University of York

Archiving Ipswich

Two years after posting about my work on the Silbury Hill digital archive, in ‘AN ADS DAY OF ARCHAEOLOGY’, and I’m still busy working as a Digital Archivist with the ADS!

For the past few months, I have been working on the Ipswich Backlog Excavation Archive, deposited by Suffolk County Council, which covers 34 sites, excavated between 1974 and 1990.

Ipswich2

Excavation at St Stephen’s Lane, Ipswich 1987-1988

To give a quick summary of the work so far, the data first needed to be accessioned into our systems which involved all of the usual checks for viruses, removing spaces from file names, sorting the data into 34 separate collections and sifting out duplicates etc.  The archive packages were then created which involved migrating the files to their preservation and dissemination formats and creating file-level metadata using DROID.  The different representations of the files were linked together using object ids in our database and all of the archiving processes were documented before the coverage and location metadata were added to the individual site collections.

Though time consuming, due to the quantity of data, this process was fairly simple as most of the file names were created consistently and contained the site code.  Those that didn’t have descriptive file names could be found in the site database and sorted according to the information there.

The next job was to create the interfaces; again, this was fairly simple for the individual sites as they were made using a template which retrieves the relevant information from our database allowing the pages to be consistent and easily updateable.

The Ipswich Backlog Excavation Archive called for a more innovative approach, however, in order to allow the users greater flexibility with regards to searching, so the depositors requested a map interface as well as a way to query information from their core database.  The map interface was the most complex part of the process and involved a steep learning curve for me as it involved applications, software and code that I had not previously used such as JavaScript, OpenLayers, GeoServer and QGIS.  The resulting map allows the user to view the features excavated on the 34 sites and retrieve information such as feature type and period as well as linking through to the project archive for that site.

OpenLayers map of Ipswich excavation sites.

OpenLayers map of Ipswich excavation sites.

So, as to what I’m up to today…

The next, and final step, is to create the page that queries the database.  For the past couple of weeks I have been sorting the data from the core database into a form that will fit into the ADS object tables, cleaning and consolidating period, monument and subject terms and, where possible, matching them to recognised thesauri such as the English Heritage Monument Type Thesaurus.

Today will be a continuation of that process and hopefully, by the end of the day, all of the information required by the query pages will be added to our database tables so that I can begin to build that part of the interface next week.  If all goes to plan, the user should be able to view specific files based on searches by period, monument/feature type, find type, context, site location etc. with more specialist information, such as pottery identification, being available directly from the core database tables which will be available for download in their entirety.  Fingers crossed that it does all go to plan!

So, that’s my Day of Archaeology 2015, keep a look out for ADS announcements regarding the release of the Ipswich Backlog Excavation Archive sometime over the next few weeks and check out the posts from my ADS colleagues Jo Gilham and Georgie Field!

Something old and something new: CAD migration and archive accessioning at ADS

ADSeasy-250x250As a reasonably new face at the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) I am still getting to grips with the somewhat baffling world of digital archiving and preservation! If someone had asked me this time last year when I was graduating what I saw myself doing in one year’s time, I would probably not have said doing a mass CAD file migration… But being a Digital Archivist for the ADS has so far been a fabulous experience.

Today I am working on two tasks, archiving collections coming through ADS-easy (for more information about ADS-easy see Ray Moore’s post from the Day of Archaeology in 2014 ), and continuing the ADS’ preservation work by migrating our historic CAD files.

It has been just over a year since the first ADS-easy archive was released, and a lot has happened in a year! For those who have not heard about ADS-easy, it is a system that allows users to electronically submit archaeological archives, along with metadata (information describing the files). It has significantly altered the workflow of digital archivists at the ADS as data from ADS-easy does not require manual inputting of metadata. Since last July we have worked on 71 archives, ranging from image collections, to excavation reports, to geophysical data. We have had 6636 unique visitors to the website and have an average of 250 unique visitors per month. Most of those are from the UK but visitors come from all over the world, including the US, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain. On average 8 archives are submitted each month and the number has been gradually rising.

