Digital Archaeological Data: Ensuring Discovery, Access, Use, and Preservation

  • Francis P. McManamonEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_1219-2

Introduction

Archaeology is awash with data. Since the late 1940s, archaeology and related cultural heritage disciplines have experienced rapid growth of data from a staggering rise in the number of investigations (e.g., see articles in Banks and Czaplicki 2014, Banks and Scott 2016, and McManamon (ed.) 2018; McManamon 2018a). The increased professional activity is driven in large part by studies now required as part of modern public development project planning (Altschul 2016; Departmental Consulting Archeologist 2010; McManamon 2018b). This is the good news.

The bad news is that most of these data, and the information they contain, have not been utilized effectively because they are difficult to find and access. Even worse, data, which increasingly are in digital file formats, are not curated in ways that will preserve them and provide for their future accessibility and use. Like many other disciplines, archaeology and cultural heritage disciplines generally need to find ways to...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. ADS & Digital Antiquity (Archaeology Data Service & the Center for Digital Antiquity). 2013. Caring for digital data in archaeology: A guide to good practice. Oxford/Oakville: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  2. ADS & Digital Antiquity (Archaeology Data Service & the Center for Digital Antiquity). 2017. Guides to good practice: the project archive, storage and dissemination. Available at: http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  3. ADS (Archaeology Data Service). 2017. Home web page. Available at: http://www.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/about.xhtml. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  4. Altschul, J.H. 2016. The role of synthesis in American archaeology and cultural resource management as seen through an Arizona Lens. Journal of Arizona Archaeology 4 (1): 68–81.Google Scholar
  5. Altschul, J.H., and T. Patterson. 2010. Trends in employment and training in American archaeology. In Voices in American archaeology, ed. W. Ashmore, D.T. Lippert, and B.J. Mills, 291–316. Washington, DC: Society for American Archaeology Press. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303719585_Trends_in_Employment_and_Training_in_American_Archaeology. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  6. Altschul, J.H., K.W. Kintigh, T.H. Klein, W.H. Doelle, K.A. Hays-Gilpin, S.A. Herr, T.A. Kohler, B.J. Mills, L.M. Montgomery, M.C. Nelson, S.G. Ortman, J.N. Parker, M.A. Peeples, and J.A. Sabloff. 2017. Fostering synthesis in archaeology to advance science and benefit society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114: 10999–11002. Available at: http://www.pnas.org/content/114/42/10999.short?rss=1. Accessed 21 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arbuckle, B.S., S. Whitcher Kansa, E. Kansa, D. Orton, C. Cakirlar, L. Gourichon, L. Atici, A. Galik, A. Marciniak, J. Mulville, H. Buitenhuis, D. Carruthers, B. De Cupere, A. Demiregi, S. Frame, D. Helmer, L. Martin, J. Peters, N. Pollath, K. Pawlowska, N. Russell, K. Twiss, and D. Wurthenberger. 2014. Data sharing reveals complexity in the westward spread of domestic animals across Neolithic Turkey. PLoS One 9 (6): e99845.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099845. Accessed 22 June 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Atici, L., S.W. Kansa, J. Lev-Tov, and E.C. Kansa. 2013. Other people’s data: A demonstration of the imperative of publishing primary data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 20: 663–681.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-012-9132-9. Accessed 22 June 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Averett, E.W., J.M. Gordon, and D.B. Counts, eds. 2016. Mobilizing the past for a digital future: The potential of digital archaeology. The University of North Dakota, Grand Forks: The Digital Press. Available at: https://thedigitalpress.org/mobilizing-the-past-for-a-digital-future/. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  10. Banks, K.M., and J.S. Czaplicki, eds. 2014. Dam projects and the growth of American archaeology: The River Basin surveys and the interagency archeological salvage program. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  11. Banks, K.M., and A.M. Scott, eds. 2016. The National Historic Preservation Act: Past, Present, and Future. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Cambridge Concord Associates. 2013. Sustaining domain repositories for digital data: A call for change from an interdisciplinary Working Group of Domain Repositories. Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Available at: https://www.icsu-wds.org/files/Domain_Repositories_Call_to_Action_16_Sept_2013.pdf. Accessed 17 Feb 2017.
  13. Childs, S.T., and K. Kinsey. 2004. A survey of SHPO archeological reports bibliographic systems, 2002. Studies in Archeology and Ethnography #5. Washington, DC: Archeology Program, National Park Service, Department of the Interior. Available at: https://core.tdar.org/document/377011/a-survey-of-shpo-archeological-reports-bibliographic-systems-2002. Accessed 9 Nov 2016.
