Internet Archaeol. 17. Popkin. Alternative Recording Methods

4 Alternative Recording Methods

An alternative, and more 'high-tech', method of recording how cut marks or bone modifications appear on a bone is to have templates digitised and used in a GIS based program where the marks and modifications are entered directly into a computer and analysed based on their 'digital' location. This type of digital positioning eliminates the ambiguities which may potentially arise through the assignation and analysis of data fields such as 'Location', 'Modification Number' and 'Quantity'. Marean et al. (2001) and Abe et al. (2002) have published studies using this type of technology with impressive results. There are disadvantages to this more technologically advanced method, however, which must be balanced against the advantages it offers. The sophisticated technology and software necessary to employ GIS based bone modification recording may be beyond the means of many independent zooarchaeologists. Also, when analysis is carried out in the field, access to sensitive digital equipment may be limited.

A further problem with the Marean et al. (2001) methodology of drawing the location of the bone fragment directly onto the computerised template for the future calculation of MNE or bone modification frequencies is, ironically, that it is too accurate. Trying to position a small long bone shaft fragment which has no clearly identifiable landmark precisely onto a digital template is almost impossible. Forcing the precise placement of large numbers of small shaft fragments onto digital templates when it is not clear where they belong will produce inaccurate MNEs and other location dependant calculations. This method also precludes using shaft fragments which can not be identified to element or species as there is no template on which to record them. Using a standard database along with conventional templates, when possible, allows less precise categories such as 'proximal shaft', 'distal shaft' and 'medium-size mammal' to be used when necessary. These categories record the state of knowledge about a fragment's placement in an honest, if less precise, manner. For these reasons, using a database which offers varying levels of positional accuracy in concert with recording templates is presently the most practical and efficient way for zooarchaeologists to record bone modification data.