Daniël van Helden | University of Leicester (original) (raw)

Edited Volumes by Daniël van Helden

Researching the Archaeological Past through Imagined Narratives: A Necessary Fiction, 2020

Archaeological interpretation is an imaginative act. Stratigraphy and artefacts do not tell us wh... more Archaeological interpretation is an imaginative act. Stratigraphy and artefacts do not tell us what the past was like; that is the task of the archaeologist. The diverse group of contributors to this volume address the relationship between archaeology and imagination through the medium of historical fiction and fictive techniques, both as consumers and as producers. The fictionalisation of archaeological research is often used to disseminate the results of scholarly or commercial archaeology projects for wider public outreach. Here, instead, the authors focus on the question of what benefits fiction and fictive techniques, as inspiration and method, can bring to the practice of archaeology itself. The contributors, a mix of archaeologists, novelists and other artists, advance a variety of theoretical arguments and examples to advance the case for the value of a reflexive engagement between archaeology and fiction. Themes include the similarities and differences in the motives and methods of archaeologists and novelists, translation, empathy, and the need to humanise the past and diversify archaeological narratives. The authors are sensitive to the epistemological and ethical issues surrounding the influence of fiction on researchers and the incorporation of fictive techniques in their work. Sometimes dismissed as distracting just-so stories, or even as dangerously relativistic narratives, the use of fictive techniques has a long history in archaeological research and examples from the scholarly literature on many varied periods and regions are considered. The volume sets out to bring together examples of these disparate applications and to focus attention on the need for explicit recognition of the problems and possibilities of such approaches, and on the value of further research about them.

Chapters by Daniël van Helden

Writing remains: new intersections of archaeology, literature and science, 2021

Researching the Archaeological Past through Imagined Narratives: A Necessary Fiction, 2020

Humans are the “storytelling animal” (Gottschall 2012). We weave narratives to shape and make sen... more Humans are the “storytelling animal” (Gottschall 2012). We weave narratives to shape and make sense of the world around us—past, present and future. Over the last 20 years, there has been a resurgence of interest across the humanities and social sciences in the role of narrative in the creation, communication and consumption of meaning; there are now also growing calls in the sciences to learn from this research and to harness the techniques of narrative storytelling for more effective presentation and dissemination of scientific research (e.g. Dahlstrom 2014; Martinez-Conde & Macknik 2017). At the intersection of the humanities and the sciences, archaeology has a particularly well-developed literature on the role of narrative, built on a long tradition of critical reflection on reasoning and writing about the material remains of the past (e.g. Evans 1989; Hodder 1989; Terrell 1990; Pluciennik 1999, 2015; Joyce et al. 2002; Holtorf 2010. In part, this attention reflects the challenges of working with rich but incomplete, and often ambiguous, archaeological evidence that both demands and defies ordering into meaningful accounts. The result has been great experimentation with, and analysis of, different narrative forms. It is one specific form—fictional narrative—that is the focus of the present volume.

Researching the Archaeological Past through Imagined Narratives: A Necessary Fiction, 2020

We live in troubled times. Growing social and economic inequality has fostered political polarisa... more We live in troubled times. Growing social and economic inequality has fostered political polarisation and a resurgence of nationalism; identities are increasingly entrenched and contested; and urgent global crises such as climate change are kicked down road as problems for future generations. Understanding, of other people’s perspectives, it seems, is in short supply. In this context, it is unsurprising that empathy (or the “empathy deficit”, Krznaric 2014: xix) should have become such a hot topic. Over the past 20 years, politicians, religious leaders, lifestyle coaches and cultural influencers have regularly identified the need for greater societal empathy (de Waal 2009; Rifkin 2010). Academic research on the subject, in the humanities, social sciences and sciences, has also boomed during this period. Writers of fiction, however, have long been alert to the importance of empathy. Novels centred around heroes (or anti-heroes) with whom the reader has little or no empathy are few and far between. This is no less true for historical fiction, from Jean Auel’s (1980) The Clan of the Cave Bear to Scott O’Dell’s (1960) Island of the Blue Dolphins. Archaeologists also have turned their attention to empathy, but the subject has not stimulated the same level of interest and research as found in cognate disciplines such as anthropology, history and classics. In this chapter, we examine some of the recent research on empathy, focusing on issues of definition, ethics and epistemology, and assess the current and potential uses of empathy in archaeology, with a particular focus on the role of fictive techniques.

Papers by Daniël van Helden

Forum Kritische Archäologie, 2022

Archaeology is very interdisciplinary in its orientation. Therefore, it presents a good case stud... more Archaeology is very interdisciplinary in its orientation. Therefore, it presents a good case study for thinking about interdisciplinary cooperation. Most, if not all, problems with interdisciplinary cooperation ultimately reduce to problems of communication. An important part of these is due to cultural differences between academic disciplines. Real cultural differences underlie disciplinary divides, and these shape the ways people communicate. Such cultural differences can cause serious (and difficult to detect) communication problems. With careful attention to communication that is sensitive to disciplinary cultural differences, a lot of problems that are practical in nature but are fundamental to effective cooperative research can be mitigated. The importance of translators in interdisciplinary research teams is highlighted. Archaeology can use its slowly growing experience with intercultural communication to enhance its interdisciplinary effectiveness. In order to reap such benefits, it is important that attention is paid to training and employing people with a broad interdisciplinary basis, so that there are people equipped to fill the important role of translator.

Entropy, 2021

In this article, we consider a version of the challenging problem of learning from datasets whose... more In this article, we consider a version of the challenging problem of learning from datasets whose size is too limited to allow generalisation beyond the training set. To address the challenge, we propose to use a transfer learning approach whereby the model is first trained on a synthetic dataset replicating features of the original objects. In this study, the objects were smartphone photographs of near-complete Roman terra sigillata pottery vessels from the collection of the Museum of London. Taking the replicated features from published profile drawings of pottery forms allowed the integration of expert knowledge into the process through our synthetic data generator. After this first initial training the model was fine-tuned with data from photographs of real vessels. We show, through exhaustive experiments across several popular deep learning architectures, different test priors, and considering the impact of the photograph viewpoint and excessive damage to the vessels, that the ...

Internet Archaeology, May 1, 2018

Entropy, 2021

Internet Archaeology, May 2018

This article aims to demonstrate how an ontology can be constructed to encompass many of the crit... more This article aims to demonstrate how an ontology can be constructed to encompass many of the criteria needed for more consumption-orientated approaches to Roman tablewares. For this it demonstrates how a dataset in a relational database can be organised for the format and capabilities of an ontology, and then how these data are input into the ontology model. Finally it includes some sample analyses to show the effectiveness of such an ontology for types of analyses that are relevant to this network.

Talks by Daniël van Helden

... 3. Shakeshaft, M. Developing a Pacing Strategy For The Ten Mile Time Trial. Internet article ... more ... 3. Shakeshaft, M. Developing a Pacing Strategy For The Ten Mile Time Trial. Internet article posted at http://web.archive.org/web/20051218194325/http://freespace.virgin. net/martin.shakeshaft/10tt.htm 4. Albertus, Y., et al. Effect ...

While boundaries between disciplines are indeed historical relics, and therefore not a natural gi... more While boundaries between disciplines are indeed historical relics, and therefore not a natural given, to call them arbitrary is perhaps an overstatement. In archaeology we are used to the idea that although human behaviour is not law-governed in the same way that natural processes are, neither are the results of this behaviour random. Thus, while many outcomes are possible from a historical situation, they are not equally probable. I would argue that, even though the exact position of disciplinary boundary is arbitrary, coarse divisions do exist with the sciences (understood inclusively to contain the humanities as well as the natural sciences).
It is these underlying divisions that really characterise the challenge of interdisciplinarity. People communicate and think in different ways in different fields. This should not be overstated, it does not reflect some Kuhnian incommensurability, but through training people are ‘disciplined’ in ways that are specific to their chosen field. This divergent disciplining is like speaking different languages; it is not impossible to communicate, but it takes effort. Most problems with interdisciplinarity reduce to such communication difficulties; from misunderstandings within projects to different ways of communicating results (i.e. problems with publishing in outlets that are judged by disciplinary codes).
Fundamentally, the only solution to a communications problem is more communication. Using real-life examples, I will argue that there is a crucial role for ‘translators’ in truly successful interdisciplinary work. It is such translators that, through speaking multiple disciplinary languages, enable bridging the, very real, communication gaps. Without them, interdisciplinarity is often just juxtaposition of different disciplinary results without much connection between them.
Interdisciplinarity has real potential, but it requires explicit, dedicated, attention to communication to be more than a fashionable buzzword.

To say that pottery remains from the Roman period are rich is to seriously understate the case. I... more To say that pottery remains from the Roman period are rich is to seriously understate the case. In many ways, their very abundance is a hindrance to their full exploitation. With current practices, comprehensive study of even moderately sized pottery assemblages is prohibitively expensive. Yet these assemblages potentially hold important information about their use in life that would be very useful for our understanding of the past.

To make analysis of such large assemblages feasible, we need to reduce the specialist time required to record them. The Arch-I-Scan project aims to contribute to this goal by employing machine learning AI software to automatically identify and record Roman pottery remains. Using photographs taken with handheld devices, such as smartphones, we aim to train the AI system to learn to recognise the different typological categories and record them. This could potential save time and funds, not least because recording on these devices can be carried out by non-specialists, freeing up specialist time for more interesting analyses.

This paper outline the design process, data gathering as well as the important concomitant research-ethical questions that come with research and archaeological work using AI technology.

Material excavated a century ago has no less bearing on the past than newly unearthed data. So ar... more Material excavated a century ago has no less bearing on the past than newly unearthed data. So archaeology is in the relatively rare position that century-old data is relevant to our current questions. Of course, today we excavate –and administrate! – to different standards and with very different questions in mind, but problematically, we cannot re-excavate old data. If we are to capitalise on archaeology’s extraordinary position of an ever expanding dataset, we need to include these legacy data into our analyses.
The upshot of this ever expanding mound of data is that it increasingly requires multiple people to effectively collate and analyse it. Using experience gained while developing an ontological database in the context of the Big Data on the Roman Table research network as illustration, I will touch on important issues of collaboration (streamlining goals within the project) and usability within and beyond a particular project. The latter two lead to the importance of flexible tools that will bear adaptation to use disparate data for different aims and questions. In other words, not only do we need to cooperate within a given project, but ideally also across projects and time if we are to avoid re-treading the same ground over and over again. In this paper, the tool I will be illustrating these points with will be the ontological database developed for the BDRT research network.

The relationship between archaeology and fiction go way back to Bulwer-Lytton’s (1834) Last days ... more The relationship between archaeology and fiction go way back to Bulwer-Lytton’s (1834) Last days of Pompeii or Gustave Flaubert’s (1862) Salammbô, but not just in the sense that archaeology has inspired writers to write novels about the archaeological past. From the very early days, archaeologists have been influenced by the novels they read about the very past they studied. The pushback against this influence is equally ancient, with fears of ‘tainting’ ‘proper’ archaeological writing with ‘unacademic’ influence or worries that the public at large will not know the difference between the two, resulting in a loss of standing for academic study of the archaeological past.
In this paper, which draws on work I have done with Robert Witcher (Durham University), I will provide a brief sketch of the history of archaeology’s engagement with fiction. This will inform an exploration of why archaeologists of the past and present have turned to fiction and what the benefits and risks of such a move are. I will argue that, in the words of Elphinstone and Wickham-Jones (2012), the differences between academic archaeology and historical fiction are “generic, not intrinsic” and that there are real advantages to opening up one’s ‘academic’ mind to fiction’s enrichment.

Archaeological research is often caught between two modes of analysis. Traditionally, we have int... more Archaeological research is often caught between two modes of analysis. Traditionally, we have interpreted our material in qualitative ways, in which the strength of argument is determined by how convincing each reader finds it. At the same time we hear periodic calls for formal quantified approaches, to allow for ‘proper testing’ of the patterns we suggest. As the size of datasets –and the computational capacity to deal with them– increase, this call is set to grow stronger. In this paper I will illustrate the potential of Fuzzy Set Theory for bridging this divergent set of pressures.
Fuzzy Set Theory (FST) allows us to formally test our theories while maintaining the analytical primacy of interpretation. This means we have an additional way of assessing arguments by formally examining the evidence for them. Using an already published and re-analysed case-study, I will demonstrate the basics of FST as well as its potential to formally explore our interpretations of archaeological patterns. Most importantly, however, I will show how, by forcing researchers to pin their colours to the mast regarding their assumptions in a much more explicit way, FST pushes us to create better theories and interpretations.

As researchers it falls to us to account for any potential biases in our own approaches. In this ... more As researchers it falls to us to account for any potential biases in our own approaches. In this session the focus is on the impact of our own background on these biases. But what if one’s entire way of thinking is fundamentally shaped by idiosyncratic influences? Looking at my own research into the limits of the suitability of the concept of identity for archaeological study of the past, I recognise the signatures of two very important people –both of them physicists. The questions I ask, the research I do into them and the answers I consider satisfactory are deeply coloured by their influence. In this paper I will seek to explain why my PhD is turning out the way it is through the lens of these influences.
What does placing my own research in this intellectual context reveal about the way in which it progresses or has progressed? Does such an idiosyncratic intellectual genealogy ultimately matter? In other words, what do others gain from hearing about the specifics of where my ideas came from? Is it the ideas that matter, or the –idiosyncratic– process by which they are generated?

In this paper I will illustrate the potential of Fuzzy Set Theory for analysing excavation data. ... more In this paper I will illustrate the potential of Fuzzy Set Theory for analysing excavation data. Using published data I will show some interesting new approaches and metrics for interpretation enabled by Fuzzy Set Theory. By juxtaposing Penelope Allison’s gender labels with indications of wealth I will explore interconnections and characteristics that are not available to traditional ‘crisp’ approaches. These are all targets for interpretation, which means that we can tell new and interesting stories.

In this paper I will go into the construction process of the ontology that was created for the Bi... more In this paper I will go into the construction process of the ontology that was created for the Big Data on the Roman Table (BDRT) network paper. This was based on the data from the Roman fort at Ellingen (Germany). These data were digitized from the original paper publication to an Excell spreadsheet for Penelope Allison’s Engendering Roman Military Spaces. The decisions in the conversion process of the Excell format to an ontology format will be discussed. I will also discuss the results from the application of the Visual Query Tool, created by Yi Hong, on the Ellingen data, showing the querying possibilities for excavation data.
Finally, I will go into a couple of aspects of the things I am working on with regard to using ontologies for my PhD project, especially dealing with Fuzzy Set Theory. I will discuss some of the changes I am making to the structure of the ontological database to incorporate non-ceramic data into it and the advantages of ontologies for such changes. Furthermore I will introduce the concept of reification vocabulary, which I will use to explore the effects of conceptual fuzziness as well as probabilistic inaccuracy on archaeological interpretation.

Researching the Archaeological Past through Imagined Narratives: A Necessary Fiction, 2020

Writing remains: new intersections of archaeology, literature and science, 2021

Researching the Archaeological Past through Imagined Narratives: A Necessary Fiction, 2020

Forum Kritische Archäologie, 2022

Entropy, 2021

Internet Archaeology, May 1, 2018

Entropy, 2021

Internet Archaeology, May 2018

This paper outline the design process, data gathering as well as the important concomitant research-ethical questions that come with research and archaeological work using AI technology.

In our work for our forthcoming volume on the uses of historical fiction for academic archaeology... more In our work for our forthcoming volume on the uses of historical fiction for academic archaeology, entitled A Necessary Fiction, Rob Witcher and I started off from the point that fiction can help us view history from a different point of view. By putting ourselves in the characters’ shoes we see history from their perspective rather than our own. This is, in fact, not radically different from the historicists admonishment to judge history on its own terms, i.e. that we should let go of our own views when judging the past.

However, Gadamer has criticised historicism as demanding an impossibility; we simply cannot relinquish our point of view. He has argued that understanding in the historical disciplines is advanced through a ‘fusion of horizons’ in which the horizon of the interpreter, made up of his or her prejudices (Vorurteilen), is first contrasted and subsequently fused with the horizon of the object of the interpretation. This fused horizon then represents our new pre-judgement horizon for our next interpretation.

Where does this leave our gut feeling that historical fiction can contribute to the understanding of the past? Can we try to fuse with a fictional horizon? And does this lead to an enhanced understanding of the past, or will we taint our horizon with fictional elements, which will continue to negatively influence our thinking?

I will illustrate these questions using examples of my own engagement with historical fiction and the effects that this has had on my own understanding of the past.

Fredrik Barth’s Ethnic Groups and Boundaries stands in an anthropological tradition that stems fr... more Fredrik Barth’s Ethnic Groups and Boundaries stands in an anthropological tradition that stems from the difficulty of defining anthropological groups on the ground. During the middle of the twentieth century it became apparent that the, previously widespread, concept of neat bounded groups could not be sustained and had to be rejected in favour of a more fluid conception of groups. No longer was there an essentialist core that defined groups by their members’ similarity, but group identities became instrumental, tools to further collective aims, but essentially without substance to them. This view has dominated anthropological and wider social scientific writing. There has been some opposition from scholars, such as A.P. Cohen (2002), and –notably –from many groups who feel that there is substance to their group. Lay concepts of group identity are notably more essentialist then most current academics’ conceptions allow. There exists a tension between the anthropological outsider’s view of groups and the emic perspective of groups’ members.
I will argue in this paper that part of this can be explained and the tension somewhat alleviated by using Fuzzy Set Theory (FST), a theory borrowed from mathematics, when conceptualising groups. While old essentialist notions of groups are too crisp to be usable, so too are their critics’. By demanding a crisp dividing line, they set essentialists an impossible task. The concept of FST reflects reality in that it does not yield neat dividing lines between groups, while allowing for a ‘real’, essentialist, core to define a group, or at least a way of defining the group in other ways than merely the collective of its members. FST sits well with Barth’s notion of a permeable boundary and it allows for more subtle thinking on social groups and social concepts in anthropology, archaeology, but wider social discussion as well.

Barth, F. 1969. Introduction. In F. Barth (ed.) Ethnic groups and boundaries, 9-38. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press.

Cohen, A.P. 2002. Epilogue. In V. Amit (ed.) Realizing community: concept, social relationships and sentiments,165-170. London: Routledge. Corner

In this talk I give a quick overview of an element my PhD research, which is provisionally entitl... more In this talk I give a quick overview of an element my PhD research, which is provisionally entitled Exploring the limits of the Archaeological applicability of the concept of identity. I will go through the argument structure of the thesis in order to contextualise the main focus of this short talk, which will be the results of one analysis carried out to gauge the way in which archaeology as a discipline has engaged with the term ‘identity’. By analysing a large body of journal publications I have attempted to get a grasp on the developments (or lack thereof) of archaeological use of the concept and to quantify some of the vague sense that most of us have about the state of the discipline.

This paper will discuss how an ontological database was built from artefact catalogues that were ... more This paper will discuss how an ontological database was built from artefact catalogues that were originally published in print and the converted into Excel spreadsheets. That is, the data used in this ontology are not ‘digitally born’ but have been digitised into spreadsheets which provide the bases for construction of the ontology. The sites in question are the Roman military forts and fortresses at Xanten (Vetera I), Rottweil (Ara Flavia I and II), at Oberstimm and at Ellingen. The Excel spreadsheets from each of these sites will have been compiled into a single ontology. This paper will address problems encountered in converting spreadsheets, with non-digitally borne data, into a single ontology. It will also discuss the advantages of the latter format and how this ontology can be best used to carry out the types of analyses discussed in this second workshop.

There are theories in other disciplines that most of us would agree are not viable candidates for... more There are theories in other disciplines that most of us would agree are not viable candidates for adoption into archaeology. Outside the context of the pub, I doubt anyone would argue for the archaeological merits of string theory. Yet beyond such extreme examples lies a grey scale of theories which could potentially be used in archaeology. How do we differentiate between successful ones and those that do not work? The answer lies in the middle ground that is the theme of the symposium.
Using my own research into the limits of the archaeological applicability of the concept of identity as a case, which illustrates the problem posed by the symposium’s theme, I will take a look at the process of evaluating success of a given theory. By looking at what has been done and what could still be done with the concept of identity to bridge the gap between big theory and detailed data I have tried to gauge how appropriate ‘identity’ is as an archaeological tool. An explicit awareness of the process by which we can evaluate theories’ merits for archaeology not only increases our efficiency with the limited resource of research effort, but also the potential of actually linking theory and data.

A session at the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference (TRAC) in March 2015 brought together a... more A session at the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference (TRAC) in March 2015 brought together a group of archaeologists and novelists (and archaeologist-novelists) to debate the value of historical fiction as an archaeological technique. The result was a lively discussion that left the participants (both speakers and audience) convinced that there was much more to be explored, and the need to reach out to a wider range of practitioners. Shortly after TRAC, Subjects and narratives in archaeology, a collection of papers edited by Van Dyke & Bernbeck, including short contributions on archaeological storytelling and fiction was published. Strikingly, however, the intellectual genealogies of these two sets of contributions demonstrate less overlap than might be imagined. Although the foundational work of James Gibb and the Adrian & Mary Praetzellis are cited by all, the wider scholarly and fictional literature cited is distinct. This may relate to sub-disciplinary differences (e.g. historical/ anthropological archaeology vs. Roman archaeology/ history) and/or to a general difference between North American and European (or British) approaches.
The broad issue of narrative and the role of fiction appear to be of renewed interest for a diverse range of archaeologists. With this session, we aim to bring together some of the contributors from the TRAC session and some of the authors from the Van Dyke & Bernbeck volume to discuss differences and similarities in approaches. The intention is to build on the “increasing clamor for and interest in alternative forms of archaeological narratives” (ibid.: 1) in distinctive ways, including:
• A deliberate focus on how fiction benefits the practice of archaeology, rather than how it can be used as a vehicle for public outreach or communication;
• The similarities and differences of fictional narrative in relation to prehistoric and historical periods;
• The ethics / responsibilities of writing fictional narratives of others’ histories;
• Poorly explored aspects at the intersection of archaeology and fiction, such as empathy;
• Links with other areas of archaeological theory (e.g. phenomenology);
• Links with other disciplines, especially Classics and TV & Film studies (especially in relation to reception studies) and History (e.g. experimental writing such as Keith Hopkins A world full of gods).
We start from the perspective that differences between fictional and archaeological narrative are “generic not intrinsic” (Elphinstone & Wickham-Jones 2012) and that fiction should be part of the research process not the outcome. Beyond that, we don’t know where the story will end.

