Row, row, row your boat gently… upstream: a methodological approach to access Portuguese bioarchaeological data using a computer database

CAA, Oslo, 29th March – 2nd April, 2016 S.4 - Databases and archives – how do we handle the digital archives?

Row, row, row your boat gently… upstream: a methodological approach to access Portuguese bioarchaeological data using a computer database Cristina Barroso Cruz2 , Ana Seabra1,2 , Filipa Neto1,3 1 – Research Centre of Anthropology and Health 2 – Interdisciplinary Center of Archaeology Human Behavior and Evolution 3 – General Directorate for Cultural Heritage

Presentation structure 1. General Directorate for Cultural Heritage and bioarchaeological remains and information: legal, scientific and research context; 2. Endovélico: nation wide archaeological database and its potentialities 3. Limitations to the Endovélico use: research and management of the remains 4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico: identifying and correcting fragilities 5. The project proposal

1. General Directorate for Cultural Heritage 1.2 Attributes RD North

RD Center

Management Protection Conservation DGPC

Portuguese cultural heritage RD Alentejo

Regional directorates

RD Algarve

1. General Directorate for Cultural Heritage 1.3 Goals for cultural heritage - To ensure a proper management, salvage, rescue and valorization of archaeological heritage - To guarantee the preservation of national archeological archives - To maintain an up-to-date inventory of archaeological remains on national territory. - To implement a national GIS of archaeological finds and sites - To regulate the procedures to be used on all archaeological work

Normalization

Accessibility

Timely data

1. General Directorate for Cultural Heritage 1.3 Archaeological remains – Legal context Basic Law of Cultural Heritage (2001) “all archaeological remains with civilization or cultural values should be protected…” “the remains from archaeological sites are considered national heritage...” “the state should promote information and access to this remains...”

1. General Directorate for Cultural Heritage 1.3 Archaeological remains – Legal context Law for Archaeological works (2014) “redefinition and clarification of the heritage management policies and divulgation of the archaeological results…” “regulating and normalizing archaeological activities…” Thus ensuring the continous development and update of the national archaeological database - Endovélico

2. Endovélico: the archaeological database

Endovélico was an Iron-Age God in Iberian Península. It’s worship prevailed until the 5th century AC.

2.1 History and goals

2.1.1 The bioarchaeological module

- Being developed since 1997;

Developed in 2006 in a response to the:

- Gathers information on nationwide archaeological records; - Main source of information from technical field reports; - Associated to a GIS software; - Managed by DGPC;

- Increase of bioarchaeological data; - Scientific development of Bioarchaeology in Portugal; - Legal protection and use for archaeological remains

Bioarchaeological database with unique features and potential

2. Endovélico: the archaeological database 2.2 The innovative feature of the Bioarchaeological module of Endovélico Accessibility: centralized and state managed data; Geographically: gathers data comprising all the national territory; Historically: ranges a wide chronological scope, (Pre-historical periods to contemporary contexts) Bioarchaeologically: gathers information regarding all dimentions of Past Populations: -

Paleodemographic profiles; Morphological data; Paleopathological inferences; Funerary archaeology information; Sociocultural elements;

Abillity to make sense out the bioarchaeological data to better understand past populations

2. Endovélico: the archaeological database 2.3 The scientific and research potential of the bioarchaeological database Through the analysis of the bioarchaeological data in Endovélico it would be possible to identify and/or determine biosocial patterns: Health and disease Migration Demographic Geographical Social & Cultural ...

3. Limitations to the use of the Endovélico bioarchaeological module 3.1 Is it too good to be true? Lack of resources to up-date data systematically: - Up-dated systematically only in 2014 (Seabra et al., 2016); Computer structure set for archaeological data and reflecting the 1990 knowledge of bioarchaeology: - Still manageable but on the verge of becoming dated; Problems in the reports are reflected in the database: - Cruz, 2012 - Cruz et al., 2015

(Seabra et al., 2016 @ CAA 2016)

3. Limitations to the use of the Endovélico bioarchaeological module 3.2 The limitations Cruz, 2012

1994

Sample: Reports: 33 Individuals: 464

2001 1999 Law 270/99: mandatory presence Basic Law for of a Physical Cultural anthropologist Heritage

Time frame: 1994 - 2007 2006

2007

Endovélico bioarchaeo. module

Data gathered and analyzed: Space and time context: 6cat. Taphonomy & Preservation: 21cat. Demographic: 13cat Funerary archaeology: 85cat. Paleopathology:17cat. Term

Meaning Subject + space

Cruz, Neto & Seabra, 2015 Data gathered: Sample: analysis of the Reports: 11 different uses of Terminology: 3 terms specific technical and scientific terminology Time frame: in field reports 2000 - 2014

Problematic time frame Very thorough analysis (more than 140 categories)

Deposition type Internment

Skeleton The action of burying Physical context

Inhumation

Deposit

The action of burying Deposition type Inhumation The action of burying

Small sample (11 reports, 9 authors); Short list of terms; Qualitative analysis

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.1 Identifying fragilities Inconsistencies / Lack of uniformity Structure - Different perceptions of what a field report is (field vs laboratory);

Work upstream Bioarchaeological field reports

Terminology - Literary use of terms vs scientific use of terms; Content - Different perceptions of what a field report should contain;;

The main problem are the reports

Results downstream Computer database

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.2 New field report analysis – preliminary results Goals: Specific goal: -To identify, at a larger scale the main fragilities of the bioarchaeological field reports; - Develop a strategy to overcome this problems so consistency in report produced can be achieved and the bioarchaeological module can be used; Material and methods: Sample: N(reports)= 27 N(individuals)= 151 N(authores)= 15 Time range: 2002 – 2015 Geographic scope: 13/18 districts

Variables: - Taphonomy; - Funerary - Preservation: anthropology - Inventory: - Paleopathology - Graphic registration: - Deposit place - Biological profiles: - Associated archaeological materials

Referred / Not referred Present / Absent

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.3 Results The good Body deposition Legs position Arms position

Funerary anthropology

Grave orientation Grave type Associated archaeological remains Paleopathology

Biological profiles

Age at death assessement methodologies Age at death assessement Photography

Inventory Taphonomy and preservation

Graphic representation Representativity 0 Referred / Present

20

40

60

Unclear / Doesn't apply

80

100

Not referred / Absent

120

140

160

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.2 Results The bad Osteological material

Deposit location

Skull position

Funerary anthropology Re-use of funerary space

Sexual diagnosis assessement methodologies

Biological profiles Taphonomy and preservation

Sexual diagnosis assessement

Taphonomy 0 Referred / Present

20

40

60

Unclear / Doesn't apply

80

100

120

Not referred / Absent

140

160

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.2 Results The ugly

Inventory

Grave class

Field register sheet

Funerary anthropology Descriptive

Taphonomy and preservation

Conservation

0

20

Referred / Present

40

60

80

Unclear / Doesn't apply

100

120

Not referred / Absent

140

160

4. Developing a new approach to the use of Endovélico 4.3 Discussion Positive aspects in report recording: - Several categories are being consistently referred: - biological profiles; - funerary anthropology Negative aspects in report recording: - The information not present, such as the deposit of osteological material and the conservation state is extremely relevant for researchers and/or scientific posterior analysis Other aspects that were not assessed: - The difficulty to insert in closed categories subjective data; - The necessity to adequate the module to a more bioarchaeological approach (individual first) instead of an archaeological approach (structure first)

5. Project proposal To promote a reflection about the epistemology of bioarchaeology in Portugal

Develop a bioarchaeological thesaurus

Define field procedures

Create standards for reporting bioarchaeological information Stantardize bioarchaeological data

Quantitative and qualitative data analysis

Identify biological and sociocultural patterns

Open access

Make the bioarchaeological module a up to date databasenacional

Understand past population through bioarchaeological data

Create a national structure to accommodate and conserve and study osteological material

5. Project proposal 5.1 In conclusion We have a good base of work with a very interesting research and informative potential regarding past populations… … but there are important problems to overcome: - How to alert the archaeological and anthropological community to the relevance of consistency/normalization of information produced? - How to categorize subjective data, such as cultural elements? - What is the best database structure (close fields? open fields? both?); - How to treat data so that culture and language aren’t obstacles? - How to overcome the 90’s database structure with no money? We welcome suggestions to improve our process and/or to adjust our database!

References Cruz, C. 2011. Viver a morte em Portugal: o potencial informativo dos relatórios antropológicos de campo (1994-2007). PhD dissertation in Biological Anthropology. Univ. of Coimbra Cruz, C., et al. (2015) Piecing together terminology in Bioarchaeology: defining concepts. CHNT19, Wein, Austria. November 3-5, 2014 DUARTE, C.; NETO, F. 2010. O Novo m—dulo de Bioantropologia no sistema do IGESPAR. 8.¼ Encontro de Arqueologia do Algarve – A Arqueologia e as outras Ciências, Câmara Municipal de Silves, Portugal, 21-23 de Outubro. DUARTE, C.; NETO, F.; 2013. Vest’gios humanos no sistema nacional de informa‹o arqueol—gica. II International Meeting on Archeology of Transition, The Funerary World, Universidade de ƒvora, Portugal 29-30 de Abril. IPA. 2002. Endovélico - Sistema de Gestão e Informação Arqueológica. Revista Portuguesa de Arqueologia. 5(1):277-283 Giesen, M. (ed.) 2013. Curating Human Remains Caring for the Dead in the United Kingdom. Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer. pp: 1-12 Giesen, M, White, L. 2013. 1. International perspectives towards human remains collection. In: (ed.) Giesen, 2013, pp: 13-24 Giesen, M, et al. 2013. 5. Dead and forgotten? Some observations on human remains documentation in the UK. In: (ed.) Giesen, 2013. pp: 53-64 Mays, S. 2002. 14. After bone report: the long-term fate of the skeletal collection. In: (eds) Mays, S, Brickley, M, Dodwell, N. Human bones from archaeological sites: guidelines for producing assessment documents and analytical reports. London: BABAO. pp: 46-47 Mays, S. 2010. Human osteoarchaeology in the UK 2001-2007: a bibliometric perspective. Int J Osteoarchaeol. 20:192-204 Neto, F, Seabra, A. (in press) What to do with Data? The application of an Information system for the collection of anthropological and funerary data from archaeological sites. CHNT19, Wein, Austria. Neto, F, Duarte, C. 2013. Questions surrounding the management of human osteological remains from archaeological contexts. I BAM, University of Coimbra, Portugal Redfern, R, Bekvalac, J. 2013. The Museum of London: an overview of policies and practice. In: (ed.) Giesen, M. Curating Human Remains Caring for the Dead in the UK. Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer. pp: 87-98 Roberts, C, Cox, M. 2003. Health and disease in Britain: from prehistory to the present day. Gloucester: Sutton Publishing Roberts, C, Mays, S. 2011. Study and restudy of curated skeletal collections in bioarchaeology: a perspective on the UK and the implication for future curation of human remains. Int J Osteoarchaeol. 21:626-630