… this blog
This site takes its name from a proposition that digital archaeologists should have a better understanding of the nature of the computational turn in archaeology. All too often, what passes for introspection really consists of a discussion about why and how a particular tool was used within a specific context. Virtually all reflective computer-using archaeologists seek to demonstrate a knowledgeable application of the tools we use. But is this sufficient? It risks losing sight of the broader context from which these applications are derived and within which they are used. Information technologies are socially charged – there are issues of control, surveillance, power, politics, order, and structure associated with them, which in turn influence how archaeological knowledge is created, represented, manipulated, modeled, and understood. This is what an introspective approach to digital archaeology seeks to investigate, and in the process, evaluate the intellectual core and identity of the subject.
(For more on this, see J. Huggett (2015) ‘A manifesto for an introspective digital archaeology’, Open Archaeology, 1(1), pp. 86-95).
… me
My main research interests are concerned with the social and philosophical implications of information technologies in archaeology. I am interested in the nature, development, impact and implications of information technologies in relation to the archaeological discipline and their effects on our understanding of the past. I have written about the relationships between archaeology, archaeological theory, and the technological representations of archaeological knowledge – how that knowledge is created, manipulated, modeled, and understood, and how that has changed with the introduction of new information technologies.
Jeremy Huggett
