DOCSLIB.ORG

Human Bioarchaeology: a Case Study for Standards in Data Collection & Curation, with a Particular Focus on the Museum of Lo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Human Bioarchaeology: a Case Study for Standards in Data Collection & Curation, with a Particular Focus on the Museum of Lo Human Bioarchaeology: a case study for standards in data collection & curation, with a particular focus on the Museum of London's WORD database Victoria Yorke-Edwards The case for standardisation… 1980s Variety of methodologies in use Issues with terminology Rising call for population-based approaches and cross-cultural comparison Difficulties with data-sharing NAGPRA…. • The National Museum of the American Indian Act (1989) • The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990) – Requirement that all US museums and laboratories: • Produce inventories of their collections of human remains • Consult with Native American Tribes with a view to repatriation, as appropriate A seminar/ workshop was held in 1991, charged with developing data collection standards, after negotiations began between the Blackfeet tribe and the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago The ‘Chicago Standards’ Databases Requirement for inventories: e.g. The Smithsonian Institution’s • The Standard Osteological Database • The Smithsonian Institution’s Repatriation Osteology Laboratory Database Wider projects: • The Global History of Health Project (Ohio State University) Back in Britain….. “Museums should have a policy to compile and make public an inventory of their holdings of Guidance for the human remains. This Care of Human should include known Remains in Museums information about the date and provenance of (DCMS, 2005:22) the remains and their exact nature and the circumstances of their acquisition.” Back in Britain….. British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology (BABAO) / IFA ‘Guidelines to the Standards for Recording Human Remains’ (2004) But what about data curation? ‘Grey Literature’: Of 311 reports on human skeletal remains considered for use, 38% were unpublished… …many only known about through ‘word-of- mouth’ (2003) Whilst there are now standards for data collection there is NO common standard for how that data is curated. Records are held in the form of card indexes, paper reports….. Whilst there are now standards for data collection there is NO common standard for how that data is curated. Records are held in the form of card indexes, paper reports…. on obsolete electronic storage devices……. or in Excel & Access spreadsheets on researchers’ computers….. A Database of Archaeological Sites Yielding HumanDatabases Remains in England; Biological Anthropology ResearchIncreasing Centre; number of Synthesys databases: ; Living Differences in: with the• Software Dead Database; Early Anglo-Saxon• Accessibility Census Project British • Type of information recorded and IrishIssues On-Line with long-term Databaseupkeep Index to Excavated Skeletons; The Sedgeford Historical and Archaeological Research Project; THE WELLCOME OSTEOLOGICAL RESEARCH DATABASE The Museum of London Curates more than 17,000 skeletons, excavated in ‘rescue’ digs in Greater London over more than 30 years. Skeletal collection covers prehistoric to post-medieval periods. Largest scientifically excavated and documented human bone assemblage from any city in the world. The WORD Project Developed in-house by osteologist Brian Connell & the museum’s IT manager, Peter Rauxloh in 2002 For all holdings of skeletal assemblages of over 50 individuals Planned with aim to publically share data online Designed to ensure integrity and speed of data entry The Database Inventory of Upper Limbs, showing binary recording Inventory of Permanent Dentition – using codes for recording (PDF manual) Age at death data – listed methods applied and coded as per manual The Museum experience Standardisation of records of all skeletal assemblages held Living, changing, database Tool for curation and conservation of collections Has increased use and interest in collections from outside the museum Ability to interrogate database and test hypotheses quickly Sharing the Data Launch of data downloads online in 2007 Format decision shaped by availability/ cost of software to the public Importance of giving context Inclusion of images, case reports for selected skeletons The ‘outside’ user experience • Public access to data. BUT: NO access to Oracle Database • Downloads • Extensive guidance documents online: – To aid downloading – To explain osteological methods used – To explain recording system http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/Collections-Research/ LAARC/Centre-for-Human/Bioarchaeology/Database/ Downloads Format Tab-delimited data downloads Advantages: • Does not require users to have an Oracle license • Can be opened by a wide variety of software packages • Users can have a copy of the data on their own computer • File sizes are small Disadvantages: • Database downloaded as separate sheets, not as relational database, although some standard fields found in all files • Does not always convert neatly into tables in the chosen software • Converting formats can be time consuming • Need manual to understand coding Photographs Users International • Archaeological students: from undergrads to PhD candidates • Archaeologists • Medical/ Biomedical researchers ……Artists… …the Media…. …writers……. User Information Citing the Database The Future of Osteological Data Sharing Increased ability to identify samples for research, leading to use of less heard of collections Further standardisation of data collection methods and range of techniques Reduced manual handling of collections Improvements in skeletal collection management Meta-analyses? Transnational projects? Issues • Format for data-sharing? • Software requirements • Data coding • Static or updated? • Citation of data .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Digital Preservation Workflows for Museum Imaging Environments
    The 11th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage VAST (2010) A. Artusi, M. Joly, D. Pitzalis, G. Lucet, and A. Ribes (Editors) Digital preservation workflows for museum imaging environments Michael Ashley1 1 Cultural Heritage Imaging, San Francisco, California, USA From: Principles and Practices of Robust, Photography-based Digital Imaging Techniques for Museums. Contributors: Mark Mudge, Carla Schroer, Graeme Earl, Kirk Martinez, Hembo Pagi, Corey Toler-Franklin, Szymon Rusinkiewicz, Gianpaolo Palma, Melvin Wachowiak, Michael Ashley, Neffra Matthews, Tommy Noble, Matteo Dellepiane. Edited by Mark Mudge and Carla Schroer, Cultural Heritage Imaging. The 11th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage VAST (2010) A. Artusi, M. Joly, D. Pitzalis, G. Lucet, and A. Ribes (Editors) This is a pre-print copy of a paper that is currently under review. Please respect the intellectual property of the authors and the efforts of the publishers and reviewers until its publication. If you find any errors that need modification please contact the author at [email protected]. Meanwhile this pdf is distributed to interested readers under a Creative Commons 3.0 license. M. Ashley / Digital Preservation Workflows For Museum Imaging Environments Digital preservation workflows for museum imaging environments Michael Ashley1 1 Cultural Heritage Imaging, San Francisco, California, USA Abstract We discuss and demonstrate practical digital preservation frameworks that protect images throughout the entire production life-cycle. Using off the shelf and open source software coupled with a basic understanding of metadata, it is possible to produce and manage high value digital representations of physical objects that are born archive- ready and long-term sustainable.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducticn Tc Ccnservoticn
    introducticntc ccnservoticn UNITED NATTONSEDUCATIONA],, SCIEIilIIFTC AND CULTIJRALOROANIZATTOII AN INIRODUCTION TO CONSERYATIOI{ OF CULTURAT PROPMTY by Berr:ar"d M. Feilden Director of the Internatlonal Centre for the Preservatlon and Restoratlon of Cultural Property, Rome Aprll, L979 (cc-ig/ws/ttt+) - CONTENTS Page Preface 2 Acknowledgements Introduction 3 Chapter* I Introductory Concepts 6 Chapter II Cultural Property - Agents of Deterioration and Loss . 11 Chapter III The Principles of Conservation 21 Chapter IV The Conservation of Movable Property - Museums and Conservation . 29 Chapter V The Conservation of Historic Buildings and Urban Conservation 36 Conclusions ............... kk Appendix 1 Component Materials of Cultural Property . kj Appendix 2 Access of Water 53 Appendix 3 Intergovernmental and Non-Governmental International Agencies for Conservation 55 Appendix k The Conservator/Restorer: A Definition of the Profession .................. 6? Glossary 71 Selected Bibliography , 71*. AUTHOR'S PREFACE Some may say that the attempt to Introduce the whole subject of Conservation of Cultural Propety Is too ambitious, but actually someone has to undertake this task and it fell to my lot as Director of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cxiltural Property (ICCROM). An introduction to conservation such as this has difficulties in striking the right balance between all the disciplines involved. The writer is an architect and, therefore, a generalist having contact with both the arts and sciences. In such a rapidly developing field as conservation no written statement can be regarded as definite. This booklet should only be taken as a basis for further discussions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In writing anything with such a wide scope as this booklet, any author needs help and constructive comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection in Web Archives: the Value of Archival Best Practices
