Tag Archives: DH

R you ready for archaeological data?

Since I am trying to work myself into the use of programming with R and accomplishing my data analysis with this tool, I have struggled more than one time with the way of thinking “programmer-style”. As trained archaeologist I have practically no idea of the thoughts and ways to work with code.

You may know that really old joke when a programmer gets to do the food shopping and you tell him “Bring one package of milk, if they have eggs, bring 10.” So, the happy noob will head to the market and get one package of milk and 10 eggs. Programmers are used to a different kind of thinking – so they will bring you 10 packages of milk, because they see the condition for it: They have eggs in the store.

I am so grateful that there are no loops necessary in R programming. I tried it once for a course in C++ and it was… well, a decent catastrophe, but still, a catastrophe. I gave up in the end, after hearing most of my tech colleagues saying that an archaeologist has no need for programming. I might have answered that tech people have no need for history, and guess what, some of them really believe that. Because computer science is a modern thing. I did not tell them about the long history of cumputer science – that maths actually was a subject for women, because all man had to be philosophers. History is full of fun facts, my dear hardcore-tech-people, maybe you would like to try it sometime. (Forgive me the bitterness).

I still have to work and think hard on the analysis I want to do. I am not just heading for a simple quantitative analysis, I want to discover certain patterns of motiv combinations, considering the different samples of different temples and other finding spots – just naming one example of the questions I have for my data.

But, again, I had to start at the beginning, meaning cleaning my data. I had to think about naming my categories, about the facts I want to analyse. So, I once again found myself cursing my ex-computer science teacher at school, because we were girls and all he explained to us is not considered necessary knowledge for compter science at all. Well, if you call powerpoint and MS Word computer science, yes, we did that. It was back in the year 2005 and I am a victim of gender-biased teaching, I am afraid to say so. I am a girl, I am so talented in languages, and so interested in Latin, ergo I do not need any kind of technical knowledge. Or stuff like computer science, chemistry, physics, etc. Actually, I always thought, I am too dumb to do stuff like programming scripts for data analysis. Guess what – they made me believe that I am more talented to do other stuff like history and Latin. Maybe that is even true, but how can anybody be too dumb to use certain tools and methods for his or her work? It took me a  long time to figure this out.

I cannot imagine doing anything different than I am doing now – I love my job. I am used to people looking at me in a very bewildered wax, because I tend to say things like “I am not interested in people as long as they have not been dead for at least a 1500 years” and stuff like that. They are wondering why I am working with things like GIS and SFM and now programming languages, because old and dead stuff means… I don’t know, maybe they think, we are still using stone tablets to write on. A lot of people are very fast to ask questions like “Why would you need to learn computer science stuff? Why do you need geoinformation systems, I thought, you are analysing stones?”

I have stopped being angry about these kinds of questions. If some poeple cannot understand your way of working, then you have to do it anyway and maybe in the end they will get your intention when seeing the results. I figured out how to use R for an analysis of two categorial variables – meaning, I can show you now the distribution of motifs on the right and left side of stone altars in my geographical area of investigation.

Well, for a first try it does not look that bad… And there is more to come.

I have not found out everything yet – there is still a lot to do with the layout etc., but I have now found a way of basic understanding my data and a basic way of working with it.

I will present charts like that in my thesis and I love doing so. I will work on my 3D-skills and I will keep on trying new things with GIS software, no matter what.

I am doing all that stuff in my own way: When I have time, when I have my head free for this kind of task. Individualism is one great challenge when you are an archaeologist. Idealism is one mightier challenge and it is hitting me hard sometimes. But hey, I guess, I like it. More than I used to do.

R you ready for something new?

Stay fierce, dear fighters of academia – yours, Astrid 🙂

To err is human – to R is happy pirate noob

Okay, I have to admit it, I saw the quote “to err is human to arr is pirate” and I totally loved it first sight.

Then the love decided that I should try an introductional course in R – and suddenly I am here, writing about this 2-day-experience with a really catchy headline…

So. R. Some of you may know that this is a programming language, very used and beloved by data miners and statistic-geeks. For more information have a look here.

I am not going to do any tutorials on R or so, because I am still a total beginner – but a really happy noob, as you may know. I decided some months ago that the word “newbie” or “noob” is not a negative term for me – I am at the start of something new. So, this is just the beginning of a learning process, another one, because I am learning all my life. 😉

If you want to learn a new programming language, you might take a look to my dear Ninja’a blog on this, this and this blogpost concerning programming and learning programming languages (oh, there is even another one…).

First things first: NO, it is not easy. Learning a new language (no matte if spoken, dead, programming or fictional – now, do not tell me, you never tried Elvish or were fascinated by the Navi-language) is not easy, it takes a lot of time and practice and a lot of thinking and remembering and a lot of mistake-making.

I am currently finishing my dissertation – and it will be done by end of December, hear me!

And I have an amount of 432 objects in my Excel-file that I need to analyse. Okay, I could do it with Excel, BUT: there is a nicer way of building graphics and of analyzing a lot of data (I am really proud of resisting and not calling it “big data” 🙂 )

So, I just managed to combine all my relief motifs of different trees, plants, cornucopiae, sacrificial servants and so on and I ran my very first script with this new defined variables.

And I know, these things are just peanuts for every experienced programmer out there, but I guess for a 2-day-course I am quite successful.

I have to rush now, I need to go to a quite interesting talk – so forgive me for being so late with this post, but maybe I can please and entertain you in your coffee break on this nice monday with his litte blogpost.

Stay calm and keep going, my dear readers!

All the best,

Astrid (also known as the happy noob) 🙂

The “D”- and the “H”-part

It was a post of my dear LaTeX ninja, talking about the pros and cons (okay, basically the pros) of one getting started doing Digital Humanities (you can find the original post here). I just flipped through it, until the following sentences:

Because the whole point of DH is that you’re not either a programmer XOR a Humanities scholar. It’s the combination of both. Most people see that combination as some sort of 30/70 or 40/60 kind of thing. I think it has to be 100/100. And yes, that means you’ll have to be a freak with a 200% workload. I’m pretty alone with this opinion, however, so don’t panic. Most people don’t see it like that at all.  I’m generally a bit of an eccentric and maybe some might perceive my opinion to be extreme. Well, sorry, but I like extreme. I think that “real DH” should mean 200%, or even better: 300%. 150% programmer and 150% Humanities. Be hardcore at both. At least that’s my personal goal.

So, I learnt that she is somehow extreme and liking it, what I actually always thought about her, and I learnt that 100/100 is a quite ambitious goal. And then I started thinking about myself and my abilities in DH. I splitted it up, there is an “D”-part and an “H”-part. So, I would like to start with my “H”-part, meaning the humanities, basically Archaeology and Classics. I am archaeologist by training, as well as ancient historian. I sometimes like my description of myself as an archaeologist with “special features”. You know, coming from a field dealing with images, but also able to read ancient sources (well, of course, all my colleagues are able to read, but I discovered that many historians and philologists keep thinking that an archaeologist just does not use written sources –  or at least, in the wrong way).

But my special features are not just my “reading skills” all alone. I did some courses in linguistics and in geomatic engineering as well, some workshops on digital methods in the humanities, …

So, if the “H”-part, meaning my archaeology-me by training, is 100%, because I have a degree and doing my PhD, then how does my “D”-part look like?

My first tries with SFM – I worked with freeware and was amazed by the quality. Here you can see a relief side of a sarkophagus with some holes, because my photos were not that good.

I told Sarah that my “D” part is about 24.6%. The workshop on Digital and Practical Epigraphy in London (click here to read the whole post) increased my knowledge about 4.2% (don’t get me wrong, it was a 100% success, but a 100% in my “D”-part are standing for a degree, so I had to convert it). So, we are located at 28.8% by now. The moment I can run my first Python scripts in a way the are meant to run and work out, I think, my rating will increase up to 36.9%. 🙂 Cheers to that, I think.  I am convinced that this is a great number, for the sum of 3 and 6 is 9… Isn’t that beautiful? Okay, enough with the maths.

Then I thought about which part is more important to me. Basically, this is like the question, if I like bones or late antique Church Fathers the most. I cannot decide, so it is quite unfair. I need both parts, never mind how much percent they have. I am convinced that my archaeology-part is sometimes at 120%, 20% are just crazy happiness, e.g. because I am allowed to take photos in a museum on monday (so, when all museums are normally closed and it is just me and the artefacts). Sometimes ist about 84,7%, because I am that exhausted after a very concentrated climbing session or my fitness workout. My “D”-part is like a static shadow behind my the “H”-part, smiling on the archaeology-me playing with bones or being fascinated by stones. The “D”-part does perfectly know that its whole existence is mainly about my archaeology-me letting it be. So maybe the “H”-part is first place in a hierachical structure. The “D”-part comes second and is caused by the “H”-part. Does sound like some kind of splitted personality, am I right? (Just a reminder: Yes, we are all crazy here, trust the Hatter, I tell you that).

My photos are better, my knowledge of the software has increased. But still, there are a lot of “mysteries” for a happy noob like me. And I like mysteries. 🙂

So, if I had never ever found the idea of being able to do SFM and 3D-stuff fascinating, if I had never ever the interest in photography, I would never ever have ended up this way. I am a trained archaeologist, capable of mastering the “H”, and a proud and happy noob, dealing with and experiencing the “D”, while learning on the job. I think, this is a very good mixture.

What about you? What is your “D” to “H” ratio? How are you working on yourself and your skills?

All the best,

Astrid (currently 28.8%/105% – because I could post some of my screenshots of my SFM-journey…) 🙂