Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 193–223 | Cite as

Archaeological Visualization: Towards an Archaeological Information Science (AISc)

  • Marcos LloberaEmail author


This paper reviews and evaluates the potential use of modern visualization techniques in archaeology. It suggests the need to apply and develop such techniques as a central part of any modern archaeological investigation. The use of these methods is associated with wider questions about data representations, in particular, their integration with archaeological theory and their role in facilitating analysis and shaping interpretation. Concern for these questions and with the overall potential that information systems provide to capture, represent, analyze, and model archaeological information suggests the need for a new interdisciplinary focus, Archaeological Information Science. For such a focus to prosper, archaeologists need to develop additional skills that go beyond mere technical ones. They need to become more active in the design and creation of future information archaeological systems. To this end, archaeologists are urged to view this task as a way to extend archaeology in new directions and to recognize that the digital representation and treatment of archaeological information can generate new forms of doing archaeology.


Visualization Information science Computation Theory ladenness Computer science Archaeological theory 


  1. Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., Jankowski, P., Keim, D., Kraak, M.-J., & MacEachren, A. (2007). Visual analytics for spatial decision support: Setting the research agenda. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 21(8), 839–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey, G. (2007). Time perspectives, palimpsests and the archaeology of time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 26, 198–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barceló, J. A., & Vicente, O. (2004). Some problems in archaeological excavation 3D modeling. In K. F. Ausserer, W. Börner, M. Goriany, & L. Karlhuber-Vöckl (Eds.), Enter the past: The e-vay into the four dimensions of cultural heritage CAA 2003, Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. BAR international series 1227 (pp. 400–404). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  4. Barceló, J. A., Forte, M., Sanders, D. (2000). Virtual Reality in archaeology. Oxford: BAR International Series 843, Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  5. Barrett, J. C. (1987). Contextual archaeology. Antiquity, 61(233), 468–473.Google Scholar
  6. Barrett, J. C. (1994). Fragments from antiquity: An archaeology of social life in Britain 2900–1200 BC. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Benko, H., Ishak, E. W., & Feiner, S. (2004). Collaborative mixed reality visualization of an archaeological excavation. In 3rd IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR 2004), 2–5 November 2004 (pp. 132–140). Arlington: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  8. Bertin, J. [1967] (1983). Semiology of graphics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boucher de Perthes, J. (1847). Antiquites celtiques et antediluvienes. Memoire sur l’industrie primitive et les arts a leur origine, vol. 10. Paris: Treuttel and Wertz.Google Scholar
  10. Brodlie, K. W., Carpenter, L. A., Earnshaw, R. A., Gallop, J. R., Hubbard, R. J., Mumford, A. M., et al. (Eds.). (1992). Scientific visualization, techniques and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  11. Bunge, M. (1973). Method, model and matter. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  12. Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in information visualization: Using vision to think. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  13. Chen, C. (1999). Information visualization: Beyond the horizon. London: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Chippindale, C. (2000). Capta and data: On the true nature of archaeological information. American Antiquity, 65, 605–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleveland, W. S. (1994). The elements of graphing data (2nd ed.). Lafayette: Hobart Press.Google Scholar
  16. Close, A. E. (2006). Finding the people who flaked the stone at english camp (San Juan Island). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  17. Couclelis, H. (1992). People manipulate objects (but cultivate fields): Beyond the raster-vector debate in GIS. In A. U. Frank, I. Campari, & U. Formentini (Eds.), Theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning in geographic space. Lecture notes in computational science 639 (pp. 65–77). Pisa: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  18. Crescioli, M., Niccolucci, F., & D’Andrea, A. (2002). XML Encoding of archaeological unstructured data. In G. Burenhult (Ed.), Archaeological informatics: Pushing the envelope CAA2001. Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. BAR International series 1016 (pp. 267–275). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  19. Criado Boado, F., & Villoch Vázquez, V. (2000). Monumentalizing landscape: From present perception to the past meaning of galician megalithism (NW Iberian Peninsula). European Journal of Archaeology, 3(2), 188–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cummings, V., Jones, A., & Watson, A. (2002). Divided places: Phenomenology and asymmetry in the monuments of the Black Mountains, Southeast Wales. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 12, 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. DeMarrais, E. (1996). The Materialization of Culture. In E. DeMarrais, C. Gosden, & C. Renfrew (Eds.), Rethinking materiality: The engagement of mind with the material world (pp. 11–21). Cambridge: MacDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
