Internet Archaeol. 16. Rajala. Aims

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Aims

'Analogue and digital technologies essentially require their own sense of history within archaeological practice.'
Gidlow 2000, 38

The relationship between archaeological theory and GIS has been discussed (e.g. Gaffney et al. 1995b; Gillings and Goodrick 1996; Gidlow 2000) but, to date, the connection between GIS and philosophy has not been reviewed in detail. The topic has been discussed previously (e.g. Rajala 2003), and is developed here in order to analyse the relationship between GIS studies, philosophy and the history of archaeology. Philosophy is defined here as the collected modes of general scientific thinking. Different philosophical schools have affected archaeological theory, which became defined as a theoretical construct specific to archaeology. GIS studies are publications where GIS plays a large part methodologically and these are seen here to have their own history of archaeological theory. The emphasis of this article is upon analysing the ways GIS, archaeological theory and practice are linked. A further aim is to try and formulate theoretical principles according to which GIS makes archaeological sense.

Since Internet Archaeology is unique among archaeological publications, I have tried to utilise the web format in this article. Instead of creating a continuous narrative, I have tried to write directly for the Internet and create a 'web of ideas'. On every page I try to discuss one aspect of the subject matter and give a statement that can stand on its own. Readers can surf only those items they are interested in and 'create' a process of acquiring knowledge. The need to scroll has been kept to the minimum – hence the concise style.