ADS-Easy

Screenshot from The Grand Western Canal archive, submitted through ADS-easy (dx.doi.org/10.5284/1031512)

My role within ADS-easy is to take the data we receive, accession it into our collections management system, convert the files into suitable preservation and dissemination formats- and document all of these processes!  Finally, I create an interface so that people can see the files on the ADS website. Today I am working on an image collection from a building recording of farm buildings in Lanchester, County Durham, and a data archive from an excavation in Crowle, Worcestershire. The data that comes in from ADS-easy is varied and often comes from small scale projects that would not otherwise be shared with the public. That is what makes the job both interesting and somewhat rewarding.

That has taken me up to lunch time, this afternoon I am carrying on with the long-running task of migrating all of our historic CAD files. Data that is archived at the ADS is continually ‘preserved’ over time to ensure that it is always readable and useable, and does not become obsolete. We are in the process of migrating our CAD files from earlier versions to the more recent 2010/2011 version. This has so far involved manually going through each collection containing CAD drawings and checking each file, converting them to the 2010 version, and then moving the previous versions to a migration folder. Another part of this process is creating a PDF file of each drawing to make them accessible to people who don’t own CAD software. All of this then needs to be documented in our collections management system so that the rest of the digital archivists know what I have done to the files, and where to find them if anything goes wrong!  After this the interfaces need updating to include the new PDF files.

CAD_example

Example of one of the many CAD plans the ADS holds. From Elizabeth House (dx.doi.org/10.5284/1008432)

CAD migration may seem quite a repetitive task, but it has allowed me to look back at some of the earliest ADS collections, such as the excavations at Eynsham Abbey in the late 80s/ early 90s, and the survey and excavation at the Iron Age emporium of Vetren . This process of migration is a very important part of what the ADS does; active management of our data means that it should (in theory!) always be accessible to the public in the most useful file formats and have longevity.

Better get back to it, those remaining 1000(ish) CAD files won’t migrate themselves!

Behind the scene – A day in Archaeological Science @BioArCh

On occasion of the Day of Archaeology 2015, I decided to take on the challenge of describing a typical day in the labs of BioArCh.

BioArch is a research group within the Department of Archaeology at the University of York that includes a wide range of expertise in human palaeoecology, paleodiet and environmental archaeology, with specific focus on the analysis of proteins, lipids, DNA and stable isotopes, human and other mammal and bird bones, molluscs, soils, microscopic remains of plants and animals.

The work in the lab is very varied and this video shows a part of my daily routine as a PhD student in Bioarchaeology. My project aims to reconstruct diet and food consumption in the multi-faith society of medieval Portugal, in which Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together for seven centuries. The main objectives are to identify if contemporaneous communities of Muslims and Christians showed different diets and if their diets changed after the Christian conquest of Portugal, completed in the 13th century. This project is included in a wider network researching the relation between food and faith. To know more about the project and the network, have a look on our blog.

In order to reconstruct the diet of past populations, small samples of bone are collected from human and animal skeletons. The next step is to extract the collagen from the bones. Once extracted, the collagen is then analysed and run through a machine called IRMS (isotope-ratio mass spectrometer) that provides the ratios of the stable isotopes of Carbon (delta 13C) and Nitrogen (delta 15N). The values of C and N inform on the consumption of meat, marine or river fish, and different types of plants (C3 vs C4).

The protocol for collagen extraction is composed of several steps. In this video I am cleaning a rib with a scalpel to get rid of the dirt on the surface (0:56), collecting some samples from the cold room that underwent demineralisation over night (1:19), rinsing the samples with water (1:48), making up a solution to favour the gelatinisation of the samples (1:59) and putting the samples in the oven where the gelatinisation is undertaken (2:16). In the last scene (2:25) I collect another batch of samples where gelatinisation was complete.

At this point the samples are half way through the protocol and a few more days will be necessary to get them ready for the analysis in the IRMS!

I hope you enjoy the video and hopefully it will give you an idea of what is going on in the lab.

If you fall in love with this video and can’t help sharing it, click here.

Alice Toso

ADS at the Center for Digital Heritage Summer School

 

CDHLogo

Today I am at the Centre for Digital Heritage Summer School (CDH). It’s the second day of a training workshop hosted by the University of York and organised by Gareth Beale. The summer school was  designed to help newcomers from any discipline learn the essential skills needed to build and run a successful digital heritage project; from getting the funding to archiving your data.

The day began with excellent talks from Kate Giles (Archaeology; University of York) and Damian Murphy (Electronics; University of York) on their own Digital Heritage projects.

I was there to present with my colleague Catherine Hardman the work of the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) and to impart to the attendees the experiences ADS has gathered from over 15 years of curating digital material. The aim of our talk was to explore real world examples of Digital Heritage projects, highlighting the practical pitfalls of creating, managing, curating, and using digital data, by comparing successful data management examples with flawed projects. We covered everything from projects with amazingly detailed metadata, through to those with ‘dirty’ data to photos of cats in tents!

We hope that after spending two days of hearing how Data Management Planning is KEY to a successful digital heritage project, that all the attendees will go on to create excellently managed digital heritage projects.

The rest of the day was dedicated to designing prospective digital heritage projects. Check out Hannah Simons Day of Archaeology blog post to read more about the excellent project ideas that were developed (including some great pics).

All the attendees of the summer school really got involved and without the excellent enthusiasm of the attendees the summer school wouldn’t have been the great success it was, so a big thanks go out to everyone involved and to Gareth for organising a great 2 days.

Counting Phytoliths from Songo Mnara, Tanzania

Right now, I spend my life counting phytoliths – over 3500 phytoliths so far….What’s a phytolith and why does it get me out of bed and into the lab before 7am? How did you not realise this was such an exciting archaeological technique?

© Hayley McParland-Clarke

Phytoliths are a bit like plant negatives; essentially the plant absorbs monosilicic acid (H4O4Si) from its water supply and during transpiration as the water ‘leaves’ the plant, the monosilicic acid becomes solid opaline silica. It has to go somewhere, so it fills in gaps within the cell structure of the plant. These gaps are either within the cells, or surrounding the cells, making silica negatives of the internal cell structure. Not all plants make phytoliths though, just like not all plants preserve well as charred plant macrofossils, and not all pollen grains enter the local archaeological record or preserve well. Plants have to degrade in situ for the phytoliths to be included in the archaeological record, no technique is perfect. But the key is, that phytoliths are well preserved in a variety of contexts and can add to our understanding of plant use; not only on sites with poor preservation of plant macrofossils and pollen, but also in contexts where plant remains may not have entered the archaeological record following charring. For example, organic crafts such as grass or palm matting may not be preserved by charring and therefore might be invisible on archaeological sites without waterlogged preservation. These may be visible through phytolith analysis if they have degraded in situ. To help identify diagnostic phytoliths I collected lots of plant samples from the field and I’m now creating a phytolith reference collection in the lab. It’s not a magic bullet to help us understand plant use in the past, but it is pretty cool!

I’m working on late 14th to early 16th Century samples from Songo Mnara, a Swahili stonetown in Tanzania, part of the  [1] and my PhD project at the University of York. Songo Mnara is part of the Kilwa Archipelago and it’s linked to other settlements and islands along the East African coast through the Indian Ocean Trade network. Songo Mnara has truly amazing preservation of stone buildings!! To get to the site you have to take a Dhow from Kilwa Masoko with a guide and once you arrive on the island you have to wade through a tidal Mangrove swamp, which can be anything between ankle deep and chest high! It’s off the beaten track, for sure.

Songo Mnara © Hayley McParland-Clarke 2013

During the 2013 excavation season, two types of structure were excavated; a stone house divided into rooms and a collapsed wattle and daub structure, which appeared open plan. Initially it was thought that the monumental stone architecture in the town was standing in an open area, but extensive test pitting by Dr Fleisher combined with Geophysical and Magnetometer survey[2] revealed the presence of concentrations of daub within this space. Excavation exposed two wattle and daub structures with comparable finds assemblages to that of the stone structures.

The phytoliths I’m looking at today come from Trench 32, one of the daub structures. Spot samples were taken across the entire packed sand floor surface of the structure on a 1m grid, in order to assess whether phytolith analysis can be used as a tool for spatial analysis and to understand the use of plant materials within the structure. Samples were also taken from the ‘outside’ of the structure in the open area to identify clear differences in the phytolith assemblage between ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ and to see if it was possible to recreate the environment immediately adjacent to and further away from the structure.

Sampling for Phytoliths at Songo Mnara © Hayley McParland-Clarke 2014

Sampling for Phytoliths at Songo Mnara © Hayley McParland-Clarke 2014

I’m really hoping that we’ll be able to see activity areas within the structure through the plant assemblage, for example food preparation areas or areas of matting. It may be possible to identify construction materials such as wood, or roofing materials such as palm thatch. I’m also hoping to see evidence of Indian Ocean Trade through phytoliths from imported edible plants within the assemblage, but as with all archaeology I can hope for lots of things, it doesn’t mean it’s there! We also sampled the stone house, which is really interesting, because it has clear rooms within it, whereas those divisions weren’t clear when excavating the daub structure. Phytolith analysis might enable us to see the limits of the daub structure by providing an ‘inside’ and an ‘outside’ botanical signature.

The process of counting involves using a high powered microscope at x400 magnification to identify phytoliths, photograph them, measure them and count them. I count around at least 250 per slide, which means that I’ve counted thousands from this site so far, and I’ve a lot more to do! Phytoliths are 3D objects, but when you’re looking down the microscope you only see the 2D image, which means that you have to remember that each phytolith type might look different depending on which angle you’re looking at it from! Phytoliths aren’t always round like pollen, in fact they’re frequently not round at all, they come in all shapes and various sizes!

Although lab work is often thought of as completely different to fieldwork, it’s sort of the same. I search through transects on the slide, much like layers of stratigraphy looking for microscopic evidence in the form of phytoliths rather than artefacts. It can take a long time, it’s systematic and sometimes I don’t find anything of interest. Recording stratigraphy on site tells you a lot about site formation processes and human actions, likewise recording information about the slide assemblage is useful. For instance, lots of phytoliths which are still articulated suggests that there was little bioturbation, or lots of microcharcoal might suggest burning episodes.

© Hayley McParland-Clarke 2014

I’m on my last few slides from this pilot study now, and I’ve started to get an idea of what’s happening in the structure which is really exciting. Each phytolith assemblage has a different character, which suggests that the spatial approach might be working!! I can clearly see a difference between the assemblages from the floor surface ‘inside’ the building and the outside; I can also see variations across the floor surface within the structure.

Future research will focus on the comparison of the stone house and the daub structure to see if there’s a difference between the uses of each structure. I also hope to look at some of the open area samples to try to understand how the urban landscape impacted on the local environment. Follow my progress and find out more about phytolith analysis, archaeobotany and archaeology on my blog, or follow me on twitter @Hayley_McP.

[1] Managed by Dr Stephanie Wynne-Jones and Dr Jeff Fleisher, funded by the NSF and AHRC.

[2] Welham, K., J. Fleisher, P. Cheetham, H. Manley, C. Steele, and S. Wynne-Jones. 2014. Geophysical Survey in Sub-Saharan Africa: Magnetic and Electromagnetic Investigation of the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Songo Mnara, Tanzania. Archaeological Prospection.

Working at the ADS/Internet Archaeology

I have been working at the University of York since November 2012, as the holder of a one-year IFA/HLF Workplace Learning Bursary. My days here are often split between tasks for the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) and the e-journal Internet Archaeology.

Work for the journal can involve proof-reading articles for publication, looking at proposals and writing HTML mark-up in order to prepare the articles for online publication. This really helps you get to grips with what the authors put across, and because of the electronic nature of the journal, it’s amazing to see the innovative ways that data and concepts can be presented. Whereas traditional print journals are confined mainly to text and images, Internet Archaeology regularly deals with animations, videos, 3D visualisations and other media, which all comes together to provide some really rich, interesting content.

As part of the submissions process, Internet Archaeology articles have a digital archive with the Archaeology Data Service, and for the past few months I have mainly been busy with preserving and archiving the digital files that make up individual articles. Depending on the content, this can be quite a challenge, especially when you start to delve back to the mid-90s origins of the journal (some days I can almost hear the dial-up tone), and involves making sure all file formats are suitable for deposit under the ADS Depositors’ Guidelines, converting files which aren’t, and making sure the finished archive is suitable for long-term preservation. As I’ve alluded to, many of the deprecated formats that the journal once dealt with don’t fit comfortably within the ADS archives, and I’ve bothered many a member of staff with questions about MATLAB files or animated GIFs.

As I have reached the end of this process (for the time being), the focus of my work here has shifted to the Grey Literature Library, held here at the ADS. This is a collection of unpublished reports that are produced by archaeological contractors relating to projects they are carrying out, which are then uploaded via the Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations project, better known as OASIS.  Thousands of events occur across the country every year, and a great deal of data is produced, so it’s important to be able to make this data available for future research. The Grey Literature Library is a fantastic tool for this, and as new reports are uploaded every day, there is always plenty of work to be done.

So today, my day has mainly revolved around adding reports to the library, and transferring the file-level metadata so they can be accessed easily. The reports are copied to our server, and the accession recorded in the internal Collections Management System (CMS), which also documents what processes are carried out on any files—this is important, as it allows other archivists to see any changes that have been made if the archived needs to be revisited. I’ve found that documentation at every level is a key part of working at the ADS.

Most of the grey literature reports are deposited in PDF format, which have to then be converted for preservation and dissemination into PDF/A, an archival format (you can read more about the intricacies of PDF formats in the ADS blog). The conversion of PDFs can be quite a time-consuming task, and in fact the lion’s share of the process is taken up by these conversions. After all the conversions are complete, and the archived files are safely stored, more file-level metadata is generated, and the reports are available to be accessed. So data relating to archaeological events that were once consigned to filing cabinets now have a new, digital life!

Reflections of a New Lecturer on the Day of Archaeology 2013

Collaborative video about my Heritage Practice module and BA Heritage Studies students at York

Collaborative video about our Heritage Practice module and BA Heritage Studies students at York

I’ve participated in the Day of Archaeology since its initiation two years ago, when my post (also see my 2012 post here) coincided very closely with my appointment at the University of York (UK). I have often struggled to summarise my day-to-day professional activities because, as I’ve discussed before, they are diverse and not evidently recognisable as the stereotype of ‘archaeology’. I adore my work because of such diversity—it is always different, it is of-the-moment, it is linked to so many exciting people (curators, designers, IT experts, archaeologists and heritage officers, media specialists, journalists, etc.), it is incredibly public, and hence it comes with a deep feeling of being engaged in something that truly impacts upon other individuals. Our great Cultural Heritage Management and Digital Heritage students have themselves been very successful in progressing to jobs with a comparable degree of variety and influence.

But the struggle to encapsulate my work has only intensified as my career has developed, owing to the fact that academia pulls you into so many administrative roles that push far beyond one’s expert interests. As a result, my days often entail (among other things) hours of email-writing and phone calls, organising courses and modules and reading lists and guest speakers, coordinating rooms and equipment and related specialist infrastructure, negotiating opportunities and insurance and accommodations and tools for the teams that I supervise, and reading drafts of others’ research.

It has been brokering this explosion in duties that I have found an especially difficult aspect of academic life, because it tends to pull you away from the very thing that is most inspiring to you—and, indeed, the thing that you are actually recognised in the wider world for: your own research. Some aspects of the job help to reinforce or elaborate your research, including preparing for teaching, in that they demand that you scour the literature and critically interrogate the emerging scholarship. But other aspects seem a million miles away from study and discovery and analysis and the other energising components of the research process.

These points have been on my mind lately as I take advantage of the couple of months of the year outside of the term-time calendar when I have more freedom to invest in my own research endeavours. I leave for Çatalhöyük next week with my great team from York, Southampton and Ege University in Turkey; our Gender & Digital Culture project is really starting to blossom (we were featured on Wednesday on the London School of Economics’ Impact blog!); I have a couple of articles and chapters now in press, and two grant applications out for review; and I’m coordinating some new projects/events for the upcoming year. But much of this work has only come together with substantial support from others: colleagues, research assistants, friends, etc.

My greatest learning experience of 2012-2013, then, has surely been in navigating this collaborative form of practice, because it has necessitated a complete shift in my intellectual mindset. As a student, I was trained to work independently—a not uncommon predicament for humanists. I would do my own study, analyse my own data, and write up my own work. However, as I’ve developed as a scholar, it’s become clear that not only is such an approach actually impossible for me now, but it was also a questionable way to have been educated in the first place. It’s questionable both because professional life demands that one be adept at collaboration, and because the best ideas and scholarship come about through learning with and from others who see the world in different ways.

The whole nature of how I intellectualise has had to change in order to accommodate this collaborative shift—and it has been a real and profound challenge for me. I’m having to teach myself how to relinquish control to others. I’m having to recognise that I can no longer do everything on my own and that I have to trust others to carry projects forward in my absence and help me. I’m having to learn to be comfortable with the fact that sometimes my role is now purely one of project manager, but that even here I can make a difference. Such a change in perspective has also meaningfully impacted on how I teach others, because I am concerned to ensure that my students don’t get educated in a vacuum, expecting that scholarly life will or should be an isolated activity. From my experience, nothing is more misconceived than the trope of the academic as a solitary figure. You are constantly surrounded by people—whether physically or metaphorically—who need things from you and vice versa. It’s a disservice to perpetuate the notion that independent, single-authored research is the paragon of scholarship, not least because even when such research is published, it always comes about through engagement with others. It’s also a disservice to budding academics to insinuate to them that such a model of practice is even plausible, because what results is real disconcertion when everyday reality—the multitasking and administrative load, etc.—proves it impossible and your whole epistemological outlook on research then is forced to change.

On this Day of Archaeology, when I’m preparing to take my team out for fieldwork next week, and working with my colleagues on multiple other projects, I’m very reflective about its collaborative essence. Collaboration is what sums up my activities today, and it’s what now characterises me as a scholar. And, honestly, I can’t imagine good research coming about in any other fashion.

Dr Sara Perry, Director of Studies, Digital Heritage, University of York

An ADS Day of Archaeology

Here it is, my Day of Archaeology 2013 and after a routine check of my emails and the daily news I’m ready to begin!

Silbury Hill ©English Heritage

Silbury Hill ©English Heritage

I am currently approaching the end of a year-long contract as a Digital Archivist at the Archaeology Data Service in York on an EH-funded project to prepare the Silbury Hill digital archive for deposition.

For a summary of the project, see the ADS newsletter and for a more in-depth account of my work so far check out my blog from a couple of weeks ago: “The Silbury Hill Archive: the light at the end of the tunnel”

Very briefly, though, my work has involved sifting through the digital data to retain only the information which is useful for the future, discarding duplicates or superfluous data; sorting the archive into a coherent structure and documenting every step of the process.