  22. Dibble, H. L., & McPherron, S. P. (1988). On the computerization of archaeological projects. Journal of Field Archaeology, 15(4), 431–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dobres, M., & Robb, J. (Eds.). (2000). Agency in archaeology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Dykes, J., MacEachren, A., & Kraak, M.-J. (2005). Exploring geovisualization. Oxford: Elsevier Press.Google Scholar
  25. Earl, G. P., & Wheatley, D. W. (2002). Virtual reconstruction and the interpretative process: A case-study from Avebury. In D. W. Wheatley, G. P. Earl, & S. Poppy (Eds.), Contemporary themes in archaeological computing (pp. 5–15). Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  26. Fekete, J-D., van Wijk, J. J., Stasko, J. T., North, C. (2008). The value of information visualization. In A. Kerren, J-D. Fekete, J.T. Stasko, C. North (Eds.), Information visualization:Human centered issues and perspectives. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4950: 1–18.Google Scholar
  27. Forte, M. (Ed.). (1997). Virtual archaeology: Great discoveries brought to life through virtual reality. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  28. Frischer, B. (2008). Introduction: From digital illustration to digital heuristics. In B. Frischer & A. Dakouri-Hild (Eds.), Beyond illustration: 2d and 3d Digital Technologies as Tools for Discovery in Archaeology (para 1.44). Oxford: Archaeopress. (
  29. Frischer, B., & Dakouri-Hild, A. (2008). Beyond illustration: 2d and 3d digital technologies as tools for discovery in archaeology. Oxford: Archaeopress. (
  30. Gaffney, C. (2008). Detecting trends in the prediction of the buried past: A review of geophysical techniques in archaeology. Archaeometry, 50(2), 313–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gell, A. (1998). Art and agency: An anthropological theory. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  32. Gillings, M. (2004). The real, the virtually real and the hyperreal: The role of VR in archaeology. In S. Moser & S. Smiles (Eds.), Envisioning the past (pp. 223–239). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  33. Gillings, M., & Goodrick, G.T. (1996). Sensuous and Reflexive GIS: Exploring Visualisation and VRML. Internet Archaeology 1.Google Scholar
  34. Gooding, D. C. (2008). Envisioning explanation: The art in science. In B. Frischer & A. Dakouri-Hild (Eds.), Beyond illustration: 2d and 3d Digital Technologies as Tools for Discovery in Archaeology (para. 45–74). Oxford: Archaeopress. (
  35. Goodrick, G., & Gillings, M. (2000). Constructs, simulations and hyperreal worlds: the role of virtual reality (VR) in archaeological research. In G. Lock & K. Brown (Eds.), On the theory and practice of archaeological computing (pp. 41–48). Oxford: OUCA.Google Scholar
  36. Gosden, C., & Marshall, Y. (1999). The cultural biography of objects. World Archaeology, 31(2), 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gray, J., & Walford, K. (1999). One Good Site Deserves Another: Electronic Publishing in Field Archaeology. Internet Archaeology 7.Google Scholar
  38. Grayson, D. K. (1984). Quantitative zooarchaeology: Topics in the analysis of archaeological faunas. Orlando: Academic.Google Scholar
  39. Hamilton, S., Whitehouse, R., Brown, K., Combes, P., Herring, E., & Thomas, M. S. (2006). Phenomenology in practice: Towards a methodology for a ‘subjective’ approach. European Journal of Archaeology, 9(1), 31–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Harris, E. (1989). Principles of archaeological stratigraphy. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  41. Harrower, M., & Fabrikant, S. (2008). The role of map animation for geographic visualization. In D. M. Dodge, M. McDerby, & M. Turner (Eds.), Geographic visualization: Concepts, tools and applications. London: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  42. Helbing, D., Keltsch, J., & Molnár, P. (1997). Modelling the evolution of human trail systems. Nature, 388, 47–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hodder, I. (1987). The archaeology of contextual meanings. New directions in archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Hodder, I. (1999). The archaeological process. An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  45. Holdaway, S., & Wandsnider, L. (2008). Time in archaeology: Time perspectivism revisited. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  46. Huisman, O., Feliciano Santiago, I., Kraak, M.-J., & Retsios, B. (2009). Developing a geovisual analytics environment for investigating archaeological events: Extending the space-time cube. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 36(3), 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Isaksen, L., Martinez, K., Gibbins, N. Earl, G., Keay, S., (forthcoming). Linking Archaeological Data. Proceedings Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA) 2009. Williamburg.Google Scholar
  48. Jefferey, S., & Aitchison, K. (2008). Who works in digital archaeology?. Archaeological Data Service News, 22 (
  49. Johnson, B., & Shneiderman, B. (1991). Treemaps: A Space Filling Approach to the Visualization of Hierarchical Information Structures. In Proceedings., IEEE Conference on Visualization, Issue 22–25 (pp. 284 91). IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  50. Jones, A. (2007). Memory and material culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kintigh, K. W. (2006). The promise and challenge of archaeological data integration. American Antiquity, 71(3), 567–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kohler, T. A., & Gumerman, G. J. (Eds.). (2000). Dynamics in human societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Kohler, T. A., & van der Leeuw, S. E. (2007). The model-based archaeology of socionatural systems. Santa Fe: SAR Press.Google Scholar