When practising archaeology, we turn to our ratio. We are both trained and expected to evaluate e... more When practising archaeology, we turn to our ratio. We are both trained and expected to evaluate evidence critically and objectively in order to achieve the best possible understanding of the archaeological record. There are, however, other intellectual ways of engaging with the past, for example, through emotional connections such as empathy. Indeed, empathy is an important part of our existing academic toolkit, though its role in archaeological interpretation is often implicit. By contrast, writers of historical fiction (and more generally, TV producers, film directors, etc.) make much more explicit—and effective—use of imagination and emotions such as empathy.
In this paper, we explore the ways in which creators of historical fiction use empathy and consider if and how empathy might be used more explicitly and profitably by archaeologists. Illustrating our paper with examples of published fiction, set in the Roman world as well as other periods, we will explore whether empathy with people in the past is possible, if and how it might vary by context (e.g. period or place), and whether or not this practice can improve (academic) understanding of the past. In other words, can we harness the power of fiction to aid our scholarly endeavour? Most importantly, does it have the potential to change not only how and what we write, but how we understand the past? Or, by erasing the distinction between archaeologist and novelist, and between fact and fiction, is there a risk that “The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters”?
The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. “Fantasy abandoned by reason produces impossible monsters: united with her, she is the mother of the arts and the origin of their marvels”. Francisco Goya c.1799.

Paper for the "Tyrannical tales? Fiction as archaeological method" session at TAG2015 Bradford 14-16 Dec 2015.

You cannot argue with results. That is why everybody likes them. By its very nature, however, aca... more You cannot argue with results. That is why everybody likes them. By its very nature, however, academic research does not always yield results. All of us, at some point, have come to the conclusion that the idea/angle/theory we have been working on simply will not work. This, however frustrating for the individual involved, is not necessarily a bad thing. Exploration is what we do and knowing where not to look can be as important as knowing where to look. It becomes a problem when we do not, or are unable to, communicate about the things we have found out not to be useful.
Publication biases etc. have been discussed at length in medical and social science, but have not received as much attention in archaeology or ancient history (although, admittedly, the side effects in medical science are more severe than in our field). In this paper I will discuss several of these biases and reflect on the effects this may have on our own subject and our own research process.

In this paper we will look at two TV-series portraying the Roman past: BBC’s I Claudius and Starz... more In this paper we will look at two TV-series portraying the Roman past: BBC’s I Claudius and Starz’s Spartacus. By comparing these two very different productions we will explore, not the inaccuracies of fictionalised accounts of scholarly ‘facts’, but rather what fictional accounts of the past may have to offer the production of archaeological narratives. Are the processes through which film-makers go about their craft the same, parallel or completely different from our own academic approaches? And how can we use these ideas to help us do our archaeological research differently, or even better?
I, Claudius and Spartacus offer two very different views of the Roman past—the former concentrating on the Roman elite and, as fictionalised in Graves’ novel, drawing heavily on classical texts; the latter widens the social and cultural view to include slaves and provincial populations with a more richly drawn mise-en-scene which might, superficially, appear to draw more directly on archaeological evidence. We compare these visions of the Roman past—and what they include and exclude—and explore the implications for the writing of scholarly accounts including the sanitisation or gratuitous portrayal of sex and violence and considerations of structure and agency including the importance of individual actions within larger historical processes. In particular, we consider the trap of teleology resulting from the benefit of hindsight. Whereas I, Claudius presents a personal retrospective which links a series of known outcomes and therefore parallels the structure of academic narratives, Spartacus forces the viewer to confront different potential outcomes in any given scene and encourages consideration of significance of agency for understanding the hopes and actions of the protagonists as well as the unforeseen results.

Ramsay MacMullen, Why Do We Do What We Do?: Motivation in History and the Social Sciences. Berl... more Ramsay MacMullen, Why Do We Do What We Do?: Motivation in History and the Social Sciences. Berlin: De Gruyter Open, 2014. Pp. 172. ISBN 9783110427271. eBook. Open Access.

Program of the workshop to be held at the University of Leicester the 9th of June of 2017

One way in which I apply poetry to academia and archaeology is as a form of note taking. It conde... more One way in which I apply poetry to academia and archaeology is as a form of note taking. It condenses the way one thinks and demands a concise yet substantial overview of the text or subject in hand. This is exemplified here by abstract verses, where cut out poems are created from the words of another author's abstract.

• From data to hierarchies Archaeologists have demonstrated a vast variety of methods in order to... more • From data to hierarchies Archaeologists have demonstrated a vast variety of methods in order to identify elites. How should we define elites and social inequality? Are power and status reflected in the archaeological record? How do we make the interpretive step from our archaeological data to the social reality of the past? What assumptions guide these theories and are they justified in their considerations? For this session we invite contributions that reflect on bridging the gap between archaeological data and social hierarchies. • Power to the people Theoretical discussions have conveniently assumed the existence of institutionalised, hereditary leadership. In doing so, a different, more complex and potentially more viable past reality is overlooked. Are Elite-models an excuse to ignore the complex reality of the past by offering a one-fits-all solution to project onto our archaeological data? How do we account for the influence of non-elites on the past? Where does the agency of the lower strata fit in? For this session we invite contributions that reflect on theoretical considerations towards hierarchies and how they potentially distort past social reality. • Selling the elite to a modern audience (translating theory to the public) Modern (lay) audiences often only encounter archaeology in a museum context, where considerable resources are committed to presenting archaeology. Elites often take a central role in translating complex archaeological debates to concepts that are easily grasped by and evoke the interest of the public. This is often accomplished by displaying shiny objects, which limits the range of stories a museum can convey. How does this influence and reflect on theoretical debates and practice in archaeology? Key note speaker Joanna Bruck (Bristol University) Reader in Archaeology, studies the British Bronze Age, with a longstanding interest in archaeological theory, particularly relational ontologies and phenomenological approaches to archaeological landscapes. She is one of the editors of the Archaeological Dialogues and organizes the Bronze Age Forum. Her recent publications include " The myth of the chief: prestige goods, power and personhood in the European Bronze Age " (with D. Fontijn), published in the Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age (2013). Substantial scholarly effort has been directed towards the identification and study of elites and hierarchies in past societies. SAD's upcoming Archaeology & Theory conference will debate power and authority in past societies and how archaeologist should deal with them. We invite papers to reflect on the following three topics: For more information visit

Appendices to PhD thesis entitled: To identity and beyond: exploring the limits of the archaeolog... more Appendices to PhD thesis entitled: To identity and beyond: exploring the limits of the archaeological study of identity<br>Includes:Appendix A: Original description of the criteria for application of category labelsAppendix B: Discussion of the utility of Ontological Data Modelling for FST in archaeologyAppendix C: Digital image of Figure B.3Appendix D: Graph Markup Language file of Figure B.3Appendix E: Populated Ontological Data Model of data from Rottweil's Kappelenösch cemetery and Nikolausfeld excavations.Appendix F: Excel document with embedded VBA subroutines for automatically generating dates for closed contextsAppendix G: VBA code for automated max-min matrix composition<br>

The concept of identity has been a focus for scholarly attention in archaeology for the last thre... more The concept of identity has been a focus for scholarly attention in archaeology for the last three decades. This thesis investigates the methodological problems and possibilities of the archaeological applicability of identity.By exploring the constraints on interpretation and the ways in which other disciplines, notably anthropology and social psychology, investigate the concept the epistemological boundary conditions within which archaeological interpretations of the past in terms of identity are made is sketched. Archaeology's engagement with 'identity' is assessed both quantitatively and qualitatively. A quantitative analysis of the occurrence of the term 'identity' in six journals covering the period 1990-2018 provides a (relatively course-grained) sense of the magnitude of the discipline's commitment of recourses to studying this subject. This quantitative analysis is complemented by a more in-depth, qualitative analysis of nine monographs dedicated to ...