Ancestors of Alaska Native people began using local copper resources to make complex tools about 1,000 years ago. More than a third of all copper objects found by archaeologists in this region were excavated at a single spot called the Gulkana Site.
This is the site I’ve been working on for the last four years as a Ph.D. student at Purdue University. Gulkana Protected Area is not well known despite its importance.
As far as I know, his name is not mentioned in any museum. Locals, including the Alaska Native Ahtna people, descendants of the area’s original inhabitants, may recognize the name, but they don’t know much about what’s there. Even among archaeologists, little information is available on this subject; only passing mentions in a few reports and a handful of publications.
However, the Gulkana Region was first identified and excavated approximately 50 years ago. What’s happening?
Archeology has a data management problem, and this is not unique to the Gulkana Site. U.S. federal regulations and disciplinary standards require archaeologists to keep records of their excavations, but most of these records have never been analyzed. Archaeologists call this problem “obsolete data accumulation.”
As an example of this backlog, the Gulkana Site tells a story not only about Ahtna history and innovations in copper processing, but also about the ongoing value of archaeological data to researchers and the public.
What happens after the excavation?
In the United States, most excavations, including those at the Gulkana Site, are conducted through a process called Cultural Resource Management. Since the 1960s, federal regulations in the United States have required archaeological excavations to be conducted before certain development projects. Regulations also require that records of any findings be preserved for future generations.
One estimate suggests that this process creates millions of records in the legacy data backlog. Archaeological data is complex, and these records include many file formats, from handwritten maps to images to spatial data.
The problem is even worse for datasets created before computers were widely used. Research shows that archaeologists are biased towards digital datasets that are easier to access and use with modern methods. Ignoring non-digital datasets not only means abandoning the products of decades of archaeological work, it also silences the human experiences that these datasets are intended to preserve. Once an area is excavated, this data is the only way the people who lived there can tell their stories.
Archaeologists aren’t sure how to solve this problem. Many solutions have been proposed, including creating new data repositories, reusing existing data sets whenever possible, and increasing collaboration with other disciplines and public stakeholders. One of the more creative solutions, the Vesuvius Challenge, recently made headlines when it awarded its $700,000 grand prize to a team that successfully used artificial intelligence to read ancient texts.
Digital archeology digs up ancient data
Of course, there is no single miraculous cure for such a complex problem. In my work at the Gulkana Site, I use many of these suggestions through a newer form of archeology that some researchers call digital public archaeology. It combines digital archeology, which uses computers in archaeological research, with public archeology that honors the public’s interest in the past.
To me, archeology looks different than people expect. Instead of spending my days digging in a spectacular location, my job requires being parked in front of the computer for hours. Instead of digging for new information, I dig for old information.
As a digital archaeologist, I apply modern methods such as artificial intelligence to breathe new life into decades-old data about the Gulkana District. I write software that converts 50-year-old handwritten excavation notes into a digital map that I can analyze using a computer.
Although less spectacular, this work was arguably more important than the excavation. Excavation is merely a data collection technique; It cannot provide much information about a site on its own. So, even though it was excavated decades ago, there is still a lot to learn about the Gulkana Protected Site.
Analysis is one way archaeologists learn about the past, and computers are making more methods available to us than ever before. In my work, I use computational mapping techniques to examine copper artefacts excavated from the Gulkana District. Studying where these objects were found will help us understand whether they were used by all people at Gulkana Site or were reserved for a select few.
Bringing archeology to communities today
I am also a public archaeologist; I believe that the past becomes meaningful through the people connected to it. This means that my work in the Gulkana District would be inadequate if it were conducted solely by me, alone, at my computer 3,000 miles away in Alaska. Instead, I designed my research in collaboration with the descendants of the people who lived at the Gulkana Site to ensure that my research was of value not only to archaeologists but also to them.
In my research, this means incorporating opportunities for youth participation throughout my project. I travel to Alaska each year to host a course on archaeology, Ahtna history, and technology in collaboration with Ahtna leadership and the local school district.
As part of the course, we organize trips to archaeological sites and Ahtna Cultural Center. Children learn about the works found in the Gulkana Site and have the opportunity to make their own works. Ahtna leaders share their cultural knowledge with students. At the end of the course, students integrate what they have learned into a video game about the Gulkana Site.
The aim of my research is to bring new life to Gulkana Estate through digital methods and outreach. My experience shows that even a site excavated 50 years ago can reveal more to help us better understand the past. Perhaps more importantly, it can also help the next generation gain experience with technological skills and connect with their heritage. Ancient archaeological data is still relevant in the digital age; We just need to pay attention to these.
This article is republished from The Conversation, an independent, nonprofit news organization providing facts and analysis to help you understand our complex world.
Written by Emily Fletcher Purdue University.
Read more:
The research described in this article is funded by the National Science Foundation (Award #2311356)