The data will be deposited with two archives: the images and graphics will go to English Heritage and the more technical data will be deposited with the ADS and as the English Heritage portion of the archive has been completed it is time for the more technical stuff!

So, the plan for today is to continue with the work I have been doing for the past few days: sorting through the Silbury Hill database (created in Microsoft Access).

Originally, I had thought that the database would just need to be documented, but, like the rest of the archive, it seems to have grown fairly organically; though the overall structure seems sound it needs a bit of work to make it as functional as possible and therefore as useful as possible.

The main issue with the database is that there are a fair amount of gaps in the data tables; the database seems to have been set up as a standard template with tables for site photography, contexts, drawings, samples, skeletal remains and artifact data etc.  but some of these tables have not been populated and some are not relevant.  The site photography and drawing records have not been entered for example, meaning that any links from or to these tables would be worthless.  The missing data for the 2007 works are present in the archive, they are just in separate Excel spreadsheets and there are also 2001 data files, these are in simple text format as the information was downloaded as text reports from English Heritage’s old archaeological database DELILAH.  The data has since been exported into Excel, so, again to make the information more accessible, I’m adding the 2001 data to the 2007 database.

My work today, therefore, as it has been for the past couple of days, is to populate the empty database tables with the information from these spreadsheets and text files and resolve any errors or issues that cause the tables to lose their ‘referential integrity’, for example where a context number is referred to in one table but is missing from a linking table.

Silbury database relationship diagram ©English Heritage

Silbury database relationship diagram ©English Heritage

So, this morning I started with the 2001 drawing records. The entering of the data itself was fairly straightforward, just copying and pasting from the Excel spreadsheet into the Access tables, correcting spelling errors as I went.  Some of the fields were controlled vocabulary fields, however, which meant going to the relevant glossary table and entering a new term in order for the site data to be entered as it was in the field.

Once the main drawing table was completed, the linking table needed to be populated; again, this was done fairly simply through cutting and pasting from Excel.

The next step was the most time-consuming: checking the links between the tables, to do this I went to the relationship diagram, clicked on the relevant link and ticked the box marked ‘enforce referential integrity’ this didn’t work which meant that a reference in one table was not matched in the linking table which meant going through the relevant fields and searching for entries that were not correct.  The most common reason for these error messages was that an entry had been mis-typed in one of the tables.

That took me up to lunchtime, so what about the afternoon?  More of the same: starting work on the sample records with the odd break for tea or a walk outside to save my eyes!

As much as the process of updating the database has been fairly routine, it’s an interesting and valuable piece of work for me as it is the first time I’ve ever really delved into the structure of a database and looking at the logic behind its design.  I was fortunate in that I had attended the Database Design and Implementation module taught by Jo Gilham as part of the York University Msc in Archaeological Information Systems which gave me a firm foundation for this work.  Also very helpful was the help provided by Vicky Crosby from English Heritage who created the database and provided a lot of documentation in the first instance.

The next step once the data has been entered will be to remove any blank fields and tables and then to document the database using the ADS’ Guidelines for Depositors and then to move on to the survey data and reports.

I’m looking forward to seeing it all deposited and released to a wider world for, hopefully, extensive re-use and research!

Mystery, Diversity and the Joy of Archaeology

Human beings are odd beasts. So much more than political animals, our ‘habits’ are so varied that they sometimes seem far from habitual. Capable of action on all scales, from building enormous monuments that take millions of people over many generations to a single individual caring for a companion in the face of incurable illness.

Yet, go with any person to the place they sleep and you will learn much about them, their society, economics, politics, aesthetics and so on. You can learn from the materials of that space – Do they sleep on a bed? under blankets? are they clean? Do they have Justin Beiber posters? Picasso prints? Turner originals? Is there water by the bed? is the cup glass, pottery or metal?

(more…)