Internet Archaeol. 16. Rajala. Summary: the reasoning process

6.4 Summary: the reasoning process

When the creation of the interpretations presented in this section is analysed using philosophical terms on the one hand and the terms of a reasoning process (cf. section 2.3) on the other, the interdependence between theory and practice as well as computing and traditional archaeology becomes clear. Ontologically, as always in GIS studies, two types of data are used: archaeological and non-archaeological. The archaeological data are the finds from different areas around the volcanic crater dated to different periods and the interpretations related to these finds. The clusters of finds are classified as sites and these are presented as pixels, point-like features according to a raster data model. The non-archaeological data relate to the elevation model used and the results of different environmental analyses. All data are brought together to analyse the character of the site(s). It is apparent from sections 6.2 and 6.3 that the lack of data hinders the interpretation process; the uncertainties relate with both types of data. Epistemologically, GIS is used as a tool to measure visibility and create hypotheses related with the values behind site location decisions. Nevertheless, it is apparent from sections 6.2 and 6.3 that the lack of data hinders the interpretation process; the uncertainties relate to both types of data but the lack of archaeological data is more devastating. The interpretations related to the results of visibility analyses cannot be specified or positively proven without data.

Theoretically, a realistic and pragmatic frame of reference allows the combination of different ideas from different archaeological schools in order to explain why and how visibility can be used to study the relationship between the sites and their surroundings. The answers to these research questions are sought using a research strategy that is based on the application of GIS and visibility analysis. The interpretations are made by applying Bourdieu's and Foucault's ideas and combining these with traditional archaeological and environmental data. The whole reasoning process requires integrated use of different aspects of archaeological research and revisiting different theoretical ideas. Although computerised methods allow questions to be answered from new angles, they cannot be separated from the results of fieldwork and general theories of certain archaeological contexts. In pragmatic terms, the questions and answers are more important than the method.