Rome Wasn't Digitized in a Day - Council on Library and Information ...

136
to standard catalogs, identification code, site code, and small f<strong>in</strong>d number. Lockyear stated that the
Heritage guidel<strong>in</strong>es regard<strong>in</strong>g the weight and diameter of co<strong>in</strong>s were problematic; <strong>in</strong> particular, he
disliked the <strong>in</strong>structions on how to record co<strong>in</strong> legends. While three database schemas were provided
by the guidel<strong>in</strong>es, Lockyear considered them to be poorly designed and claimed that they did not take
full advantage of relational database capabilities. This is unfortunate, Lockyear noted, because a good
database design could make it easy to produce catalogs that conformed to almost any format as long as
the necessary data had been entered. Good database design would also reduce duplication of effort at
data entry (e.g., a table of legends could be used so a legend did not have to be entered for each co<strong>in</strong>
that exhibited it). In addition, Lockyear argued that s<strong>in</strong>ce “fuzzy data” are be<strong>in</strong>g recorded for many
co<strong>in</strong>s, the ability to <strong>in</strong>dicate levels of certa<strong>in</strong>ty for some fields would be very important. Another area
for improvement, Lockyear proposed, was <strong>in</strong> the categories of analysis used <strong>in</strong> numismatics, and he
emphasized the need to move beyond simply analyz<strong>in</strong>g when co<strong>in</strong>s were produced to exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g “co<strong>in</strong>use
periods.”
The greatest benefit of a well-designed database, Lockyear reasoned, would be the ability to
automatically generate summary lists of co<strong>in</strong>s. Additionally, he proposed l<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g such databases to
GIS packages <strong>in</strong> order to better enable “<strong>in</strong>tra and <strong>in</strong>ter-site analyses,” a possibility that he was
surprised had not been explored by more numismatists. Lockyear believed three po<strong>in</strong>ts were essential
to move numismatics forward: (1) all co<strong>in</strong>s from excavations should be identified to the extent
possible; (2) a standard database schema should be created that could be used by specialists <strong>in</strong> the field
and easily archived with the ADS, and any such schema should not be dependent on a particular piece
of software; and (3) the analysis of co<strong>in</strong>s should be <strong>in</strong>tegrated with stratigraphic and ceramic data. 447
To help br<strong>in</strong>g about such change, he proposed mak<strong>in</strong>g available a “user friendly and flexible database
application.” An even better solution, he suggested, would be to develop a web-based system that
made use of MySQL or another open-source system, for this would support the use of common
database tables and make data universally available. Lockyear hoped that new f<strong>in</strong>ds would be entered
<strong>in</strong>to such a system, that archaeologists would be able to download all or any part of these data and
analyze them us<strong>in</strong>g their favorite tools, and that legacy numismatic data such as site lists and hoards
would begun to be <strong>in</strong>put. 448 Lockyear concluded by reiterat<strong>in</strong>g that the analysis of co<strong>in</strong>age data needs
to be <strong>in</strong>tegrated with other strands of archaeological <strong>in</strong>formation:
The future lies, I believe, <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tegration of stratigraphic, co<strong>in</strong>age and other evidence such as
ceramic data. This is hardly a revolutionary idea, be<strong>in</strong>g commonplace <strong>in</strong> other contexts, but one
which we must now pursue with some vigour (Lockyear 2007).
As has been seen <strong>in</strong> other discipl<strong>in</strong>es such as epigraphy, scholars are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly look<strong>in</strong>g to the
potential of databases and the digital world to re<strong>in</strong>tegrate data sources that have often been arbitrarily
divided by discipl<strong>in</strong>ary structures, to provide a more holistic approach to study<strong>in</strong>g the ancient world.
Perhaps the most significant work regard<strong>in</strong>g the challenges of numismatic data <strong>in</strong>tegration is be<strong>in</strong>g
conducted by the Digital Co<strong>in</strong>s Network, 449 which is promot<strong>in</strong>g “the effective use of <strong>in</strong>formation
technology <strong>in</strong> the collection, exchange, and publication of numismatic data.” This network identifies
447 One useful source for the study of Roman ceramics is “Roman Amphorae: A Digital Resource”
(http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/archive/amphora_ahrb_2005/<strong>in</strong>fo_<strong>in</strong>tro.cfmCFID=3775528&CFTOKEN=68253066), which is available <strong>in</strong> the ADS
archive. A directory of onl<strong>in</strong>e ceramics and pottery resources (particularly from the Roman period) can be found at Potsherd
(http://www.potsherd.ukl<strong>in</strong>ux.net/).
448 Lockyear also mentioned the possibility of <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g the data from one extensive project, the “Portable Antiquities Scheme,” “a voluntary scheme to
record archaeological objects found by members of the public <strong>in</strong> England and Wales.” All these f<strong>in</strong>ds are available through a central database that <strong>in</strong>cludes
thousands of co<strong>in</strong>s. http://www.f<strong>in</strong>ds.org.uk/
449 http://www.digitalco<strong>in</strong>s.org/