  14. Childs, S.T., K. Kinsey, and S. Kagan. 2010. Repository fees for archaeological collections. Heritage Management 3 (2): 189–212. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/hma.2010.3.2.264?src=recsys. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. CHP (Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC). 2012. Legal analysis of federal requirements for curation of digital archaeological documents and data. Report to the Office of the General Counsel, Arizona State University, Tempe. Available at: https://www.digitalantiquity.org/wp-uploads/2013/05/2013-CHP-Legal-Analysis-of-Fed-Req-for-Curation-of-Dig-Arch-Docs-Data-.pdf. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.
  16. Clarke, Mary. 2015. The digital dilemma: Preservation and the digital archaeological record. Advances in Archaeological Practice 3 (4): 313–330. Available at https://www.academia.edu/18029286/The_Digital_Dilemma_Preservation_and_the_Digital_Archaeological_Record. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DANS (Data Archiving and Networked Services). 2017. Home web page. Available at: https://dans.knaw.nl/en. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  18. DCC (Digital Curation Centre). 2017. DCC curation lifecycle model and what is digital curation? Digital Curation Center, The University of Edinburgh. Available at: http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/curation-lifecycle-model. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.
  19. Departmental Consulting Archeologist. 2010. The Secretary of the Interior’s Report to Congress on the Federal Archaeology Program, 2004-2007. Washington: Archaeology Program, National Park Service.Google Scholar
  20. Digital Antiquity (Center for Digital Antiquity, Arizona State University). 2017. Home web pages. Available at: https://www.digitalantiquity.org/ and https://www.tdar.org/. Accessed 29 Nov 2017.
  21. Drew, N. 2004. Preserving archaeological associated records. In Our collective responsibility: The ethics and practice of archaeological collections stewardship, ed. S.T. Childs, 55–66. Washington, DC: Society for American Archaeology. Full publication information is available at: http://www.worldcat.org/title/our-collective-responsibility-the-ethics-and-practice-of-archaeological-collections-stewardship/oclc/57375355. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  22. Drew, N. 2010. Curating associated records: Budget development and cost-saving strategies. Heritage Management 3: 275–289. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/hma.2010.3.2.275. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eiteljorg, H., II. 2004. Archiving digital archaeological records. In Our collective responsibility: The ethics and practice of archaeological collections stewardship, ed. S.T. Childs, 67–77. Washington, DC: Society for American Archaeology. Full publication information is available at: http://www.worldcat.org/title/our-collective-responsibility-the-ethics-and-practice-of-archaeological-collections-stewardship/oclc/57375355. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  24. Ember, C., R. Hanisch, G. Alter, H. Berman, M. Hedstrom, and M.Vardigan. 2013. Sustaining domain repositories for digital data: A white paper. Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Available at: http://datacommunity.icpsr.umich.edu/sites/default/files/WhitePaper_ICPSR_SDRDD_121113.pdf. Accessed 4 Nov 2016.
  25. Erway, R. 2012. Lasting impact: Sustainability of disciplinary repositories. Dublin: OCLC Research. Available at: http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2012/2012-03.pdf. Accessed 30 Feb 2017.Google Scholar
  26. Faniel, I. M., and E. Yakel. 2017. Practices do not make perfect: Disciplinary data sharing and reuse practices and their implications for repository data curation. In Curating Research Data, Volume One: Practical Strategies for Your Digital Repository, pp. 103–126. Association of College and Research Libraries, Chicago. Available at: http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/2017/practices-do-not-make-perfect.html. Accessed 19 Apr 2017.
  27. Faniel, I., E. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, J. Barrera-Gomez, and E. Yakel. 2013. The challenges of digging data: A study of context in archaeological data reuse. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries, New York City.Google Scholar
  28. Fowler, D.D., and D.R. Givens. 1995. The records of archaeology. In Preserving the anthropological record, 2nd edn, ed. S. Silverman, and N.J. Parezo. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. Available at: http://copar.org/par/par9_fowler_givens.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  29. Hegmon, M., J.R. McGrath, and M.K. Munson. 2017. The potential and pitfalls of large multi-source collections: Insights from the analysis of Mimbres gender imagery. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5(2):138–146.Google Scholar
  30. Heitman, C., S. Plog, and W. Martin. 2016 Legacy records and digital innovation: The Chaco research archive and beyond. Presentation at the 81st annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Orlando. Available at: https://core.tdar.org/document/404068/legacy-records-and-digital-innovation-the-chaco-research-archive-and-beyond. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.
  31. Heitman, C., S. Plog, and W. Martin. 2017. Innovation through large-scale integration of legacy records: Assessing the “value added” in cultural heritage resources. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10(3):Article 17. Available at: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3129277.3012288. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  32. ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research). 2014. Integrating domain repositories into the National Data Infrastructure: Meeting report. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Available at: http://datacommunity.icpsr.umich.edu/sites/default/files/IntegratingDomainRepositoresIntotheNationalDataInfrastructurev3.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2017.
  33. Johnson, R.K. 2002. Institutional repositories: Partnering with faculty to enhance scholarly communication. D-Lib Magazine 8(11). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november02/johnson/11johnson.html. Accessed 17 Feb 2017.
  34. Kansa, E.C., S.W. Kansa, and B. Arbuckle. 2014. Publishing and pushing: Mixing models for communicating research data in archaeology. International Journal of Digital Curation 9 (1): 57–70. Available at: http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/301. Accessed 13 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kintigh, K.W. 2006. The promise and challenge of archaeological data integration. American Antiquity 71: 567–578. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40035365?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kintigh, K.W. 2010. Sustaining database semantics. In Proceedings of the 38th conference on computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. Granada.Google Scholar
  37. Kintigh, K.W., and J.H. Altschul. 2010. Sustaining the archaeological record. Heritage Management 3: 264–274. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/hma.2010.3.2.264?src=recsys. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kintigh, K.W., J.H. Altschul, M.C. Beaudry, R.D. Drennan, A.P. Kinzig, T.A. Kohler, W.F. Limp, H.D.G. Maschner, W.K. Michener, T.R. Pauketat, P. Peregrine, J.A. Sabloff, T.J. Wilkinson, H.T. Wright, and M.A. Zeder. 2014a. Grand challenges for archaeology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) 111 (3): 879–880. Available at: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/3/879.full. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kintigh, K.W., J.H. Altschul, M.C. Beaudry, R.D. Drennan, A.P. Kinzig, T.A. Kohler, W.F. Limp, H.D.G. Maschner, W.K. Michener, T.R. Pauketat, P. Peregrine, J.A. Sabloff, T.J. Wilkinson, H.T. Wright, and M.A. Zeder. 2014b. Grand challenges for archaeology. American Antiquity 79: 5–24. Available at: http://www.public.asu.edu/~kintigh/Kintigh%26al2014AmAntiqGrandChallenges.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kintigh, K.W., J.H. Altschul, A.P. Kinzig, W.F. Limp, W.K. Michener, J.A. Sabloff, E.J. Hackett, T.A. Kohler, B. Ludäscher, and C.A. Lynch. 2015. Cultural dynamics, deep time, and data planning cyberinfrastructure investments for archaeology. Advances in Archaeological Practice 3 (1): 1–15. Available at: https://core.tdar.org/document/392821/cultural-dynamics-deep-time-and-data-planning-cyberinfrastructure-investments-for-archaeology. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lord, P., A. Macdonald, L. Lyon, & D. Giaretta. 2004. From data deluge to data curation. In Proceedings of the UK e-Science All Hands Meeting, 2004. Available at: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/e.j.lyon/150.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2016.
  42. Lynch, C.L. 2003. Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. Libraries and the Academy 3 (2): 327–336. Available at: http://muse.jhu.edu/article/42865. Accessed 17 Feb 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lynch, C.L. 2017. Updating the agenda for academic libraries and scholarly communications. Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. 40. Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/40. Accessed 20 Apr 2017.
  44. McManamon, F. P. 2016. Creating a sustainable domain repository: tDAR (the Digital Archaeological Record). Presented at the SciDataCon 2016, Denver. Available at: https://core.tdar.org/document/439857/creating-a-sustainable-domain-repository-tdar-the-digital-archaeological-record. (tDAR id: 439857;  https://doi.org/10.6067/XCV8J67KM2. Accessed 29 Nov 2017.
  45. McManamon, F.P. 2018a. The development of cultural resource management in the United States. In New perspectives in cultural resource management, ed. F.P. McManamon, 11–55. New York: Routledge. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/New-Perspectives-in-Cultural-Resource-Management/Mcmanamon/p/book/9781138101128. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  46. McManamon, F.P. 2018b. Developments in American Archaeology: Fifty Years of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Annual Review of Anthropology 47:in press.Google Scholar
  47. McManamon, F.P., ed. 2018. New Perspectives in Cultural Resource Management. New York: Routledge. Availabe at: https://www.routledge.com/New-Perspectives-in-Cultural_Resource_Management/McManamon/p/book/978113810128. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.
