Internet Archaeology 40

The editorial for Internet Archaeology Issue 40

This article focuses on the use of Google Earth as a tool to facilitate public engagement and dissemination of data. It examines a case study based around one of the largest archaeological investigations of the Stonehenge landscape, the Stonehenge Riverside Project. A bespoke layer for Google Earth was developed to communicate the discoveries of the research by creating an engaging, interactive and informative multimedia application that could be viewed by users across the world. The article describes the creation of the layer: Google Under-the-Earth: Seeing Beneath Stonehenge, and the public uptake and response to this. The project was supported by a Google Research Award, and working alongside Google enabled a 'free to download' platform for users to view the data within in the form of Google Earth, as well as the integration of a variety of applications including: Google SketchUp, YouTube, and Flickr. In addition, the integration of specialist software, such as Esri ArcGIS, was fundamental to the integration of the spatial data gathered by the project. Methodologies used to create the application are documented here, including how different outputs were integrated such as geophysical survey, 3D reconstructions and landscape tours. The future possibilities for utilising Google Earth for public engagement and understanding in the discipline are examined.

Humans are agents capable of helping others, learning new behaviours and forgetting old ones. The evolutionary approach to archaeological systems has therefore been hampered by the 'modern synthesis' - a gene-centred model of evolution as a process that eliminates those that cannot handle stress. The result has been a form of environmental determinism that explains human evolution in terms of heroic struggles and selective winnowing. Biologists committed to the modern synthesis have either dismissed agency as a delusion wrought in our bodies by natural selection, or imposed a sharp, Cartesian split between 'natural' and 'artificial' ecologies.We revisit the seminal literature of evolutionary biology and show that the paradigmatic fault lines of 21st century anthropology can be traced back to the 19th century and beyond. Lamarck had developed a two-factor evolutionary theory - one factor an endogenous tendency to become more advanced and complex, the other an exogenous constraint that drove organisms into conformity with environment. Darwin tried to eliminate the progressive tendency and imposed linearity constraints on evolution that Thomas Henry Huxley rejected. When experimental evidence falsified Darwin's linear hypothesis, the race began to develop a new, gene-centred model of evolution. This became the modern synthesis.

This article describes the methodology of a two-year research project to create an analytical database and GIS of 583 (proto-)urban centres on the Italian peninsula that existed between 350 BCE and 300 CE. The article is linked to the project's data files, deposited with the ADS, and is essential reading for users of the database. The research design, format and functionality of the database are described in conjunction with the challenges encountered during the methodological development of the project. The relevance of the project to the historical development of urbanism on the Italian peninsula during the period under study is outlined. An overview of the project's results provides an insight into the potential of the research methodology. It is relevant to anyone interested in ancient urbanism, Italian and Roman archaeology, or in the methods and results of combining ancient textual and archaeological legacy data with geospatial data.

The articles in this section of Internet Archaeology came out of a Theoretical Archaeology Group session at Manchester University in 2014. The session was motivated to explore issues associated with 'digital public archaeology' (DPA). It addressed the ways in which digital methods mediated or challenged the practice of public archaeology, an aspect of archaeology that has often emphasised communities defined by an attachment to place, frequently framed by the archaeological site. Increasingly digital technologies are allowing a breakdown of the focus on physical place, and change in the concept of 'community' (cf. Waterton 2010), with the potential to connect geographically disparate populations. Moreover, we wondered whether the mitigation of archaeological practice by digital media, which has been argued to lead to the unclear ontological statuses of material culture (Tringham 2010; Carusi et al. 2011), led to any specific issues with the practice of digital public archaeology.

Archaeologists are increasingly working with crowd-sourced digital data. Using evidence from other disciplines about the nature of crowd-sourcing in academic research, we suggest that archaeological projects using donated data can usefully be differentiated between generative projects (which rely on data collected by citizen scientists), and analytical projects (which make use of volunteers to classify, or otherwise analyse data that are provided by the project). We conclude that projects which privilege hyper-local research (such as surveying specific sites) might experience tension if the audience they are appealing to are 'cyber local'. In turn, for more 'traditional' archaeological audiences (when the primary motivating interests may be the tangible, physical nature of portable material culture or the archaeological site itself), then intangible, digital simulacra may not provide an effective medium through which to undertake digital public archaeology.

The introduction of digital data capturing and management technologies has transformed information practices in archaeology. Digital documentation and digital infrastructures are integrated in archaeologists' daily work now more than ever. International and national institutions and projects have contributed to the development of digital archiving and curation practices. Because knowledge production in archaeology depends heavily on documentation and information dissemination, and on retrieval of past documentation, the question of how information is managed is profoundly intertwined with the possibilities for knowledge production. Regulations at different levels articulate demands and expectations from the emerging digital information practices, but how are these different regulations coordinated, and do they support archaeological knowledge production?In this article we look into the state of information policy - the sum of principles guiding decisions about information - in archaeology and related areas. The aim of the article is to shed light on how information policy directs practice in archaeology, and to show that analysis of such policies is therefore vital. Information policy in legislation and guidelines in Swedish archaeology serves as a case study, and examples from development-led archaeology and the museum sector illustrate how information policies have varied roles across different heritage sectors. There are historical and local trajectories in the policy documents specific to Sweden, but the discussion shows that the emergence of Swedish policies have many parallels with processes in other countries. The article provides recommendations for information policy development for archaeology and related areas.