that such excavation is not reversible because excavation is destruction, which means that all we have at the end of the day is the data provided by the archaeologist, including its mistakes. Now, the great advantage of a digital excavation is that it is reversible, which means that you can make as many virtual digs as you wish and you can compare your results with others. From such comparisons lots of mistakes can be removed and a richer view of the past can be obtained. This means that amateurs can also participate, because any "mistake" that occurs is reversible. That's all very well, but what do you think will happen if everyone can see what is underneath the soil? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 23, 2006 Report Share Posted December 23, 2006 That's all very well, but what do you think will happen if everyone can see what is underneath the soil? I'm not sure what your objection is. In what concerns me, the more people enjoy studying the past, so much the better. If you're concerned that amateurs will start doing all sorts of weird theories, then don't worry about that. First of all, an interpretation must be accepted by others, which means that gross errors wil be easily pointed before something is accepted. Secondly, a lot of fringe archaeology occurs today because archaeologists keep most of the knowledge for themselves. If people can participate more and more in archaeological activity and work and learn with prefessionals that's a good way of ensuring the disappearance of all sorts of weird interpretations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 23, 2006 Report Share Posted December 23, 2006 (edited) I'm not sure what your objection is. I was thinking more along the lines of treasure hunting and illegal digging. Most archaeological remains should be kept unknown and unseen as long as possible. Edited December 23, 2006 by Maladict Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 I'm not sure what your objection is. I was thinking more along the lines of treasure hunting and illegal digging. Most archaeological remains should be kept unknown and unseen as long as possible. I don't think that's a problem. The purpose of excavations is to register that data. Once the same thing is possible to do with ground radars and virtual digs it's irrelevant if the artifact is later looted or not. Anyway, if the possibility of looting bothers you that can easily be erradicated simply through an international agreement that removes market value for artifacts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 I don't think that's a problem. The purpose of excavations is to register that data. Once the same thing is possible to do with ground radars and virtual digs it's irrelevant if the artifact is later looted or not. Allright, just promise me you'll never become an archaeologist. Anyway, if the possibility of looting bothers you that can easily be erradicated simply through an international agreement that removes market value for artifacts. Yeah sure. That'll scare 'em Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Maladict Let me explain you some things about archaeology: Archaeologists study the past through its material dimension. That means that today you need to dig the objects but if in the future there is technology that allows archaeologists to know what lies beneath the ground, physical excavations become redundant. This also means that it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 Maladict Let me explain you some things about archaeology: Perhaps I should tell you at this point that you are talking to an archaeologist, and one who has had firsthand experience with looting on numerous occasions. Let's just let this rest, shall we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 Maladict Let me explain you some things about archaeology: Perhaps I should tell you at this point that you are talking to an archaeologist, and one who has had firsthand experience with looting on numerous occasions. Let's just let this rest, shall we? Are you pulling rank on me, Maladict? Have you ever considered that I may be an archaeologist too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantagathus Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 Ok, so we've established that you both may be archaeologists with two entirely different views on the approach... For what it's worth however, I happen to side with Maladict on this one in that it will still need to be a tool for experts. It may well make it easy for volunteers to operate & help out in digs but I don't like the idea of a bunch of amateurs running around with sophisticated ground penetrating radar making wild claims on what is buried underneath them. And to clarify, this is spoken by an amateur & hobbyist... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 For what it's worth however, I happen to side with Maladict on this one in that it will still need to be a tool for experts. It may well make it easy for volunteers to operate & help out in digs but I don't like the idea of a bunch of amateurs running around with sophisticated ground penetrating radar making wild claims on what is buried underneath them. If that's your only objection then don't worry since, in what concerns me, it's fine that such machinery is only operated by experts. My main intention is, instead, to distribute for as many persons as possible the results of such survey in order to allow that everyone can do virtual diggings. Notice that something similar happened in the 15th/16th centuries with the invention of the press and a wider literacy, something that allowed more people to read old documents and participate in historical research. Actually, this forum, where most of its members are amateurs, is an example of that, since most of the sources used here are written ones. What I'd like to happen in the future is something similar with archaeology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladict Posted December 28, 2006 Report Share Posted December 28, 2006 (edited) Are you pulling rank on me, Maladict? No, I just thought it was funny, explaining archaeology to an archaeologist. One of the amusing things about a digital forum. If that's your only objection then don't worry since, in what concerns me, it's fine that such machinery is only operated by experts. My main intention is, instead, to distribute for as many persons as possible the results of such survey in order to allow that everyone can do virtual diggings. Notice that something similar happened in the 15th/16th centuries with the invention of the press and a wider literacy, something that allowed more people to read old documents and participate in historical research. Actually, this forum, where most of its members are amateurs, is an example of that, since most of the sources used here are written ones. What I'd like to happen in the future is something similar with archaeology. I'd like to compare it to the invention of the metal detector. It can be a useful tool for archaeologists sometimes, but when the general public got their hands on it they started using it in less than scientific ways, as could have been expected. This is what I fear will happen too with the digital excavation. Edited December 28, 2006 by Maladict Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.