Articles by I. Mikel Martinez

In archaeology, when data is gathered directly at the digging, we face a long series of steps that slow down and complicate this process. In general, they are inconveniences assumed by the archaeologist with no further ado; they are a drawback associated with or inherent in field work. But these circumstances may or may not be acceptable; they may or may not influence the quality of the interpretation, enable short term review or have unintentionally manipulated it by selecting what and how we document at the digging. When we work with serious time restrictions, with a limited budget and in poor conditions and at the same time want to get the best documentation to safeguard for the future and to be able to use during the development and study process, our attitude changes and we would wish to have an option that streamlines those vexatiously slow moments. That is when we ponder the options for automating as many processes as possible in the field. Since 1985, we have been working on a digging, the uniqueness of which makes us wish to document each step with total accuracy. The information arises, sometimes, after many square meters of opened surface. Therefore we cannot fail to document anything. Add to this the fact that che digging itself and the interpretation of the place gave rise to a flood of controversy. Therefore there exists a double need to document the site completely. The work involved in drawing the charts and profiles soon became vexatiously, slow. The very numerous elements of interest that we wanted and the succession of layers of information were a "bottleneck" where the economic budget vaporised. It was at the beginning of the work when we thought about "streamlining" through selective gathering of data. But we did not do so; we looked for alternatives, we tried them out and we substantially improved the performance. In the final analysis, we had only improved the results in the field. We still had two steps left in the laboratory and, at the end, we would have only one rigid and modifiable chart at a very high cost. We all know how economic fluctuations effect budgets for digging. We needed to reduce our drawing costs in the field as well as in the laboratory in order to be able to destine that time and money to other segments of the research. Since 1993, an interdisciplinary team has been working on the ARCHEOGRAF project. Right from the start we focused on obtaining a tool that would assist drawing for diggings and that would reduce cost and time within a framework of four basic requirements: 1) be as universal as possible, 2) be totally computerised, 3) be easy and accurate and 4) be accessible for archaeologists. Today this tool is a reality meeting all the requirements that we had set out and opening new expectations for more advanced versions.