    WITTENBERG: SELECTION IN WEB ARCHIVES Selection in Web Archives: The Value of Archival Best Practices Jamie Wittenberg, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States of America Abstract: The abundance of valuable material available online has mobilized the development of preservation initiatives at collecting institutions that aim to capture and contextualize web content. Web archiving selection criteria are driven by the limitations inherent in harvesting technologies. Observing core archival principles like provenance and original order when establishing collection development policies for web content will help to ensure that archives continue to assure the authenticity of the materials they steward. Keywords: Web Archives; Archival Theory; Digital Libraries; Internet Content; Selection and Appraisal Introduction The abundance of valuable material available online has mobilized the development of preservation initiatives at collecting institutions that aim to capture and contextualize web content. Methodologies for web collection practices are institution and collection-specific. Among institutions charged with preserving cultural heritage, web archiving has become commonplace. However, the disparity between institutional selection and appraisal criteria reveals the absence of standardization for web archive establishment. The Australian web archive, for example, accessions content that it evaluates as having long-term research value. The Library of Congress web archive, represented by its Minerva team, established a collection
    [Show full text]
  • From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean
    THE FUTURE OF THE PAST: From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean Editors Konstantinos Chalikias, Maggie Beeler, Ariel Pearce, and Steve Renette http://futureofthepast.wix.com/culturalheritage HERITAGE, CONSERVATION & ARCHAEOLOGY ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA Contents 1. The Future of the Past: From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Konstantinos Chalikias, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Maggie Beeler, Bryn Mawr College, Ariel Pearce, Temple University, and Steve Renette, University of Pennsylvania 2. Go, Do Good! Responsibility and the Future of Cultural Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 21st Century ........... 5 Morag M. Kersel, DePaul University 3. Contested Antiquities, Contested Histories: The City of David as an Example ........................................................................... 11 Rannfrid I. Thelle, Wichita State University 4. Cultural Racketeering in Egypt—Predicting Patterns in Illicit Activity: Quantitative Tools of the 21st-Century Archaeologist .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Katie A. Paul, The Antiquities Coalition
    [Show full text]
  • ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Syllabi Course Syllabi Spring 1-2016 ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology Corey Ragsdale University of Montana, Missoula Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Ragsdale, Corey, "ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology" (2016). Syllabi. 4657. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi/4657 This Syllabus is brought to you for free and open access by the Course Syllabi at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Syllabi by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Anthropology 513 Bioarchaeology Seminar Instructor: Dr. Corey Ragsdale Office: Social Science 217 Email: [email protected] Office hours: TR 2:00 to 3:30 Course Description Bioarchaeology allows us to ‘people’ the past. To do this, bioarchaeologists follow two general rules of thumb. First, they contextualize human remains in physical space, cultural milieu, and pre-historic time. That is, skeletonized and mummified bodies are never examined without also considering their associated archaeological materials. Second, bioarchaeologists regard ancient bodies as bio-cultural phenomena. Human biology is impacted directly by culture, and vice versa. With these two ideas in hand, we will explore bioarchaeology’s history, development, major topical concerns, and debates. We will also engage critically with categories and assumptions about race, sex/gender, age, ethnicity, disease and disability, violence, and body parts. To conclude the semester, we will reflect upon bioarchaeology’s relevance in contemporary politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS
    PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS BIOARCHAEOLOGY (ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY) Mario ŠLAUS Department of Archaeology, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia. Keywords: Bioarchaeology, archaeological, forensic, antemortem, post-mortem, perimortem, traumas, Cribra orbitalia, Harris lines, Tuberculosis, Leprosy, Treponematosis, Trauma analysis, Accidental trauma, Intentional trauma, Osteological, Degenerative disease, Habitual activities, Osteoarthritis, Schmorl’s nodes, Tooth wear Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. Definition of Bioarchaeology 1.2. History of Bioarchaeology 2. Analysis of Skeletal Remains 2.1. Excavation and Recovery 2.2. Human / Non-Human Remains 2.3. Archaeological / Forensic Remains 2.4. Differentiating between Antemortem/Postmortem/Perimortem Traumas 2.5. Determination of Sex 2.6. Determination of Age at Death 2.6.1. Age Determination in Subadults 2.6.2. Age Determination in Adults. 3. Skeletal and dental markers of stress 3.1. Linear Enamel Hypoplasia 3.2. Cribra Orbitalia 3.3. Harris Lines 4. Analyses of dental remains 4.1. Caries 4.2. Alveolar Bone Disease and Antemortem Tooth Loss 5. Infectious disease 5.1. Non–specific Infectious Diseases 5.2. Specific Infectious Disease 5.2.1. Tuberculosis 5.2.2. Leprosy 5.2.3. TreponematosisUNESCO – EOLSS 6. Trauma analysis 6.1. Accidental SAMPLETrauma CHAPTERS 6.2. Intentional Trauma 7. Osteological and dental evidence of degenerative disease and habitual activities 7.1. Osteoarthritis 7.2. Schmorl’s Nodes 7.3. Tooth Wear Caused by Habitual Activities 8. Conclusion Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS 1. Introduction 1.1. Definition of Bioarchaeology Bioarchaeology is the study of human biological remains within their cultural (archaeological) context.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue Information
    Juengst and Becker, Editors Editors and Becker, Juengst of Community The Bioarchaeology 28 AP3A No. The Bioarchaeology of Community Sara L. Juengst and Sara K. Becker, Editors Contributions by Sara K. Becker Deborah Blom Jered B. Cornelison Sylvia Deskaj Lynne Goldstein Sara L. Juengst Ann M. Kakaliouras Wendy Lackey-Cornelison William J. Meyer Anna C. Novotny Molly K. Zuckerman 2017 Archeological Papers of the ISSN 1551-823X American Anthropological Association, Number 28 aapaa_28_1_cover.inddpaa_28_1_cover.indd 1 112/05/172/05/17 22:26:26 PPMM The Bioarchaeology of Community Sara L. Juengst and Sara K. Becker, Editors Contributions by Sara K. Becker Deborah Blom Jered B. Cornelison Sylvia Deskaj Lynne Goldstein Sara L. Juengst Ann M. Kakaliouras Wendy Lackey-Cornelison William J. Meyer Anna C. Novotny Molly K. Zuckerman 2017 Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Number 28 ARCHEOLOGICAL PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION Lynne Goldstein, General Series Editor Number 28 THE BIOARCHAEOLOGY OF COMMUNITY 2017 Aims and Scope: The Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association (AP3A) is published on behalf of the Archaeological Division of the American Anthropological Association. AP3A publishes original monograph-length manuscripts on a wide range of subjects generally considered to fall within the purview of anthropological archaeology. There are no geographical, temporal, or topical restrictions. Organizers of AAA symposia are particularly encouraged to submit manuscripts, but submissions need not be restricted to these or other collected works. Copyright and Copying (in any format): © 2017 American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing from the copyright holder.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Cultural Heritage Materials
    September 2016 Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Cultural Heritage Materials Creation of Raster Image Files i Document Information Title Editor Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Cultural Heritage Materials: Thomas Rieger Creation of Raster Image Files Document Type Technical Guidelines Publication Date September 2016 Source Documents Title Editors Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Cultural Heritage Materials: Don Williams and Michael Creation of Raster Image Master Files Stelmach http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/guidelines/FADGI_Still_Image- Tech_Guidelines_2010-08-24.pdf Document Type Technical Guidelines Publication Date August 2010 Title Author s Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Archival Records for Electronic Steven Puglia, Jeffrey Reed, and Access: Creation of Production Master Files – Raster Images Erin Rhodes http://www.archives.gov/preservation/technical/guidelines.pdf U.S. National Archives and Records Administration Document Type Technical Guidelines Publication Date June 2004 This work is available for worldwide use and reuse under CC0 1.0 Universal. ii Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 7 SCOPE .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 THE FADGI STAR SYSTEM .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Art Deaccessioning Policy
    Deaccessioning Policy Document No. CUR 4.0 – Deaccessioning Policy Page 1 Approved: December 2020 Approved by: National Gallery of Australia Council next review due: December 2022 Summary Name of Policy Description of Policy Deaccessioning Policy Policy applies to ☒ NGA wide ☐ Specific (eg. Department) Policy Status ☐ New policy ☒ Revision of Existing Policy (previously Art Acquisition Policy) Approval Authority Director Responsible Officer Assistant Director, Artistic Programs Contact area Artistic Programs Date of Policy Review* October 2022 Related Policies, Procedures, National Gallery Act 1975 Guidelines and Local Protocols Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 Council Instructions including Financial Delegations Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Rights and Engagement Policy Due Diligence and Provenance Policy Acquisitions Policy Research Library Collection Development Policy Research Archive Acquisition Policy The Copyright Act 1968 The Privacy Act 1988 Privacy Policy Australian Best Practice Guide to Collecting Cultural Material 2015 Collections Law: Legal issues for Australian Archives, Galleries, Libraries and Museums *Unless otherwise indicated, this policy will still apply beyond the review date. Approvals Position Name Endorsed Date Assistant Director Natasha Bullock Yes Director Nick Mitzevich Yes Council Ryan Stokes Yes Document No. CUR 4.0 – Deaccessioning Policy Page 2 Approved: December 2020 Approved by: National Gallery of Australia Council next review due: December 2022 Table of contents