  54. Kopytoff, I. (1986). The cultural biography of things: Commoditization as process. In A. Appadurai (Ed.), The social life in things: Commodities in cultural perspective (pp. 64–91). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Leucci, G., & Negri, S. (2006). Use of ground penetrating radar to map subsurface archaeological features in an urban area. Journal of Archaeological Science, 33, 502–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lewin, K. (1938). The conceptual representation and the measurement of psychological forces. Durnham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper and Bros.Google Scholar
  58. Llobera, M. (2007). Reconstructing visual landscapes. World Archaeology, 39(1), 51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lock, G. (2003). Using computers in archaeology: towards virtual pasts. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Lock, G., & Harris, T. (1992). Visualizing spatial data: the importance of geographic information systems. In P. Reilly & S. P. Q. Rahtz (Eds.), Archaeology and the information age: a global perspective (pp. 81–96). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Losier, L.-M., Pouliot, J., & Fortin, M. (2007). 3D geometrical modeling of excavation units at the archaeological site of Tell ‘Acharneh (Syria). Journal of Archaeological Science, 34, 272–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lucas, G. (2001). Critical approaches to fieldwork: Contemporary and historical archaeological practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Lucas, G. (2005). The archaeology of time. Themes in archaeology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Lynch, M., & Woolgar, S. (Eds.). (1990). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  65. McManamon, F. P., & Kintigh, K. W. (2010). Digital antiquity: Transforming archaeological data into knowledge. SAA Archaeological Record, 10(2), 37–40.Google Scholar
  66. McPherron, S. J. P., & Dibble, H. L. (2000). The lithic assemblages of Pech de L’Azé IV (Dordogne, France). Préhistoire Européen, 15, 9–43.Google Scholar
  67. McPherron, S. J. P., Dibble, H. L., & Goldberg, P. (2005). Z. Geoarchaeology, 20(3), 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Meskell, L. (2004). Divine Things. In E. DeMarrais, C. Gosden, & C. Renfrew (Eds.), Rethinking materiality: The engagement of mind with the material world (pp. 249–260). Oxford: McDonald Institute Monographs, Oxbow.Google Scholar
  69. Miller, W. J., & Wentz, E. A. (2003). Representation and Spatial Analysis in geographic information systems. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93, 574–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Moore, H. L. (1986). Space, text and gender: An anthropological study of the Marakwet of Kenya. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Moser, S., & Smiles, S. (Eds.). (2005). Envisioning the past: Archaeology and the image. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  72. Niccolucci, F. (Ed.). (2002). Virtual archaeology proceedings of the VAST Euroconference, Arezzo 24–26 November 2000. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  73. Orton, C. (1982). Computer simulation experiments to assess the performance of measures of quantity of pottery. World Archaeology, 14, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Orton, C. (1993). How many pots make five: An historical review of pottery quantification. Archaeometry, 35, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Reilly, P., & Rahtz, S. (1992). Archaeology in the Information Age: A Global Perspective. One World Archaeology 21. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Richards, J. D. (2006). Archaeology, e-publication and the Semantic Web. Antiquity, 80, 970–979.Google Scholar
  77. Schiffer, M. B. (1972). Archaeological context and systemic context. American Antiquity, 37, 156–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Scott, S. A. (1991). Problems with the use of flake size in inferring stages of lithic reduction. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 13, 177–178.Google Scholar
  79. Snow, D. R., Gahegan, M., Giles, C. L., Hirth, K. G., Milner, G. R., Mitra, P., et al. (2006). Information science: Enhanced: Cybertools and archaeology. Science, 311(5763), 958–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Thomas, J., & Cook, K.A. (Eds.), (2005). Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. IEEE CS Press.Google Scholar
  81. Tufte, E. R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  82. Tufte, E. R. (1997). Visual explanations. Cheshire: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  83. Tufte, E.R. [1983] (1998). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. 2nd Ed. Cheshire: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  84. Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  85. Van Fraasen, B. C. (2008). Scientific representation: Paradoxes of perspective. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  86. Winterbottom, S. J., & Long, D. (2006). From abstract digital models to rich virtual environments: landscape contexts in Kilmartin Glen, Scotland. Journal of Archaeological Science, 33, 1356–1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wong, P., & Thomas, J. (2004). Visual Analytics. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 24(5), 20–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wylie, A. (1999). Rethinking unity as a “Working Hypothesis” for philosophy of science: How archaeologists exploit the disunities of science. Perspectives on Science, 7, 293–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wylie, A. (2002). Thinking from things: Essays in the philosophy of archaeology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  90. Yarrow, T. (2008). In context: Meaning, materiality and agency in the process of archaeological recording. In C. Knappett (Ed.), Material agency: towards a nonanthropocentric approach (pp.121–138). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations