I recently used a citation analysis of the Computer Applications in Archaeology annual conference proceedings as a proxy for examining the spread of digital archaeology across the broader discipline (Huggett 2024). Admittedly to my surprise, the results seemed to show that the debates and methods of digital archaeology had significantly infiltrated the wider archaeological discipline, at least as evidenced in citations of CAA papers in books and journals outside of digital archaeology (although not conference proceedings).
But as if to burst my newly optimistic bubble about the influence of the work of digital archaeologists across the broader discipline, a chapter recently appeared which sought to examine the influence of digital technologies on archaeology (Ribeiro 2025). It does so almost entirely without reference to any work in the field of digital archaeology: Hacıgüzeller et al. (2021) is the only ‘digital’ reference in the piece. It’s perhaps why Ribeiro can boldly claim that “… little has been said about how technology has influenced the practice of archaeology itself.” (Ribeiro 2025, 45) since discussions and debates within digital archaeology on that topic appear to be entirely overlooked. But to put that aside, it does mean that the chapter provides an interesting viewpoint on digital matters from a perspective specifically outwith digital archaeology itself, and so, in a way, shines a different light on digital technology in archaeology. It’s a perspective that those of us working in digital archaeology can respond to even if, in many cases, we may think we have already done so.