Traditional archaeological drawing
A future vestige or a necessity
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22171007 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Anastasiia Husak (0009-0001-7995-4813, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Pages | 93-101 |
| Publication date | 2024-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Vita Antiqua (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2519-4542 • E-ISSN: 2522-9419 |
| Publisher | Center of Paleoethnological Researches (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.37098/va-2024-15-93-101 |
| OpenAlex | W4405163391 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 6 |
This article explores the role of archaeological drawing (especially its traditional form) in the development of archaeological knowledge, while also illustrating the generalized process behind the cognitive and mental models of archaeological thought. Archaeological drawing, being subjective in its interpretative nature, serves as an important method of critical observation and analysis of archaeological objects and artifacts. The main discussion focuses on the necessity of preserving the «traditional» type of drawing in modern archaeology amid rapid digitalization. A comparison of how digital and traditional drawing are perceived allows for an understanding of the cognitive level of two seemingly similar, but in fact, different methods of archaeological recording. Digital drawing, despite its many advantages, such as speed of execution and the ability to easily process images, is not always able to provide as deep an interaction with archaeological artifacts. When using digital drawing, researchers often focus on the technical aspects of the work, which can distract them from critical analysis of the artifacts themselves. The nature of traditional archaeological drawing makes it an indispensable tool in research, as it fosters a high-quality interaction with artifacts. Visualizing findings through such drawing is a process that combines cognitive and sensory aspects of perception, leading to a deeper understanding of the object. In addition, traditional drawing remains a reliable pedagogical tool; helping new generations of archaeologists not only master technical skills but also develop critical thinking abilities. Overall, the decline in the use of the «traditional drawing» method, although not yet observed in Ukrainian archaeology, could eventually alter the perception of archaeological finds. The spread of digital recording methods creates a risk that archaeologists may lose important aspects of research that are tied to deep interaction with artifacts. However, digital technologies continue to integrate into modern science, promoting a faster pace of work and access to research results. Combining traditional and digital approaches allows, ensuring both speed and depth of analysis for more comprehensive results. In conclusion, while modern technologies continue to influence all aspects of science, including archaeology, traditional archaeological drawing remains an important tool. Its preservation and integration with new methods can contribute to the development of archaeological science, maintaining a balance between speed and accuracy, between the demands of modern science and the deep knowledge provided by the traditional approach. Key words: archaeological drawing, mental models, traditional drawing, digitalization, cognitive archaeology, archaeological knowledge
Archaeology · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage · Augmented Reality Applications · History · Spatial Cognition and Navigation
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |