understanding roman table ware distributions in the mediterranean: an exploratory and confirmatory...
DESCRIPTION
Paper presented at the HESTIA conference 2 July 2010 at the University of Oxford.Roman table ware distributions are traditionally explored through their presence in specific places and visualised as dots on a map. As such they seem to represent distinct entities that do not relate, other than in their relative proximity. This paper challenges an exclusively geographical perspective by proposing a networks approach for exploring ceramic distributions. It states that it is equally informing to explore the dynamics between physical and relational space. There can be no doubt that places and people in the past were connected to each other, and this paper will explore to what extent this connectivity is reflected in the relationships between ceramic data. In order to understand the nature of this connectivity it is necessary to explore the structure of pottery distributions.This paper aims at addressing the following issues:To what extent can the relationships between table ware sherds inform us of processes that led to their distribution as we know it?How can topological and geographical networks complement each other in understanding such processes?The ICRATES database of table wares from the Roman East (Prof. Jeroen Poblome, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven), containing exhaustive information on over 20,000 published sherds, will allow for these issues to be tested. Firstly, this paper will illustrate how analysing ceramic distributions as networks of interactions can help to identify the general structure and local patterns in a complex dataset. Secondly, the potential of network analysis for testing a geographical hypothesis will be evaluated. The results of both types of analyses will be confronted to validate the geographical hypothesis with ceramic data and to explain some of the patterns that emerged from the topological approach. As such, this paper aims to start discussions on comparing archaeological and historical networks generated from different data types.TRANSCRIPT
Understanding Roman table ware distributions in the Mediterranean
an exploratory and confirmatory network analysis of the ICRATES database
Tom Brughmans
Space VS topology
Bes 2007
● To what extent can the relationships between table ware sherds inform us of processes that led to their distribution as we know it?
● How can topological and geographical networks complement each other in understanding such processes?
ICRATES
The ICRATES database of table wares from the Roman East(Prof. Jeroen Poblome, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)
Nearly 30,000 sherds
Identifying meaningful relationships
Understand the complexity of this archaeological dataset
Explore the nature of the economic information stored in the relationships between ceramic data
Understand the dynamics between physical and relational space
→ Relational network of co-presence, representing pottery distribution patterns
→ Geographical network of distance, representing a hypothesis of shortest-distance trade routes
Pottery distribution:co-presence networks
Sites 125-100 BC
Sites 100-75 BC
Sites 75-50 BC
Sites 50-25 BC
Sites 25-0 BC
Forms 75-50 BC
ESA
Forms 75-50 BC
ESD
ESC
ESA
Geographical hypothesis:distance network
Hypothesis:
“Roman table ware vessels were transported during every part of their life
cycle over trade routes chosen to minimise travel distance”
Beta skeletons
Transportation ESC
ConclusionTopological/exploratory● Highlights large and small patterns● Processes in the ancient past and academic processes● Visualisation and analysis
Geographical/confirmatory● Visualise geographical network● Structure of hypothesis
Space VS topology● Validate hypothesis● Identifies non-spatial structure
Contact: [email protected]
Presentation, bibliography, and more info on:http://archaeologicalnetworks.wordpress.com/
ICRATES:http://www.arts.kuleuven.be/icrates/
Acknowledgements: thanks to Prof. Jeroen Poblome, Prof. Simon Keay, Dr. Graeme Earl and Leif Isaksen
Selected bibliography:
BES, P. and POBLOME, J. 2006: A new look at old data: the ICRATES platform. In Malfitana, D., Poblome, J. and Lund , J. (eds.), Old pottery in a new century: innovating perspectives on Roman pottery studies. Catania: Monografie dell’Istituto per i Beni Archeologici e Monumentali, 22-24 April 2004. (Rome, Bretschneider), 141-165.BES, P.M. and POBLOME, J. 2008: (Not) see the Wood for the Trees? 19,000+ Sherds of Tablewares and what we can do with them. In Biegert, S. (ed.), Rei Cretariae Romanae Fautores Acta 40. (Bonn), 505-514.BRUGHMANS, T. 2010 (In print): Connecting the dots : towards archaeological network analysis. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 29.3.
Comparing data types
“Urban connectivity in Iron Age and Roman southern Spain”Prof. Simon KeayDr. Graeme Earl
http://www.soton.ac.uk/archaeology/acrg/acrg_research_urbanconnectivity.html
Indegree Visibility Early Imperial period
Ceramics grouped Early Imperial period
Euergetism types
Architecture grouped
Sculpture Early Imperial period