    [Show full text]
  • NAPC FORUM 2018 Speaker Bios
    NAPC FORUM 2018 Speaker Bios As Newport Restoration Foundation's Director of Preservation, Shantia Anderheggen manages the organization's portfolio of over 80 historic properties in Newport, RI, as well as the coordinating the organization's ongoing work on its Keeping History Above Water initiative. Prior to NRF, Shantia served as Director of Easements for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Historic Preservation Planner for the City of Newport (RI), and Historic Preservation Team Leader for Historic New England (formerly the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities). She is currently President of the New England Chapter of the Vernacular Architecture Forum and sits on the US ICOMOS Subcommittee for Climate Change & Heritage Knowledge Exchange. Sara André is an architectural historian with the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office. Ms. André has been working professionally in the preservation field since 1999. She has extensive experience with survey work, National Register nomination review, preservation planning, tax credit review, and regulatory review. Ms. André worked with the NJ Historic Preservation Office for 15 years, prior to joining the IA SHPO. Aaron Barlow is a newcomer to the Historic Preservation community. He graduated from the University of Utah in 2016 with a Master’s degree in City and Metropolitan Planning and now works as an Associate Planner for the City of Hutchinson. Aaron assisted in the development of the Historic Preservation Cost Comparison Tool and now uses it regularly to help property owners with their home renovation projects. Rich Barry has been working with Kärcher, a leader in cleaning technology and manufacturer, since May 2015 to advance their worldwide Cultural Sponsoring Program in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioarchaeology and Social Theory
    Bioarchaeology and Social Theory Series Editor Debra L. Martin Professor of Anthropology University of Nevada Las Vegas , USA More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11976 Lorna Tilley Theory and Practice in the Bioarchaeology of Care Lorna Tilley Australian National University Canberra, Australia Bioarchaeology and Social Theory ISBN 978-3-319-18859-1 ISBN 978-3-319-18860-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-18860-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2015942688 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Archaeological Data Collection 1
    Running Head: DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA COLLECTION 1 Digital Archaeological Data Collection and Archaeological Data Repositories: How Digital Environments are leading to a Convergence of Data Collection Standards Julia Silver [email protected] (410) 660-5009 Johns Hopkins University Museum Studies Digital Curation Certificate Program December 5, 2015 DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA COLLECTION 2 Abstract This paper discusses how the lack of standardized methods for on-site data collection has impacted the ability of archaeologists to preserve archaeological data and make it accessible for reuse. Repositories and databases, like the Alexandria Archive Institute’s (AAI) Open Context and Digital Antiquity’s tDAR (the Digital Archaeological Record), have gained traction as prominent platforms to both publish archaeological data and to store and make accessible raw data. However, gaps remain between data collection and data accessibility, which seem unlikely to be closed by the adoption of standards for the documentation and description of field data. The following questions are considered: What are the challenges to standardization in the collection and documentation of field data? In the absence of agreed-upon standards, what alternative methods can aid in the preservation and accessibility goals of archaeologists? One promising development, a mobile platform created by the Federated Archaeological Information Management Systems (FAIMS) Project, is considered as an alternative path that may lead to a convergence of data collection standards in the future. DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA COLLECTION 3 Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Research Methodologies III. Historical Background a. Defining Digital Archaeology b. DigMaster c. The Beginning of Online Data Publication d. The Archaeological Information Ecosystem IV.
    [Show full text]