|
Conclusions. Conclusively, GIS are a very powerful tool of spatial analysis in
Archaeology. As a tool however, it is value-laden and this has been obvious in the orientation of
archaeological research. GIS can become a constitutive element of current archaeological theory,
as long as research moves towards new applications and a clear distinction is made between
objective explanation and interpretation through modeling.
Although the improvement of GIS technology will facilitate the implementation of more
sophisticated analyses, the gap between archaeological and GIS theory will still negatively affect
the successful incorporation of GIS in archaeological research. In order to overcome this
problem, a shift in GIS research interest towards specific archaeological problems should take
place, embodying archaeological methodology issues and theories and translating them to a body
of archaeology-focused GIS tools. The systematic exploration of these functions within the
domains ofontology, visualization and time can reveal new ways for the organization,analysis
and representation of archaeological data. This can be reinforced by effectively using the
experience of the current archaeological focused applications, in order to record the needs of
contemporary archaeological research, point the problematic issues of current analysis and
declare the expectations of such a conjunction.
References:
[1] Bailey, G.N., ―Concepts of Time in Quaternary Prehistory‖, Annual review of Anthropology
12, 1983, pp.165-192.
[2] Blok, C., ―Monitoring Change: Characteristics of Dynamic Geo-spatial Phenomena for
Visual Exploration‖ in Ch. Freska et al. Spatial Cognition II, 2000, LNAI 1849: Berlin, pp. 16-
30.
[3] British Archaeological Jobs Resource (BAJR), General Guide to Archaeology in the
Planning Process, 2005. http://www.bajr.org/ DeveloperWeb/Planning.htm
[4] Doerr, M., Hunter, J. & Lagoze, C., ―Towards a Core Ontology for Information
Integration‖, in Doerr, M., Sarris, A. (eds.), The Digital Heritage of Archaeology - Proceedings
of the 30th CAA Conference, Heraklion, Crete, April 2002, Hellenic Ministry of Culture, Archive
of Monuments and Publications: Athens.http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v04/i/Doerr/
[5] Dykes, J., MacEachren, A. M., & Kraak, M.-J. (Eds.)., Exploring Geovisualization, 2005,
Elsevier: Amsterdam.
[6] Gaffney, V., Stancic, Z. & Watson, H., ―The Impact of GIS on Archaeology: a Personal
Perspective‖ in Lock, G. & Stancic, Z. (eds.) Archaeology & Geographic Information Systems: a
European Perspective, 1995, Taylor & Francis: London, pp.211-229.
[7] Gidlow, J., ―Archaeological Computing and Disciplinary Theory‖ in Lock, G. & Brown, K.
(eds.) On the Theory and Practice of Archaeological Computing, 2000, Oxford Uni. Committee
for Archaeology: Oxford, pp.23-30.
14
[8] Gillings, M. & Goodrick, G. T., ―Sensuous and Reflexive GIS: Exploring Visualisation and
VRML‖, Internet Archaeology 1, 1996. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue1/gillings_toc.html
[9] Harris, T. M. & Lock, G. R., ‗Towards an Evaluation of GIS in European Archaeology: the
Past, Present and Future of Theory and Applications‘ in Lock, G. & Stancic, Z. (eds.)
Archaeology & Geographic Information Systems: a European Perspective, 1995, Taylor &
Francis: London, pp.349-365.
[10] Hodder, I., The Archaeological Process: An Introduction, 1999, Blackwell Books: Oxford.
[11] Karlsson, H., ―Time for an Archaeological ‗Time-Out?‘‖, in Karlsson, H. (ed.) It‘s About
Time: The Concept of Time In Archaeology, 2001, Bricoleur Press: Göteborg, pp.45-59
[12] Lock, G., ―Archaeological Computing, Archaeological Theory and Moves Towards
Contextualism‖ in Huggett, J. & Ryan, N. (eds.) Computer Applications and Quantitative
Methods in Archaeology 1994 - BAR International Series 600, 1995, Hadrian Books: Oxford,
pp.13-8.
[13] Lucas, G., Critical approaches to fieldwork: contemporary and historical archaeological
practice, 2001, Routledge: London & N.Y.
[14] Madsen, T., ―ArchaeoInfo. An Object Oriented information system for archaeological
excavations‖, Proccedings of the 30th CAA conference, Vienna, Austria, April 2003.
[15] Marble, D. F., ―The Potential Methodological Impact of Geographic Information Systems
on the Social Sciences‖ in Allen, K. M. S., Green, S. W. & Zubrow, E. B. W. (eds.) Interpreting
Space: GIS and Archaeology, 1990, Taylor and Francis: London, pp.9-21.
[16] Maloy, M. A. & Dean, D. J., ―An Accuracy Assessment of Various GIS-Based Viewshed
Delineation Techniques‖, Photogrammetric Enginnering and Remote Sensing 67, 2001,
pp.1293-8.
[17] Ryan, N., ―Managing Complexity: Archaeological Information Systems Past, Present and
Future‖. http:// www.cs.kent.ac.uk/ people/ staff/ nsr/ arch/ba as.html [18] Sellis et al., Spatio-
Temporal Databases: The CHOROCHRONOS Approach, 2004. Springer: Berlin.
[19] Smith, B. & Mark, D.M. ―Geographicalcategories: an ontological investigation‖,
Ιnternational Journal of Geographical Information Science, Vol. 15, no. 7, 2001, pp.591-612.
[20] Stoter, J.E. & Zlatanova, S., ―3D GIS: Where are we standing?‖, Joint Workshop on
Spatial, Temporal and Mutli-dimensional Data Modelling and Analysis in Quebec, Canada,
2003.
[21] Wheatley, D. & Gillings, M., SpatialTechnology and Archaeology: The Archaeological
Applications of GIS, 2002, Taylor & Francis: London.
[22] Witcher, R. E., ―GIS and Landscapes of Perception‖ in Gillings, M., Mattingly, D. & Van
Dalen, J. (eds.) Geographical Information Systems and Landscape Archaeology – The
Archaeology of Mediterranean Landscapes 3, 1999, Oxbow Books: Oxford, pp.13-22. [23]
Zlatanova S., Rahman A. A. & Pilouk M., ―Trends in 3D GIS development‖, Journal of
Geospatial Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2002. http://www.gdmc.nl/zlatanova/thesis/html/refer/
s/SZ_AR_MP_JGE02.pdf
[24] Zubrow, E. B. W., ―Contemplating Space: a Commentary on Theory‖ in Allen, K. M. S.,
Green, S. W. & Zubrow, E. B. W. (eds.) Interpreting Space: GIS and Archaeology, 1990, Taylor
and Francis: London, pp.67-72.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
