EAC Symposium – Setting the Agenda: Giving new meaning to European archaeological heritage
Break-out session 3
Managing the sources of European history
Group 2
Woudagemaal room
Chair: Paulina Florjanowicz
Minutes: Gerda de Bruijn
Impression
There were 6 participants in the group. They wrote down their statements enthusiastically and the
discussion went very smoothly thanks to Paulina Florjanowicz’ efficient chairing. There was only one
less positive point – the participants were suffering from intellectual exhaustion after two days of
intense discussion.
The group agreed to discuss all types of sources, not just digital sources, but also other relevant
archaeological sources. The subjects that were mentioned in the discussion: to what extent is
standardisation possible? how can information be accessed? the importance of working together,
and 3D depots.
The discussion resulted in three main themes
1 Public access using all possible means, including digital technology. We need public access to
archaeological resources, so that the public is informed. Ignorance breeds ignorance.
2 Standards are needed at metadata level in management, not in terms of research. There is a need
for more cooperation at a European level and European programmes. Standards are okay for
heritage management but you can’t standardise archaeological research. There is also a need for a
common glossary.
3 From data to knowledge. There is a way from data to knowledge and conclusions. Data doesn’t
only come in digital form, remember traditional documentation. In archaeology, don’t forget the
original sources, material objects, sites and how to deal with them, as well as what was excavated
but never researched and published. We have to re-excavate and encourage syntheses.
Extra theme: There is European heritage outside Europe, left by emigrants, colonialism, trade. In
other words, sources of European history can also be found outside Europe and should not be
forgotten.
List of themes and statements
1. Public access







Agree on a single host portal, ‘one stop shop’.
Be realistic in project aims.
How to make sources reach the public.
Virtual museums, education, popularisation (school children).
Management of digital information for social websites.
Use the digital media to make the results/interpretation available to the public. In a broad
sense – web-based viewer.
Archaeologists can’t keep the results to themselves – ignorance promotes ignorance.
1
2. Standardisation







Standardisation as a bias – To what extent level is standardisation possible?
Common glossary to make sense of our terminology.
Connect/link different databases (heritage management, research, museum, management).
Properly describe items that we choose not to deposit and clearly state the principles
underpinning our choices.
Digital database of all archaeological material in 3D (different resolutions) + few original
objects.
There is a need for more European programmes in order to manage cultural heritage sources.
Collaboration on management: Networking is important in managing sources. A need for
dialogue and interaction between more European programmes.
3. From data to knowledge






Data versus knowledge? It has to be interpreted to get the real meaning.
Interdisciplinary and cross-sector approach, not pure data.
We need to see management of sources in the long term, not just to create immediate
benefits. Encourage the re-use or re-researching of items deposited in museums.
Focus on what is already excavated, research, store, conserve and make syntheses.
We mustn’t forget that original or primary sources are themselves monuments, landscapes and
objects. Presumption in favour of preservation in situ.
Remember the value of paper records: don’t forget to preserve the paper archive!
And don’t forget

There are some important sources outside Europe. Managing European heritage also means
managing the European heritage outside Europe. For example, from trade and colonialism,
emigration.
2