Future use or no future at all? An examination of post-excavation historical archaeological repositories in NSW

Bibliographic Data

ID11956516
AuthorsCaitlin D’gluyas (0000-0002-7910-2119, Department of Archaeology, Classics and History, School of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia, corresponding author), Martin Gibbs (0000-0002-4091-9789, Department of Archaeology, Classics and History, School of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia)
Year2022
Volume88
Issue2
Pages129-143
Publication date2022-03-13
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAustralian Archaeology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0312-2417 • E-ISSN: 2470-0363
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/03122417.2022.2046685
OpenAlexW4220962061
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited30

In NSW the availability of excavation records, physical remains (primarily artefacts), technical datasets, and reports associated with a historical archaeological project can only be described as varied. These forms of data can be collectively termed an archaeological archive. The storage of archives commonly includes any combination of small-scale centralised repositories, on-site facilities, private (client or investigator) off-site storage, or digital platforms. Archaeologists recognise the value of sustainably archiving these resources, as well as making them available for research, public access, or other intentions, however, what is the status of our combined approaches? Data collected from 40 historical archaeological sites in NSW has been used here to benchmark the current situation in the state. It was found that only three of the investigated sites had a complete and accessible archaeological archive with suitable metadata available before reaching the storage facility. This research outlines the precarious status of our efforts in archiving for perpetuity and the reliance on informal and personal networks within the archaeological community to discover and access archives. It is argued here that a framework of visibility, accessibility, and longevity should be applied to any project to consider the strength of archaeological archive retention methods. While the focus remains on understanding the key issues, several recommendations are also made for improving the consistency and long-term success of accessing historical archaeological repositories and data management systems. Key suggested approaches are to promote significance in the decision to create archaeological archives in the first place, prioritise resolving visibility constraints and focus on small and achievable system improvements

Archaeological record · Archaeology · Consistency (knowledge bases · Excavation · Geography · Metadata · Sustainability · Visibility · World Wide Web · Archaeological Research and Protection · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Computer Science · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · Engineering · History

Tools

Open DOI