  48. McManamon, F.P., and K.W. Kintigh. 2010. Digital antiquity: Transforming archaeological data into knowledge. The Society for American Archaeology Archaeological Record 10: 37–40. Available at: https://www.tdar.org/images/SAA-McM-Kintigh.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  49. McManamon, F.P., K.W. Kintigh, and A. Brin. 2010. Digital antiquity and the digital archaeological record (tDAR): Broadening access and ensuring long-term preservation for digital archaeological data. The Center for the Study of Architecture Newsletter 23. Available at: http://csanet.org/newsletter/fall10/nlf1002.html. Accessed 10 Dec 2011.
  50. McManamon, F.P., K.W. Kintigh, L.A. Ellison, and A. Brin. 2017. tDAR: A cultural heritage archive for twenty-first century public outreach, research, and resource management. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5 (3): 238–249. Available at: https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/189868/content/tdar.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Michener, W.K., J.W. Brunt, J.J. Helly, T.B. Kirchner, and S.G. Stafford. 1997. Nongeospatial metadata for the ecological sciences. Ecological Applications 7: 330–342. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/1051-0761(1997)007%5B0330:NMFTES%5D2.0.CO;2/abstract. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. OECD Publishing. 2017. Business Models for Sustainable Research Data Repositories. OECD Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy Papers No. 47. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris. Available at: www.oecd.org/going-digital.
  53. Richards, J.D. 2008. Managing digital preservation and access: The archaeology data service. In Managing archaeological resources: Global context, national programs, local actions, ed. F.P. McManamon, A. Stout, and J.A. Barnes, 173–194. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/Managing-Archaeological-Resources-Global-Context-National-Programs-Local/McManamon-Stout-Barnes/p/book/9781598743128. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.Google Scholar
  54. Richards, J.D. 2017. Twenty years of preserving data: A view from the United Kingdom. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5 (3): 227–237. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/advances-in-archaeological-practice/article/twenty-years-preserving-data/4B801489107ECB1773E3618F47D2DBD2. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Richards, J.D., T. Austin, and C. Hardman. 2010. Covering the costs of digital curation. Heritage Management 3: 255–263. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/hma.2010.3.2.255. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rumsey, A.S. 2016. The risk of digital oblivion: What knowledge should we save? Chronicle of Higher Education. 4 May 2016. Available at: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Risk-of-Digital-Oblivian/236342/. Accessed 21 Dec 2016.
  57. SAA (Society for American Archaeology). 1996. Principles of archaeological ethics. Available at: http://saa.org/AbouttheSociety/PrinciplesofArchaeologicalEthics/tabid/203/Default.aspx. Accessed 22 Nov 2017.
  58. Schlanger, S., R. Wilshusen, and H. Roberts. 2015. From mining sites to mining data: Archaeology’s future. Kiva 81 (1–2): 80–99. Available at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00231940.2015.1118739?needAccess=true. Accessed 21 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Science. 2011. Challenges and opportunities. Science 331 (6018): 692–693.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.331.6018.692. Accessed 17 Feb 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sheehan, Beth. 2015. Comparing digital archaeological repositories; tDAR versus open context. Behavioral & Social Science Librarian 34 (3): 173–213. Available at: http://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639269.2015.1096155?src=recsys. Accessed 21 Nov 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. tDAR (the Digital Archaeological Record). 2018. Home web page. Available at: https://www.tdar.org/. Accessed 23 August 2018.
  62. Watts, J. 2011. Policies, preservation, and access to digital resources: the digital antiquity 2010 national repositories survey (Reports in digital archaeology, Number 2). Tempe: Center for Digital Antiquity, Arizona State University. Available at: https://core.tdar.org/document/378318/policies-preservation-and-access-to-digital-resources-the-digital-antiquity-2010-national-repositories-survey. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  63. York, J., M. Gutmann, and F. Berman. 2016. What do we know about the stewardship gap? Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library, Deep Blue Repository. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/122726. Accessed 21 Feb 2017.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Digital Antiquity, School of Human Evolution and Social Change and ASU LibrariesArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Thanik Lertcharnrit
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ArchaeologySilpakorn UniversityBangkokThailand