Data from excavations from a long time ago and their connection to today’s communities

Alaska Native ancestors began using local copper deposits to make intricate tools about 1,000 years ago. Over a 3rd of all copper objects found by archaeologists within the region have been excavated at a single site, the Gulkana Site.

This is the positioning I actually have been studying for the past 4 years as a graduate student at Purdue University. Despite its importance, the Gulkana site will not be very well-known.

To my knowledge, it will not be mentioned in any museum. Locals, including Alaska Native Panting People who’re descended from the unique inhabitants of the place may know the name, but they have no idea much about what happened there. Even amongst archaeologists, little information is obtainable about it – just just a few reports and casual mentions in just a few publications.

However, the Gulkana site was first discovered and excavated almost 50 years ago. What's occurring?

Archaeology has a knowledge management problem, and it will not be unique to the Gulkana site. U.S. federal regulations and disciplinary standards require archaeologists to maintain records of their excavations, but a lot of those records have never been analyzed. Archaeologists seek advice from this problem as “Legacy data backlog.”

As an example of this lag, the Gulkana site tells us not only about Ahtna history and innovations in copperworking, but additionally concerning the continued value of archaeological data to researchers and the general public.

What happens after an excavation?

In the United States, most excavations, including those on the Gulkana site, are conducted under a process called Cultural Resource Management. Since the Nineteen Sixties, federal regulations within the United States have required archaeological excavations before certain development projectsThe regulations also require that records of all finds be kept for future generations.

According to 1 estimate, this process Millions of records within the legacy data set. Archaeological data is complex and these records include many file formats, from handwritten maps to photographs and spatial data.

The problem is most acute for datasets created before computers were widely available. Research suggests that archaeologists prefer digital datasets, that are more easily accessible and usable with modern methods. Ignoring non-digital datasets will not be only abandoning the fruit of a long time of archaeological work, but additionally ignoring the human experiences that these datasets were designed to preserve. Once a site is excavated, these data are the one way the individuals who lived there can tell their story.

Archaeologists are usually not sure how you can solve this problem. Many solutions have been proposed, including Creation of latest data repositoriesmake Reuse of existing data sets every time possible, and increased cooperation with other disciplines and with public stakeholders. One of the more creative solutions, the Vesuvius Challenge, recently made headlines for Award of the grand prize of US$700,000 to a team that successfully used artificial intelligence to read ancient texts.

Digital archaeology digs up old data

Of course, there isn’t any panacea for such a sophisticated problem. In my work with the Gulkana site, I apply a lot of these suggestions through a more recent type of archaeology that some researchers call digital public archaeologyIt combines digital archaeology, which uses computers in archaeological research, with public archaeology, which recognises the general public's interest up to now.

For me, archaeology looks different than what people might expect. Instead of spending my days excavating some fabulous place, my job involves sitting in front of a pc for hours, digging through old information as an alternative of digging up recent ones.

As a digital archaeologist, I exploit modern methods like AI to bring decades-old data concerning the Gulkana site back to life. Write software that converts 50-year-old handwritten excavation notes right into a digital map that I can analyze with a pc.

Although this work is less glamorous, it’s arguably more necessary than excavation. Excavation is merely one approach to gathering data; by itself, it cannot reveal much a few site. That is why there remains to be much to learn concerning the Gulkana site, though it was excavated a long time ago.

Archaeologists learn concerning the past through evaluation, and computers give us more methods than ever before. In my work, I exploit computer-aided mapping techniques to check the copper artifacts recovered from the Gulkana site. By studying where these objects were found, we are able to discover in the event that they were utilized by all of the people on the Gulkana site or in the event that they were reserved for only a select few.

Connecting archaeology with contemporary communities

I’m also a public archaeologist; I consider that the past is made meaningful by the people connected to it. This implies that my study of the Gulkana site can be inadequate if I were to conduct it alone at my computer 3,000 miles from Alaska. Instead, I designed my research in collaboration with descendants of the individuals who lived on the Gulkana site to be sure that my research can be precious to them, not only archaeologists.

In my research, which means that I incorporate opportunities for youth participation into my project. Every 12 months I travel to Alaska to organize a course about archaeology, Ahtna history and technology in collaboration with Ahtna leadership and the local school district.

During the course, we take field trips to archaeological sites and the Ahtna Cultural Center. Children learn concerning the artifacts found on the Gulkana site and have the chance to create their very own artifacts. Ahtna leaders impart their cultural knowledge to the scholars. At the tip of the course, students incorporate what they’ve learned right into a video game concerning the Gulkana site.

The aim of my research is to breathe recent life into the Gulkana site through digital methods and outreach. My experience shows that even a site excavated 50 years ago can reveal more to assist us higher understand the past. Perhaps more importantly, it will probably also help the subsequent generation gain experience with technological skills and connect with their heritage. Old archaeological data remains to be relevant within the digital age – we just must listen to it.