At the computer's edge. The value of virtual constructions to the interpretation of cultural heritage
At the computer's edge. The value of virtual constructions to the interpretation of cultural heritage
The title of this paper is an adaptation of Ian Hodder’s notion that interpretation starts ‘at the trowel’s edge’ (1997), as excavations should be active, reflexive and multivocal practices, during which interpretation takes place as an inextricable part of our research. The process of interpretation is a complicated issue. It has engrossed most practitioners, and is closely related to the conceptualisation of the past as reflecting contemporary social and cultural experiences through the scrutiny of cultural heritage remains. Archaeological remains are under appreciated, as they can be accessed only by specialised audiences, and any finds are presented by means of conventional illustrations and comprehensive list of artefacts. Even the most common recording method in archaeology, i.e. fieldnotes, and the subsequent site reports, have been criticised (Hodder 1989) for their distance and impersonality, as well as their attempt to demonstrate objectivity by establishing rigorous classifications and complex terminologies. For that reason, different forms of media have been used in the interpretive processes, not only in scientific research, but also for providing varied levels of engagement with the archaeological datasets by the public.
46-51
Papadopoulos, Constantinos
1151d2e7-6e63-4005-a2f9-2b1b4d0e2c97
Kefalaki, Efi
554cd151-1e55-46cd-bd3a-688412392d4c
2010
Papadopoulos, Constantinos
1151d2e7-6e63-4005-a2f9-2b1b4d0e2c97
Kefalaki, Efi
554cd151-1e55-46cd-bd3a-688412392d4c
Papadopoulos, Constantinos and Kefalaki, Efi
(2010)
At the computer's edge. The value of virtual constructions to the interpretation of cultural heritage.
Archeomatica, (4), .
Abstract
The title of this paper is an adaptation of Ian Hodder’s notion that interpretation starts ‘at the trowel’s edge’ (1997), as excavations should be active, reflexive and multivocal practices, during which interpretation takes place as an inextricable part of our research. The process of interpretation is a complicated issue. It has engrossed most practitioners, and is closely related to the conceptualisation of the past as reflecting contemporary social and cultural experiences through the scrutiny of cultural heritage remains. Archaeological remains are under appreciated, as they can be accessed only by specialised audiences, and any finds are presented by means of conventional illustrations and comprehensive list of artefacts. Even the most common recording method in archaeology, i.e. fieldnotes, and the subsequent site reports, have been criticised (Hodder 1989) for their distance and impersonality, as well as their attempt to demonstrate objectivity by establishing rigorous classifications and complex terminologies. For that reason, different forms of media have been used in the interpretive processes, not only in scientific research, but also for providing varied levels of engagement with the archaeological datasets by the public.
Text
Guest_Paper_final.pdf
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 2010
Organisations:
Archaeology
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 205537
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/205537
PURE UUID: c5afe085-5347-422d-9fb5-8ab8eb6a74d3
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 09 Dec 2011 14:48
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 04:34
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Constantinos Papadopoulos
Author:
Efi Kefalaki
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics