This short note argues that relevance and acceptance of archaeological heritage, particularly that from the 18th to the 20th centuries, hinge on effective public mediation. To achieve this, it is crucial to focus on the value and legitimisation of monuments from an impartial perspective. Employing an interdisciplinary and open-minded approach is essential in providing pertinent responses to enquiries that resonate with contemporary society. Therefore an approach to archaeological heritage by drawing on extended themes or categories is suitable to make archaeological heritage 'present' and generate public acceptance for heritage work.
{"title":"Categories Beyond: An approach to value and relevance of archaeological heritage. Three case studies in Westphalia, Germany","authors":"Michael Malliaris","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.19","url":null,"abstract":"This short note argues that relevance and acceptance of archaeological heritage, particularly that from the 18th to the 20th centuries, hinge on effective public mediation. To achieve this, it is crucial to focus on the value and legitimisation of monuments from an impartial perspective. Employing an interdisciplinary and open-minded approach is essential in providing pertinent responses to enquiries that resonate with contemporary society. Therefore an approach to archaeological heritage by drawing on extended themes or categories is suitable to make archaeological heritage 'present' and generate public acceptance for heritage work.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140272438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The archaeology of the Second World War has existed since the 1980s in English-language research. However, the vestiges of this conflict were only officially included in French national heritage at the end of 2013. Only since 2014, the year of the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy, do preventive archaeology operations prescribe for World War II (WWII) sites. Public research programmes have also been set up to identify and characterise the heritage linked to the conflict, in particular the numerous remains of the Atlantic Wall on France's western seafront. During this decade, several archaeological operations have revealed the strong scientific potential attached to WWII sites throughout the country. At the same time, researchers from the National Institute of Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) have drawn up a general research theme based on these remains which now form part of an international discussion framework. There are three main lines of research based on the typology of material traces from the conflict. The first of these is dedicated to battlefield remains, which are currently being used to compile an archaeology of military operations in Normandy. The second is the study of defensive structures (bunkers on the Atlantic Wall and passive defence constructions) that are also the subject of exciting discoveries in Normandy and other French regions. The third area of research addresses remains linked to internment and mass crimes. In particular, this concerns the search, currently underway, of the only Nazi concentration camp on French soil, the KL Natzweiler-Struthof. This houses the European Centre of Deported Resistance Members (CERD) and performs important research on other deportation or internment memorials (e.g. Drancy, Mont-Valérien) and on a series of prison camps across France. These sites, long threatened by soil and coastal erosion, development or the looting of militaria, are now crystallising as powerful heritage assets, even though the expression and sharing of this archaeological memory of World War II comes in response to high levels of national and international public expectation.
{"title":"Considering Second World War Archaeological Heritage in France","authors":"Vincent Carpentier","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.10","url":null,"abstract":"The archaeology of the Second World War has existed since the 1980s in English-language research. However, the vestiges of this conflict were only officially included in French national heritage at the end of 2013. Only since 2014, the year of the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy, do preventive archaeology operations prescribe for World War II (WWII) sites. Public research programmes have also been set up to identify and characterise the heritage linked to the conflict, in particular the numerous remains of the Atlantic Wall on France's western seafront. During this decade, several archaeological operations have revealed the strong scientific potential attached to WWII sites throughout the country. At the same time, researchers from the National Institute of Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) have drawn up a general research theme based on these remains which now form part of an international discussion framework. There are three main lines of research based on the typology of material traces from the conflict. The first of these is dedicated to battlefield remains, which are currently being used to compile an archaeology of military operations in Normandy. The second is the study of defensive structures (bunkers on the Atlantic Wall and passive defence constructions) that are also the subject of exciting discoveries in Normandy and other French regions. The third area of research addresses remains linked to internment and mass crimes. In particular, this concerns the search, currently underway, of the only Nazi concentration camp on French soil, the KL Natzweiler-Struthof. This houses the European Centre of Deported Resistance Members (CERD) and performs important research on other deportation or internment memorials (e.g. Drancy, Mont-Valérien) and on a series of prison camps across France. These sites, long threatened by soil and coastal erosion, development or the looting of militaria, are now crystallising as powerful heritage assets, even though the expression and sharing of this archaeological memory of World War II comes in response to high levels of national and international public expectation.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140280721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Recht, Katarzyna Zeman-Wiśniewska, Lorenzo Mazzotta
The rural site of Erimi-Pitharka is located in the archaeologically rich Kouris Valley of south-central Cyprus. Previous rescue excavations by the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, have revealed a subterranean complex, industrial areas, and a building complex at the highest topographical point of the site. New excavations by an international team began in 2022 and continued in 2023. We here report on the findings from these first two seasons, which have focused on the large building complex in Area I/1A. Dated to LC IIC-IIIA (c. 1300-1150 BCE), this part of the site is characterised by an emphasis on agricultural production and storage. The inhabitants took advantage of the soft limestone-rich bedrock to create subterranean and semi-subterranean installations, rooms and storage spaces, and pithoi were similarly used for storage and industrial activities. Pitharka was peacefully abandoned, and much of the material culture was removed in the process.
{"title":"Excavations at the Late Bronze Age site of Erimi-Pitharka, Cyprus (2022-2023 seasons): Regional production and storage in the Kouris Valley","authors":"L. Recht, Katarzyna Zeman-Wiśniewska, Lorenzo Mazzotta","doi":"10.11141/ia.67.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.67.6","url":null,"abstract":"The rural site of Erimi-Pitharka is located in the archaeologically rich Kouris Valley of south-central Cyprus. Previous rescue excavations by the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, have revealed a subterranean complex, industrial areas, and a building complex at the highest topographical point of the site. New excavations by an international team began in 2022 and continued in 2023. We here report on the findings from these first two seasons, which have focused on the large building complex in Area I/1A. Dated to LC IIC-IIIA (c. 1300-1150 BCE), this part of the site is characterised by an emphasis on agricultural production and storage. The inhabitants took advantage of the soft limestone-rich bedrock to create subterranean and semi-subterranean installations, rooms and storage spaces, and pithoi were similarly used for storage and industrial activities. Pitharka was peacefully abandoned, and much of the material culture was removed in the process.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140091658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay proposes that a pragmatic approach be taken towards Holocaust heritage in the 21st century and beyond. Its point of departure is the recognition that it is now nearly 80 years since the end of the war and we are not making heritage decisions today about such sites based on inheriting them 'untouched' in 1945 and dictating their future role as sites of education, remembrance and pilgrimage. Rather, in acknowledgement that many decades have passed and that buildings from many sites of Holocaust heritage have been put to other uses, I argue that a pragmatic solution is required rather than an insistence that Holocaust heritage must have no function today other than one based solely on remembrance and memorialisation. This essay discusses whether we should be prepared to accept compromises and give up idealistic perceptions of a single 'right' solution that dictates the heritage futures of such sites. The research for this discussion is based upon the 2019-24 International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) project Safeguarding Sites, chaired by the author. This essay thus prizes an approach that safeguards Holocaust sites, but questions what we mean by 'safeguarding', arguing that Holocaust heritage is not like the archaeological site of Pompeii; we have not inherited it untouched and preserved in volcanic ash, nor have we had ownership of it continuously since the end of the war.
{"title":"Should We Adopt a Pragmatic Approach to Holocaust Heritage in the 21st Century?","authors":"Gilly Carr","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.9","url":null,"abstract":"This essay proposes that a pragmatic approach be taken towards Holocaust heritage in the 21st century and beyond. Its point of departure is the recognition that it is now nearly 80 years since the end of the war and we are not making heritage decisions today about such sites based on inheriting them 'untouched' in 1945 and dictating their future role as sites of education, remembrance and pilgrimage. Rather, in acknowledgement that many decades have passed and that buildings from many sites of Holocaust heritage have been put to other uses, I argue that a pragmatic solution is required rather than an insistence that Holocaust heritage must have no function today other than one based solely on remembrance and memorialisation. This essay discusses whether we should be prepared to accept compromises and give up idealistic perceptions of a single 'right' solution that dictates the heritage futures of such sites. The research for this discussion is based upon the 2019-24 International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) project Safeguarding Sites, chaired by the author. This essay thus prizes an approach that safeguards Holocaust sites, but questions what we mean by 'safeguarding', arguing that Holocaust heritage is not like the archaeological site of Pompeii; we have not inherited it untouched and preserved in volcanic ash, nor have we had ownership of it continuously since the end of the war.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140282670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In many places across Europe, it has long been common practice to protect, preserve and research monuments of the recent past. The many ways to approach archaeologies of the near present and recent past creates both a challenge and an opportunity for archaeological heritage management, and were considered in a number of papers from the 2023 EAC symposium and are now published here.
{"title":"New Challenges: Archaeological heritage management and the archaeology of the 18th to 20th centuries. Foreword","authors":"Alex Hale, Thomas Kersting","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.1","url":null,"abstract":"In many places across Europe, it has long been common practice to protect, preserve and research monuments of the recent past. The many ways to approach archaeologies of the near present and recent past creates both a challenge and an opportunity for archaeological heritage management, and were considered in a number of papers from the 2023 EAC symposium and are now published here.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140271343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article presents research on the material remains of Nazi and post-war communist prison and forced labour camps in West Bohemia (1939-1945 and 1949-1961). The location of a sample of 35 camps was carried out using historical evidence and aerial images from the 1940s and 1950s. Non-invasive surveys and small-scale excavations of selected camps revealed the preservation of the archaeological record and its attributes, which are closely linked to the subsequent use of the sites. The spatial context showed an interconnection of the camp system with WWII as well as Cold War armament production. The heritage protection of these sites, the current state of memorials and the contemporary utilisation of the camp areas has also been examined. Research has shown the potential of neglected archaeological evidence of places of mass repressions, where crimes against humanity were committed by totalitarian regimes in the former Czechoslovakia. It has also revealed the disturbing fact that these sites have been disappearing at an alarming rate without any documentation, as a result of development and construction activities.
{"title":"Preservation and heritage protection of the archaeological remains of prison and forced labour camps from the period of Nazi occupation and the Communist era in West Bohemia","authors":"Pavel Vařeka","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.17","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents research on the material remains of Nazi and post-war communist prison and forced labour camps in West Bohemia (1939-1945 and 1949-1961). The location of a sample of 35 camps was carried out using historical evidence and aerial images from the 1940s and 1950s. Non-invasive surveys and small-scale excavations of selected camps revealed the preservation of the archaeological record and its attributes, which are closely linked to the subsequent use of the sites. The spatial context showed an interconnection of the camp system with WWII as well as Cold War armament production. The heritage protection of these sites, the current state of memorials and the contemporary utilisation of the camp areas has also been examined. Research has shown the potential of neglected archaeological evidence of places of mass repressions, where crimes against humanity were committed by totalitarian regimes in the former Czechoslovakia. It has also revealed the disturbing fact that these sites have been disappearing at an alarming rate without any documentation, as a result of development and construction activities.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140280480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Contemporary archaeology was one of the topics addressed within a large study to improve understanding of archaeological heritage management in the Mediterranean basin by the pubarchMED project. While 19th and early 20th century contexts are often studied, contemporary archaeology in the Mediterranean (especially post World War II period) still represents a challenge both for practitioners and heritage managers. This article delves into some structural issues of archaeological heritage management and archaeological practice of the contemporary world, disentangling the main challenges they reveal and the interesting questions they raise for archaeological practice.
{"title":"Managing Contemporary Archaeology in the Mediterranean: Challenges Observed from #pubarchMED","authors":"Jaime Almansa-Sánchez","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.3","url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary archaeology was one of the topics addressed within a large study to improve understanding of archaeological heritage management in the Mediterranean basin by the pubarchMED project. While 19th and early 20th century contexts are often studied, contemporary archaeology in the Mediterranean (especially post World War II period) still represents a challenge both for practitioners and heritage managers. This article delves into some structural issues of archaeological heritage management and archaeological practice of the contemporary world, disentangling the main challenges they reveal and the interesting questions they raise for archaeological practice.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140276956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent advances in machine learning and computer vision techniques have brought (semi-)automatic feature detection within reach of an increasing number of archaeologists and archaeological institutions, including those in Finland. These techniques improve our ability to detect and gather information on archaeological cultural heritage over vast areas in a highly efficient manner. However, the widespread adoption of such methods can also pose significant challenges for archaeological cultural heritage management, especially in relation to certain types of near-ubiquitous archaeological remains from the 17th-20th centuries.
{"title":"What Should We Do With These? Challenges related to (semi-)automatically detected sites and features. A note","authors":"Niko Anttiroiko","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.6","url":null,"abstract":"Recent advances in machine learning and computer vision techniques have brought (semi-)automatic feature detection within reach of an increasing number of archaeologists and archaeological institutions, including those in Finland. These techniques improve our ability to detect and gather information on archaeological cultural heritage over vast areas in a highly efficient manner. However, the widespread adoption of such methods can also pose significant challenges for archaeological cultural heritage management, especially in relation to certain types of near-ubiquitous archaeological remains from the 17th-20th centuries.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140279716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gediminas Petrauskas, Lijana Muradian, Augustina Kurilienė
After the Lithuanian National Revival in 1988 and the restoration of independence in 1990, the public on their own initiative searched for the remains of fallen anti-Soviet Lithuanian partisans (1944-1953), excavating the burial sites of partisan remains, their bunkers and dugouts. Such excavations prompted the need to establish regulations and procedures for the exhumation and transfer of the remains of victims of 20th-century conflicts and occupation regimes. Government resolutions adopted in 1992 obliged prosecutors, archaeologists, anthropologists and forensic medical experts to be involved in the exhumation procedure and to carry out the exhumation in accordance with the basic requirements of archaeological research. Owing to the restoration and destruction of authentic partisan bunkers and dugouts, the increase in archaeological investigations at 20th-century conflict sites, as well as the emergence of a distinct field of modern conflict archaeology, the 2022 revision of the Archaeological Heritage Management Regulation stipulated the necessity to carry out archaeological research prior to any excavation works at all 19th- and 20th-century conflict sites. Between 1995 and 2022, a total of 171 permits for archaeological excavations at 20th-century conflict sites were issued. Investigations were mostly carried out at the burial sites of Wehrmacht and Polish Home Army (Armia Krajowa) soldiers of the Second World War and Lithuanian partisans. Partisan bunkers, dugouts, campsites, battlefields also received considerable attention. Today, more than 1700 20th-century conflict sites have legal protection in Lithuania. These include Lithuanian Partisan War sites (mainly sites of death and burial), burial sites of soldiers from the First and Second World Wars, sites of massacres and burials of Jews, and other sites associated with the Soviet and Nazi occupation regimes. This article focuses on 20th-century conflict sites in Lithuania, examining issues of their protection, heritage conservation and archaeology, as well as current trends in archaeological research methodology.
{"title":"Archaeology of Modern Conflict and Heritage Legislation in Lithuania during Thirty Years of Restored Independence","authors":"Gediminas Petrauskas, Lijana Muradian, Augustina Kurilienė","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.13","url":null,"abstract":"After the Lithuanian National Revival in 1988 and the restoration of independence in 1990, the public on their own initiative searched for the remains of fallen anti-Soviet Lithuanian partisans (1944-1953), excavating the burial sites of partisan remains, their bunkers and dugouts. Such excavations prompted the need to establish regulations and procedures for the exhumation and transfer of the remains of victims of 20th-century conflicts and occupation regimes. Government resolutions adopted in 1992 obliged prosecutors, archaeologists, anthropologists and forensic medical experts to be involved in the exhumation procedure and to carry out the exhumation in accordance with the basic requirements of archaeological research. Owing to the restoration and destruction of authentic partisan bunkers and dugouts, the increase in archaeological investigations at 20th-century conflict sites, as well as the emergence of a distinct field of modern conflict archaeology, the 2022 revision of the Archaeological Heritage Management Regulation stipulated the necessity to carry out archaeological research prior to any excavation works at all 19th- and 20th-century conflict sites. Between 1995 and 2022, a total of 171 permits for archaeological excavations at 20th-century conflict sites were issued. Investigations were mostly carried out at the burial sites of Wehrmacht and Polish Home Army (Armia Krajowa) soldiers of the Second World War and Lithuanian partisans. Partisan bunkers, dugouts, campsites, battlefields also received considerable attention. Today, more than 1700 20th-century conflict sites have legal protection in Lithuania. These include Lithuanian Partisan War sites (mainly sites of death and burial), burial sites of soldiers from the First and Second World Wars, sites of massacres and burials of Jews, and other sites associated with the Soviet and Nazi occupation regimes. This article focuses on 20th-century conflict sites in Lithuania, examining issues of their protection, heritage conservation and archaeology, as well as current trends in archaeological research methodology.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140282638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
'Big Data' is a misunderstood but technically definable concept; it is large volume, unstructured, heterogenous information, that is being generated at a high velocity - which normally means it is being constantly updated in real time. And, in many situations, this is very difficult to work with; an analogy might be to compare the curated content of Netflix, which is a (very) large but structured data set, with the unending chaos of YouTube content, which is Big Data. The first part of this paper considers big data, and how it is defined and used, with the second part considering how large amounts of small data can be used in sociology as applied to archaeology.
{"title":"Big Data and Lots of Data are Not the Same Things: Small data sources in the social science of archaeologists","authors":"Kenneth Aitchison","doi":"10.11141/ia.65.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.65.3","url":null,"abstract":"'Big Data' is a misunderstood but technically definable concept; it is large volume, unstructured, heterogenous information, that is being generated at a high velocity - which normally means it is being constantly updated in real time. And, in many situations, this is very difficult to work with; an analogy might be to compare the curated content of Netflix, which is a (very) large but structured data set, with the unending chaos of YouTube content, which is Big Data. The first part of this paper considers big data, and how it is defined and used, with the second part considering how large amounts of small data can be used in sociology as applied to archaeology.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139632734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：