Curating Archaeological Provenience Data Across Excavation Recording Formats
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20249194 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sarah A Buchanan (0000-0002-4871-039X, University of Missouri, corresponding author), Tiana R Stephenson (University of Missouri), Diletta Nesti (University of Missouri), Marcello Mogetta (0000-0003-2736-3410, University of Missouri) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue | 11 |
| Pages | 210 |
| Publication date | 2025-10-23 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Humanities (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2076-0787 • E-ISSN: 2076-0787 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/h14110210 |
| OpenAlex | W4415489427 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 12 |
Archaeological excavations today generate extensive datasets across survey, excavation, and analysis activities, especially when they are conducted in collaborative structures such as field schools. Working across such activities, data archivists contribute to the goals and research outcomes of the dig by establishing data practices that are participatory and educational (two pillars of data literacy) as they permanently record information about the archaeological results. At the Venus Pompeiana Project (VPP), a collaborative archaeological investigation of the Sanctuary of Venus in Pompeii, both provenance and provenience data are recorded into a database at the trenches’ edge, which optimises the accuracy of the data by allowing direct input and review by the data creators and archaeological site experts. When legacy data about work conducted decades or even centuries earlier are brought into the data picture, scholars stand to gain a deeper understanding of the geographic locations of key interest over time. Yet, the integration of analogue legacy and digital archival datasets is collaborative and longitudinal work. In this paper, we bring together experiential reflections on data archiving conducted at both the excavation site and in the physical archives of the Pompeii Archaeological Park. We then provide an integrative analysis of the outcomes of such data curation, highlighting what each data archiving contributor “discovered” about the site as a whole or a specific artefact, feature, or data category. Our findings contribute deeper insights into what data archiving and format-specific curation activities are most effective for learning experiences, archaeological scholarship, and professional practices
Archaeological record · Citizen journalism · Data integration · Digital data · Excavation · Provenance · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage · Archaeological Research and Protection · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction
The Oxford Handbook of Museum Archaeology
Will It Ever Be Fair
Destruction/reconstruction
What We Talk About When We Talk About Provenance
An Archaeological Curation Dilemma with an Approach to a Solution—the Texas-Based Accreditation Program for Curatorial Facilities
Response to Responses on “What We Talk About When We Talk About Provenance
Material Consequences of Contemporary Classical Collecting
Exhibiting Archaeology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |