Digital Approaches to Cultural Heritage 2024 Collaborative Reading List

The students attending my masters-level class on Digital Approaches to Cultural Heritage in Spring 2024 were drawn from the London Intercollegiate Classics programme (students in Classics, Ancient History, Classical Art and Archaeology, Late Antique and Byzantine Studies, and Reception of the Classical World from King’s College London, Royal Holloway University of London and University College London) plus a few Institute of Classical Studies doctoral students auditing the module. The course was taught with the support of the Sunoikisis Digital Classics online programme, with common sessions on Youtube, and ten in-person seminars and practical sessions hosted in the Senate House MakerSpace.

To complement the readings provided through SunoikisisDC, we  invited each student to contribute one suggested “reading” per week, ideally open access but not necessarily formally published articles (blog posts, videos, news reports, etc. were welcome) on the subject of the course: the intersection of digital humanities and the study of antiquity and heritage. I borrowed the idea for this collaborative reading list from my colleague Emlyn Dodd, and was delighted with the gusto and sensitivity with which the students took to it. The results of this year’s collaboration are reproduced below, including brief comments from the student who contributed each item (with the explicit permission of all students), with thanks and kudos to all.

The brief:

Please add below here at least one example per week of a reference you have found that is relevant to this course and might be of interest to the others. This need not be a formal publication, but can also include blog posts, videos or podcasts, wiki pages, websites, online editions or tools, etc. Explain briefly in the message why you found it useful, and be prepared to share it with the class in the Tuesday seminar.

Maxime Guénette:

Elliott, Tom. ‘Epigraphy and Digital Resources’. In The Oxford Handbook of Roman Epigraphy, edited by Christer Bruun and Jonathan Edmondson, 78–86. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

It is a fairly short chapter of the The Oxford Handbook of Roman Epigraphy. Tom Elliot introduces the reader to several digital epigraphic databases and editions, journals and references that are useful for further reading, as well as initiatives by associations like EAGLE in epigraphy. It is an excellent introduction to digital epigraphy for students or other scholars keen to learn more about digital humanities in general.

Euan Bowman:

Novotny, J. and K. Radner, ‘Official Inscriptions of the Middle East in Antiquity: Online Text Corpora and Map Interface’. in Crossing Experiences in Digital Epigraphy, eds. A. De Santis and I. Rossi, 141-153. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018.

This is a pretty brief overview of what the OIMEA (Official Inscriptions of the Middle East) project is and what it can offer scholars and those with an interest in the cultures of (primarily) ancient Mesopotamia. Most of the inscriptions they have included so far are in Akkadian and Sumerian, although they also intend to add Old Persian and Aramaic. I thought it would be useful to include here as it highlights some other benefits and difficulties found with digitised epigraphic databases (such as the difficulty of handling multilingual translations) that were not highlighted by the set reading.

David Roots:

Codex Sinaiticus:

Not an article, just a digital project, which I have come across in my course which I found interesting. The earliest surviving codex of the bible from the 4th century, this is in Greek. Website allows you to examine the original manuscript and to download some text in html I believe.

Maxime Guénette:

Digital project called Herculaneum 3D Scan. It gives the occasion to scholars, cultural heritage specialists and the wider public to virtually visit several roman houses in Herculaneum. One of the nice aspect of this project is that you can download the 3D models and also calculate distance, volume and other things with webGL

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Article from the International Journal of Conservation Science (Vol.8; Issue I-Jan-March 2017:35-42) describes how close-range photogrammetry was used to produce a 3D Model of ‘Arutel Roman Castrum’. Agisoft Photscan and Netfabb (for mesh editing) were applied to 2,200 photographs (all taken at ground level) and 270 m of walls were digitally modelled. The first author is from the Factulty of Geography in the University of Bucharest and the second author is a partner in a commercial company specializing in photogrammetry and GIS.

David Roots: and/or

This is a link to photogrammetry scans of Rochester Cathedral, made by the Rochester Cathedral research guild ( I found this to be useful in my first year presentation on the cathedral, especially as it was during a covid lockdown and I could not visit the cathedral in person. In this way anyone including academics across the world can experience the cathedral’s architecture.

Euan Bowman:

Karagkounis, D, and S. Tsanaktsidou, ‘The Restoration of the Main Theatre of the First Ancient Theatre of Larissa, Greece, Assisted by 3D Technologies’. in Transdisciplinary Multispectral Modeling and Cooperation for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage, edited by A. Moropoulou; A. Georgopoulos, 13-23. Switzerland: Springer.

Interesting chapter on how 3D modelling/mapping can be used in the reconstruction of ancient sites (specifically a Hellenistic theatre in Larissa). I included it since Thessaly is one of those regions that has not received much attention archaeologically so I was interested to see how 3D technologies had been used here. It also gives a different view from assigned readings about the utility of creating 3D models, i.e. to aid in restoration efforts.

Noam Mendzelevski:

Leore Grosman, Avshalom Karasik, Ortal Harush, & Uzy Smilanksy. (2014). Archaeology in Three Dimensions: Computer-Based Methods in Archaeological Research. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology & Heritage Studies, 2(1), 48–64.

A good overview of the use of photogrammetry as part of the archaeological investigation, summarising the process of making digital 3D models before highlighting the numerous applications of such; including – and particularly usefully – how digital 3D models, through the development of new computer algorithms, can reveal historical answers from material remains that we would otherwise struggle or be unable to provide.

Maxime Guénette:

Weiland, Jon. 2021. Review: Pleiades.

Blog reviewing the digital gazetteer Pleiades, the leading geographical gazetteer in Digital Classics. The author presents a summary of the tool and its features, its growth, as well as strengths and weaknesses. It is a very good introduction on how Pleiades should be used and its importance in Digital Classics.

David Roots:

Ryan Horne (2020) Beyond lists: digital gazetteers and digital history, The Historian, 82:1, 37-50, DOI: 10.1080/00182370.2020.1725992

This arrival discusses the advantages brought by digital Gazetters over physical ones, in that they have no limitations on the display and number of information they can provide, and how they can be connected by using a standard URI and through Recongito, added to other documents, as discussed in the lecture.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Foka, A., McMeekin D. A., Konstantinidou, K., Mostofian, N., Barker, E., Demiroglu, O. C., Chiew, E., Kiesling B. and Talatas L. 2021. Mapping Ancient Heritage Narratives with Digital Tools. In: Champion, E. M. (ed.) Virtual Heritage: A Guide. Pp. 55–65. London: Ubiquity Press. DOI: License: CC-BY-NC

This book chapter examines the 2nd c. CE Periegesis Hellados (Description of Greece) by Pausanias. The narrative covers journeys between sites in Greece and exceptional objects found there. The chapter discusses the use of Recogito and the issue of ‘teasing apart’ movement, memory and space and how they interrelate. The authors used collection of gazetteers such as Pleiades, Topstext, Judith Binders Art History and that of the German Archaeological Institute (DAI).

Noam Mendzelevski:

Grossner, K., Janowicz, K., & Keßler, C. (2016). Place, Period, and Setting for Linked Data Gazetteer. In M. L. Berman, R. Mostern, & H. Southall (Eds.), Placing Names: Enriching and Integrating Gazetteers (pp. 80–96). Indiana University Press.

The article explores how the methodological framework of Linked Data (i.e., the combination of multiple reference frameworks in a standardised ontological pattern) can enable the construction of comprehensive digital historical gazetteers which meet criteria of extensibility, multivocality, integration, and sustainability. It also further delineates additional requirements for comprehensiveness, such as the need for inclusion of temporal components alongside spatial components.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Mafredas, Thomas & Malaperdas, George. (2021). Archaeological Databases and GIS: Working with Databases. European Journal of Information Technologies and Computer Science. 1. 1-6. 10.24018/compute.2021.1.3.20.

DOI :10.24018/ejcompute.2021.1.3.20

This article focuses on how a database can provide a detailed record of archaeological excavations and a DB’s subsequent use in GIS research. The authors list the advantages of structuring data in a database environment, which attribute data should be selected and, how data entry becomes more efficient and more accurate when using handheld devices on site. It is also noted that updating and changing the database should be considered when compiling it. In the second part of the article an excavation project (Bethsaida, Israel) is briefly outlined. It describes how its database of the material finds (coins, Glas, metal, ceramics) was incorporated into the GIS research. The aim was to map geographical locations of different material objects in their respective historical time layers.

 Euan Bowman:

Parlıtı, U. (2021) ‘An Evaluation on Eastern Anatolia Late Iron Age
(Persian/Achaemenid Period)’. Nisan 1: 107-120.

I added this article since I thought it would be interesting to see how GIS is used outside of articles with GIS as their primary focus. It uses GIS minimally, but still in an interesting and useful way. The article is a survey and reassessment of available archaeological data in Achaemenid Armenia. They use GIS to make a map that pinpoints each important location that is discussed in the article. This is a very useful application of this approuch since the article serves as an introduction to the available evidence in this field. People, such as myself, who dont know a lot about this Achaemenid satrapy are therefore not left in the dark about where everything is that the author is talking about. This is especially helpful for people studying the Achaemenid Empire since you do need to bounce around different regions to understand how the wider imperial administration works even if you focus on one area, so making the article very accessible to non-specialists on ancient Armenia is very helpful!

Noam Mendzelevski:

Archaeology Data Service, n.d. ‘Guides to Good Practice.’

The Guides to Good Practice, created jointly by the UK Archaeology Data Service (ADS) and Digital Antiquity in the US, are a series of digital archaeology guides seeking to provide a basis for archaeological workflows that will produce shareable, archivable digital data. They include a comprehensive and detailed array of information packets on topics such as basic components of digital archaeology, types of data collection and fieldwork, and methods of data analysis and visualisation; the lattermost of which includes the applications and current issues of GIS use, how to create, use and archive GIS datasets, and more.

David Roots:

Ruggeri, F, Crapper, M, Snyder, JR & Crow, J 2017, ‘A GIS-based assessment of the Byzantine water
supply system of Constantinople’, Water Supply, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 1534-1543.

This article examines the 4th and 5th century aqueduct of Constantinople using GIS, which uses GPS data of the various aqueducts but also included a Digital elevation model using an ‘Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer’
9 (ASTER) GDEM V2. In conclusion they were able to validate earlier research of Synder(2013) who had estimated the Fourth-century line to be 267,880 vs the studies 245, 913. The study found that in total (if the lines ran in parallel) of an astonishing 565km and a gradient of 5m/km to 0.5m/km.

Maxime Guénette:

Parcero-Oubina, C, Smart, C and Fonte, J. 2023. Remote Sensing and GIS Modelling of Roman Roads in South West Britain. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 6(1): 62–78. DOI:

This article presents a recent study on a more than likely road network system in the southwest of Roman Britain. This region is far less studied than other parts of England because of the scarcity of evidences. The authors used LiDAR from national surveys to build a GIS database and used this database for GIS spatial analysis of possible roads between settlements, possible roman sites and Roman forts. To overcome the downfalls of an exclusive least cost paths analysis, they also used MADO and CMTC.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

This article (2016) treats the 3D model of the Roman arch (dated to reign of Septimius Severus/193-211 CE) in Palmyra that was destroyed by ISIS in October 2015. The article notes that cultural appropriation of the town’s ruins occurred before the 21st century in the seal of the USA and the ceiling of the Freer-Sackler galleries.
The 3D model of the arch was originally created by the UK Institute for Digital Archaeology (IDA) and displayed in Trafalgar Square. Later it moved to NY where the Deputy Major proclaimed it an act of solidarity with the people of Syria. While the text acknowledges this aspect, it also points out that the IDA has not sufficiently revealed any ties with the Syrian communities. Furthermore, it speaks of “digital colonialism” with its in-built danger of creating institutes retaining the copyright for the models and limiting open access. The article ends by quoting the director of technology of the IDA who at the time promised open access to the data file of the arch.

Maxime Guénette:

Timofan, Anca, Călin Șuteu, Radu Ota, George Bounegru, Ilie Lascu, Radu Ciobanu, Dan Anghel, Cătălin Pavel, and Daniela Burnete. “PANTHEON 3D. An Initiative in the Three-Dimensional Digitization of Romanian Cultural Heritage.” Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Digitalia 63, no. 2 (March 15, 2019): 65–83.

This paper talks about the cool stuff happening with Romanian history and tech. The National Museum of Unification in Alba Iulia is leading a big project called Pantheon 3D. They’re using fancy 3D scanning and modeling to make virtual versions of ancient Roman stuff. The goal is to create a digital collection and a cool website where you can explore it all. They want to use these digital goodies in museums, schools, and research to make learning about history more awesome. By teaming up with other groups, they’re hoping to find new ways to save and appreciate our shared heritage. This paper says that using 3D tech like this is super important for studying old stuff, and Pantheon 3D could be a game-changer for preserving our history.

 Euan Bowman:

Hepworth, K. And Church, C. (2018). ‘Racism in the Machine: Visualization Ethics in Digital Humanities’. Digital Humanities Quarterly 12.

An interesting paper that picks up on some of what we have been talking about in class previously. Talks about how human biases and prejudice can become reflected in digital humanities projects and considers the ethical dimensions of this. Uses digital maps of historic lynchings in the US as case studies. Shows how visual presentation of maps are inextricably linked to political views, I.e. whether state boundaries are shown or not implies a different view of lynchings as either a state specific or national problem. On maps that give an option to toggle state boundaries, the implication is that it is both.

Noam Mendzelevski:
Khunti, R., 2018. ‘The Problem with Printing Palmyra’. URL:

The document analyses the ethical issues surrounding the reconstruction of Palmyra’s Arch of Triumph, which was destroyed by ISIS in 2015. The Institute for Digital Archaeology (IDA) used 3D printing to create replicas of the arch in New York, London, and Dubai. The author argues that the reconstruction failed to meet basic ethical standards in key ways, and that basic ethical principles that apply to preservation and display of original heritage sites should also govern digital reconstructions.

David Roots:

A blog post sort of thing from Wikimedia Uk’s website, looking at a project from 2017 which uploaded the university of Edinburgh’s data on witch trials which had been sat in the cold cauldron of the university’s Microsoft Access database for a decade. Some 45 Design informatic Masters students uploaded the data to wikidata and produced various visualisations of the data.

Maxime Guénette:

Zhao, Fudie. ‘A Systematic Review of Wikidata in Digital Humanities Projects’. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 38, no. 2 (2023): 852–74.

The aim of the systematic review was to identify and evaluate how Wikidata is perceived and utilized in Digital Humanities (DH) projects, as well as its potential and challenges as demonstrated through use.

The paper found that:

  1. Wikidata is commonly used in DH projects as a content provider, a platform, and a technology stack.
  2. It is often implemented for annotation and enrichment, metadata curation, knowledge modelling, and Named Entity Recognition (NER).
  3. Most projects tend to use data from Wikidata, but there is potential to utilize it as a platform and technology stack for publishing data or creating a data exchange ecosystem.
  4. Projects face two types of challenges: technical issues in implementation and concerns with Wikidata’s data quality.
Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Ford, H., & Iliadis, A. (2023). Wikidata as Semantic Infrastructure: Knowledge Representation, Data Labor, and Truth in a More-Than-Technical Project. Social Media + Society, 9(3).

This article highlights how online platforms (google, alexa, amazon etc.) increasingly use Wikidata as a ‘critical architecture’ that links data throughout the world. The authors believe that Wikidata is a critical mediator of truth and thus has significant social and political implications. On a critical note they claim that due to the dissemination in discreet bits of information, these facts are not always anchored to their original references. They propose classifying Wikidata as a semantic infrastructure so that questions about its impact are more easily formulated. One of the challenges they note is Wikidata’s development as a public goods versus its use by downstream platforms that utilise its facts without credit. They end by highlighting two areas for future research; the study of knowledge automation/dissemination in an environment with few dominate commercial players and secondly, whether Wikidata is an alternative to ‘exploitive platform capitalism’ in the production of public knowledge goods.

Noam Mendzelevski:

Sengul-Jones, M., 2021. ‘The promise of Wikidata.’ URL:
The article discusses how data journalists can use Wikidata as a linked open knowledge base in their work, highlighting its upsides and potential downsides. It makes mentions of Wikidata’s uses as, amongst other things, a shortcut between different language Wikipedia versions, in doing large-scale data querying with the multilingual API (though with caution around nuance), and for discovering relationships by querying the knowledge base. Critically though, the article also warns of its limitations such as inconsistencies, biases, and lack of coverage that journalists should be aware of when using the data. In all, the article highlights and raises awareness for the considerable benefits that the usage of Wikidata provides to modern digital journalists while also cautioning responsible usage.

Euan Bowman:

Isaksen, L., Simon, R., Barker, E., and P. de Soto Canamares. ‘Pelagios and the Emerging Graph of Ancient World Data’. In: WebSci ’14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on Web science, ACM, pp. 197–201.

Paper talks about the growth of the Linked Open Data Project GAWD (Graph of Ancient World Data. It explains for example that it uses simple ontologies such as Open annotation that makes it easier to adopt for people working in humanities who usually may not have a back ground in digital approaches. Also argues that there is still a lot of work to be done and offers several steps to be taken to integrate it.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Claire S., “3D Printing & Intellectual Property: Are the Laws fit for Purpose”; In 3DNatives, July 3rd 2023

This website news article discusses the laws pertaining to 3D Printing and IP. It highlights the legal definitions pertinent to the field, the parties from 3D printing hobbyists to multinationals who seek to guard their discoveries with patents and trademarks. Different stakeholders are affected differently by the laws and may face different repercussions. Initially definitions for copyright, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, copyright law and 3D printing are outlined. The article also highlights the use of NDAs demanded of employees in 3D printing companies. There are movements that are fighting for change to the IP laws, such as Creative Commons that are trying to reform copyright laws so that the public has easier access to culture and knowledge. The article ends by saying that legal rulings tend to favour larger companies and may disfavour open creativity. It lists some individuals and organisations that are fighting for more open access to creative works and a modification of copyright laws. But, overall the IP laws that are applicable to 3D are complex and look set to become more nuanced and important in the immediate future.

The website has been in existence since 2013 and was acquired by the American Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE) in 2023. Its mission is to bring the “wonders of 3D printing to as many people as possible.

David Roots:

A short news article which demonstrates the application of XR in museums/cultural heritage. The university of Glasgow through its project “The Museums in the Metaverse project” aims to create a virtual platform where any user with a vr headset can interact online with a Museums entire collection – which not only gives the public a new experience, but opens the door for academic study, as apparently about 90% of a museums collections are held in storage.

 Euan Bowman:

Kantaros, A., Soulis, E. and E. Alysandratou, (2023) ‘Digitization of Ancient Artefacts and Fabrication of Sustainable 3D-Printed Replicas for Intended Use by Visitors with Disabilities: The Case of Piraeus Archaeological Museum’. Sustainability 15: 1-18.

Article that touches on one of the topics that came up in the Thursday seminar. Specifically, it gives one answer to what 3D modelling and printing can be useful for. It uses 2 statues recovered from Piraeus as case studies for how these technologies can enhance learning for people who are blind or visually impaired. Article argues that 3D printed copies will allow people to interact with these artefacts through physical touch and therefore give them a clearer sense of the objects. The authors also argue that 3d printing and modelling have a lot of potential ‘to be purposefully crafted and modified in order to cater to a diverse range of disabilities, including but not limited to visual impairments, hearing impairments, and mobility limitation’.

Maxime Guénette:

Loder, William. ‘Designing Digital Antiquity: Classical Archaeology in New Virtual Applications’. M.A. dissertation, University of Arkansas, 2021.

In this thesis, William Loder explores the integration of archaeological theory with game design principles to create immersive 3D applications of ancient sites in virtual reality. By combining concepts from phenomenology and sensory studies with game design theory, Loder aims to enhance interactive education and research opportunities in classical archaeology. The focus is on developing a Virtual Roman Retail Project (VRR) application that allows users to explore a reconstructed shop scene in Pompeii, engaging with historical contexts and material data through interactive experiences. The methodology involves a blend of photogrammetry and 3D modeling techniques to accurately recreate the ancient environment. Loder emphasizes the importance of embodiment and presence in virtual landscapes for a more immersive learning experience. The thesis also discusses the challenges of digital reconstruction in archaeology, highlighting the need for constant interpretation and iteration to ensure accuracy and relevance in research.

Maxime Guénette:

Muenster, Sander. ‘Digital 3D Technologies for Humanities Research and Education: An Overview’. Applied Sciences 12, no. 5 (25 February 2022): 2426.

The article explores the use of digital 3D technologies in humanities research and education. It covers key concepts, such as methodological settings, scientific communities, workflows, technologies for creating and visualizing 3D models, documentation standards, and framework conditions. The study investigates the impact of 3D technologies on cultural heritage studies and discusses funding sources, ethical considerations, and acknowledgements. Additionally, it highlights the importance of collaborations and networking in advancing research in this field.

Noam Mendzelevski:

Barratt, R. P. (2021). Speculating the Past: 3D Reconstruction in Archaeology. In E. M. Champion (Ed.), Virtual Heritage: A Guide (pp. 13–24). Ubiquity Press.

The chapter comprehensively discusses the main uses, methods, and issues of 3D reconstructions in archaeology. It offers a balanced perspective on the advantages (e.g. new opportunities for archaeological interpretation) and limitations (e.g. indistinguishable hyperrealism) of 3D reconstructions, while also presenting practical solutions to address the issue of inaccuracy in 3D models. The author’s discussion of games and their ability to create immersive learning experiences is especially relevant for those seeking to engage the public with archaeological heritage.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Götz, S. (2024), virtual 3D Reconstruction of Ancient Architecture in the Ostia Forum Project in Ostia Forum Projekt Website

This article describes how the Ostia Forum Project which is run by the Stiftung Humboldt-Universität has been working with the structure-from-motion (SfM) method. In 2020 the project began with creating virtual 3D reconstructions of various construction phases, fragments, altars, temples and the plaza of ancient Ostia. The aim was to include the possibilities of examining lines of sight, walkways and incidence of light. It has merged the 3d reconstructions based on polygons with models from 3D photogrammetry. This article provides the current reconstruction of the the Temple of Roma and Augustus in the Forum. The result is a walk-in 3D model that can be explored and compared with other buildings. Additionally, light effects during the day and throughout the year have also been included.

David Roots:

FOR RUPESTRIAN CHURCHES, The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLII-2/W9, 2019
8th Intl. Workshop 3D-ARCH “3D Virtual Reconstruction and Visualization of Complex Architectures”, 6–8 February 2019, Bergamo, Italy

This article examines the use of photogrammetry and laser scanning as techniques to create 3D models of byzantine churches in Italy to examine the systems of illumination of the buildings in the medieval times.

 Euan Bowman:

G. Kontogianni, A. Georgopoulos, N. Saraga, E. Alexandraki, K. Tsogka, ‘3D VIRTUAL RECONSTRUCTION OF THE MIDDLE STOA IN THE ATHENS ANCIENT AGORA’. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences.

Article talks about the process of reconstructing the Middle Stoa from the Athenian Agora as a 3D model. Data for reconstruction was ranked according to accuracy before implemented. For example, previous 3D models and other modern reconstructions were considered highly accurate while travellers’ reports were seen as less so. At times, the authors may have leaned on the supposed accuracy of modern models a little too much. When describing how they applied colours to their version of the building, they claimed that they only used one modern reconstruction as evidence. However, they don’t elaborate on what evidence was used by this previous study or what the previous authors’ assumptions were. It therefore felt that we just had to take their word for it.

 Euan Bowman:

Horne, R. (2020). Mapping Power: Using HGIS and Linked Open Data to Study Ancient Greek Garrison Communities. In: Travis, C., Ludlow, F., Gyuris, F. (eds) Historical Geography, GIScience and Textual Analysis. Historical Geography and Geosciences. Springer, Cham.

The chapter talks about how developments in LOD have helped make new advancements in the study of ancient Greek garrisons. The author makes a gazetteer that shows every Greek garrison throughout antiquity. The chapter argues that this would have been impossible before with LOD since many humanities data sets are derived from textual sources which offer little geospatial data, therefore complicating the use of GIS. However, after aligning data with information on Pleiades, a complete overview of Greek garrisons was possible. After making this gazetteer, it was found that garrison commanders were usually only ever found in areas peripheral to ruling powers and never in imperial capitals.

Elizabeth Koch-Kölük:

Rantala, H., Ikkala, E., Koho, M., Tuominen, J., Rohiola, V., & Hyvonen, E. (2021). Using FindSampo Linked Open Data Service and Portal for Spatio-temporal Data Analysis of Archaeological Finds in Digital Humanities. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2980.

This paper talks about FindSampo(a LOD service and semantic portal) that is based on Finnish Citizen Science archaeological data and has been in use since May 2021. It is a collaboration between the public, archaeologists and heritage managers in Finland. Currently there are more than 3,000 archaeological finds made by the public in the data service, which can be searched and results can be visualised in maps, charts and a timeline. Most finds are derived from metal detecting and therefore their visualisations also provide information on further places that are recommended for detecting and those that should be avoided. Querying data is carried out with SPARQL. In future, the framework will be adapted for international archaeological finds as well.

Maxime Guénette:

Blaney, Jonathan. ‘Introduction to the Principles of Linked Open Data’. Programming Historian 6 (2017).

This is a lesson from Programming Historian, which is a good introduction to the main aspects of Linked Open Data like URI, RDF, SPARQL, etc. It explains the several advantages of this technology of Semantic Web, but also some of the pitfalls and difficulties. The lesson then uses Linked Open Data through examples to demonstrates how academics can publish or use this techonology for their own research.

Posted in Open Access, SunoikisisDC, Teaching | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Digital Humanities student placement in Institute of Classical Studies 2024

Guest post by Wei Hei Nip

As part of the MSc Digital Humanities programme at UCL, I had the opportunity to contribute to the ongoing project on 3D digitisation and documentation of the Ehrenberg Bequest at the Institute of Classical Studies between 29th April and 17th May 2024. As a former student of Ancient History and Archaeology, and currently pursuing my Masters in Digital Humanities, this placement provided me with a unique opportunity to apply my skills and knowledge from DH in archaeological settings.

The Ehrenberg Bequest is a collection of over 150 small antiquities, mostly Greek and Roman ceramics, bequeathed to the ICS by Dr. Victor Ehrenberg in 1976. The collection is currently being used in teaching and training of 3D methods involving students, workshop participants, internship or placements. The 3D digitization works involve producing 3D models of the collection items and to document the imaging and modelling process.

The Senate House MakerSpace is the shared space for digitisation and experimentation located in the Senate House. It focuses on the experiment and application of 3D technologies. The Digital Humanities Research Hub may sometimes organise training and workshops at the MakerSpace to help students and researchers think about the use of 3D technologies in their works. My work placement mainly takes place within the MakerSpace.

Setup of photogrammetry studio at the MakerSpace


1. Digitisation

One of my main tasks during the placement was to digitise the artefacts from the Ehrenberg Collection. This involved photogrammetry techniques and equipment to capture 3D images of the artefacts. The process involves taking photos of the artefact at different angles and processing the photos using photogrammetry software, Agisoft Metashape Pro. More on the 3D modelling workflow can be found in the blog posts by Gabriel Bodard (see here) and Barbara Roberts (see here).

The training is useful and informative, where an elaborate list of videos and hands-on practice are provided. Following the training provided, I selected a small selection of objects to work on. I carefully documented the process of photogrammetry and processed the captured images to create accurate 3D models. The finished 3D models are uploaded onto ICS’s Ehrenberg Collection SketchFab account, where they are publicly accessible.

The Ehrenberg Bequest offers a variety of artefacts to digitise, such as Roman lamps and fragments of pottery. Here’s an example of my digitisation.

Cypriot white-painted ware aryballos Ehrenberg collection catalogue no. 43 (see here)

Cypriot white-painted ware aryballos Ehrenberg collection catalogue no. 43 (see here)

2. Documentation

Besides digitising the artefacts, I also helped with the documentation and cataloguing processes. I recorded all the necessary information about the digitised objects mainly in a designated Word document. This involved noting down details such as object descriptions, 3D modelling configurations and processes.

In addition to the Word document, I attempted to document the 3D digitisation using the Digital Lab Notebook created by Cultural Heritage Imaging (Chi). It is an open source software for collecting and managing metadata about computational photography projects. Users can enter information such as, metadata of the imaging subjects, equipment, imaging methodology, related locations, people and documents.

However, challenges were encountered during the data input process in the DLN. For instance, the configurations are sometimes not applicable to the projects. Further works and planning are needed to fully utilise the software for the project’s documentation.

I also organised the catalogue spreadsheet, cross-referencing it with the digitised objects to ensure that there were no missing records. This work helped in maintaining a comprehensive and accurate inventory of the collection. However, due to the condition of storage of the Ehrenberg collection, the catalogue number of the artefacts may have been lost. Hence, some of the artefacts are unable to be identified from the catalogue spreadsheet. Further work may have to be done to better organise and catalogue the collection.

My Learning

Through this placement, I gained hands-on experience in 3D digitisation, image processing, and model creation. This experience reinforced my understanding of how digital technologies can be utilised for cultural heritage preservation and accessibility. I am also grateful that I learnt how to make 3D models using photogrammetry despite having no prior experience at all.

The placement also let me work in a self-directed manner, allowing me to organise my time and work independently. It also gave me the chance to engage with the people at the Digital Humanities Research Hub and the ICS, and understand how digital humanities are applied to their work.

I also get to participate in activities at the MakerSpace. The Analog 3D Printing workshop is particularly fun, where we create objects with clay as a hands-on discussion on how ancient technologies or objects were made.

Products from the analog 3D printing workshop

By the end of the placement, I also get to 3D print a digitised object from the ICS Ehrenberg Collection and bring home as a souvenir. It is printed with the Ultimaker 3 Extended 3D printer equipped in the MakerSpace.

Posted in Teaching | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Digital Classicist London 2024 programme

The programme for Digital Classicist London seminar 2024 is now up. The seminar takes place on Fridays in late June and throughout July. Two seminars are online only; three take place in the Senate House MakerSpace and are also live-streamed. YouTube links for all are included below. All seminars are at 17:00 BST except for July 5, which starts half an hour later. Advancing booking is required for in-person seminars.

  • Fri, June 28, 2024. Jaclyn Neel (Carleton University), Rome from the Ground Up: Romulus and Remus on YouTube. (Online only) (Youtube)
  • Fri, July 5, 2024: 17:30. Chiara Palladino (Furman University), Representing ancient landscapes digitally: the what, the how, the why. (Senate House MakerSpace [book]) (Youtube)
  • Fri, July 12, 2024. Anna Conser (University of Cincinnati), Pitch Accents as Melodic Data in Ancient Greek Texts: Digital Tools for Close and Distant Reading. (Online only) (Youtube)
  • Fri, July 19, 2024. Naomi Scott (University of Bristol), Crowdsourcing a translation of Julius Pollux’s Onomasticon: methods and problems. (Senate House MakerSpace [book]) (Youtube)
  • Fri, July 26, 2024. Valentina Iannace (University of Florence), Matching fragments from the Tebtynis Temple Library “deposit”: preliminary work to develop an AI software, with some examples of Greek documents. (Senate House MakerSpace [book]) (Youtube)

Organised by Katharine Shields (KCL) and Gabriel Bodard (ICS).

Posted in seminar | Leave a comment

Data Driven Classics (London, July 5, 2024)

This free one-day workshop looks like it would be particularly valuale for classicists (within reach of London) with no previous experience of working with digital datasets or corpora, who want a good hands-on and theorertical introduction to the possibilities.

(Forwarded for Andrea Farina.)


Dear colleagues,

The Department of Digital Humanities at King’s College London is excited to announce a unique opportunity for scholars interested in the intersection of Classics and digital methodologies. We invite you to participate in our upcoming event entitled Data Driven Classics: Exploring the Power of Shared Datasets on 5th July 2024.

Date: 5th July 2024
Time: 10:00 AM – 5:00 PM
Venue: King’s College London, Embankment Room MB-1.1.4 (Macadam Building, Strand Campus)

About the Workshop:
The study of the ancient world increasingly relies on curated datasets, emphasising the importance of data sharing and reproducibility for open research in today’s technologically interconnected world. In this context, the workshop aims to achieve two main objectives:

  1. Raise awareness on the significance of datasets, data papers, and data-sharing for Classics.
  2. Guide classicists in identifying, utilising, and sharing datasets within the scientific community.

The workshop will consist of a one-day programme featuring engaging presentations, hands-on sessions, and roundtable discussions led by experts in the field. In the morning session, our four invited speakers will explore the importance of data-sharing and present case studies of published datasets in Classics, covering linguistic and historical-geographical perspectives. This will be followed by a general discussion on data use and sharing.

Invited speakers:

  • Dr Mandy Wigdorowitz (University of Cambridge), Humanities has a place in the open research and data sharing ecosystem
  • Paola Marongiu (University of Neuchâtel), Collecting, creating, sharing and reusing data in Classics: an overview of the best practices
  • Mathilde Bru (University College London), Building and publishing a dataset as a Classicist
  • Prof Claire Holleran (University of Exeter), Working with epigraphic datasets: mapping migration in Roman Hispania

In the early afternoon, participants will engage in hands-on activities, working in groups to describe datasets and identify their potential for reuse. They are encouraged to bring their own datasets, if available, to receive feedback from both the workshop facilitators and fellow participants. Feedback will focus not only on the quality of the data itself but also on the best practices for sharing it (e.g., format, open repository, deposition process). For those who do not have their own datasets, we will provide sample datasets to familiarise themselves with various repository types and data formats. Participants will also have the opportunity to learn about different platforms for data sharing and essential elements such as creating a README file and understanding its purpose. Discussions will also cover vital aspects such as licensing options and the significance of obtaining a DOI for datasets.

Who can attend:
This workshop is open to postgraduate students, researchers, and staff members interested in Classics, regardless of their level of expertise in digital methodologies. We especially encourage participation from those with an interest in linguistics, archaeology, history, and related fields. Participants are sought within and outside King’s College London. Preference will be given to applicants whose cover letters demonstrate that their research projects or professional pursuits benefit from the event. We also aim to maintain a balanced representation across disciplinary backgrounds.

Registration and logistics:
Seats for this workshop are limited. To apply for participation, please email Andrea Farina andGeorge Oliver at andrea.farina[at] and george.oliver[at] attaching a cover letter no longer than one page in .pdf format and writing “REGISTRATION Data Driven Classics” as the subject of your email. In your cover letter, please state your name, affiliation, position (student, PhD student, Lecturer etc.), email address, and your field in Classics (e.g., linguistics, history, etc.), and explain why you would like to attend the workshop and how it can benefit your research.

There is no registration fee for this event. However, participants are responsible for covering their travel expenses through their own institutions. The workshop will accommodate a maximum of 25 participants to ensure adequate assistance during the hands-on session.

Important dates:
Deadline to submit expression of interest with cover letter: 22nd May 2024.

Notification of acceptance: 31st May 2024.

Event: 5th July 2024.

Contact Information:
For any inquiries or further information, please contact Andrea Farina at andrea.farina[at] or George Oliver at george.oliver[at]

For further info, please visit our webpage.

The organisers

Andrea Farina and George Oliver

Posted in Events, Teaching | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

CFP Digital Classicist London 2024

The Digital Classicist London seminar invites proposals for the Summer 2024 series. We are looking for seminars on any aspect of the ancient or pre-colonial worlds, including history, archaeology, language, literature, cultural heritage or reception, that address innovative digital approaches to research, teaching, dissemination or engagement. We are particularly interested in proposals for seminars that think about digital capital, models of labour and credit, and community engagement with heritage and antiquity.

Seminars will be held fortnightly through June and July in the Institute of Classical Studies, Senate House, London, and will be simultaneously streamed to remote audiences on Youtube, but we hope most speakers will be physically present in London. We have a small budget to support travel for speakers within the UK.

Please send an abstract of 300 words to <> (clearly marked Digital Classicist London​) by the end of Tuesday April 2, 2024.

Posted in Call for papers, seminar | Leave a comment

Tenure-Track job in Digital Classics, U Georgia

Forwarded for Erika Hermanowicz (to whom any enquiries should be addressed). The date for receipt of applications was 8 January, but has been extended until 15 February, 2024. I have highlighted in green the section relating to digital methods.

Tenure-Track Assistant Professor in Classics

The Department of Classics at the University of Georgia invites applications for a full-time tenure-track Assistant Professor in Data Analytics and Pedagogy in Classics with an anticipated start date of August 1, 2024.

Candidates should be prepared to teach classes in data collection, quantitative analysis, visualization, and AI learning based on data sets of archaeological, material, and/or literary evidence, with a focus on methodologies and pedagogy. We welcome applicants whose research spans any gamut of the classical to early modern eras, and applicants with expertise in any languages in the Mediterranean spectrum. Familiarity with economic history and its cultural contexts is preferred. Candidates must have a Ph.D. in Classics or a related discipline by time of appointment.

The successful candidate is expected to maintain an active research agenda, teach undergraduate and graduate courses (with a 2-2 teaching load), and contribute to departmental governance.

To apply, please submit dossiers containing a cover letter, cv, contact information for three references, and a writing sample (20 pages maximum). Applications should be submitted at Reference providers will be sent an email through the UGAJobs system with instructions on how to submit their letters of recommendation. Review of applications will begin on January 8, 2024 and continue until the position is filled.

The Franklin College of Arts and Sciences, its many units, and the University of Georgia are committed to sustaining a work and learning environment that is inclusive. The University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ethnicity, age, genetic information, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, or protected veteran status. Persons needing accommodations or assistance with the accessibility of materials related to this search are encouraged to contact Central HR (

Georgia is well known for its quality of life in regard to both outdoor and urban activities ( UGA is a land and sea grant institution located in Athens, 65 miles northeast of Atlanta, the state capital (;

For questions, contact the committee chair, Erika Hermanowicz, at:


Grace McGibney, Student Services Paraprofessional, at


Posted in Jobs | Tagged | Leave a comment

Digital Classicist London 2023

Institute of Classical Studies, University of London
Fridays at 17:00 UK time in room 349*, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU and all seminars broadcast live to Youtube.

June 9: Panagiota Sarischouli (Thessaloniki), NOMINA Database: Names and Orality in Magic in Antiquity (Youtube) room 349

June 16: Kevin Wong (Harvard), Antiquity for Sale: Game Engines, Asset Stores, and the Platformization of the Classical Imagination in Videogame Development (Youtube) room 349

June 23: David Bamman (Berkeley), Latin BERT: A Contextual Language Model for Classical Philology (Youtube) room 349

July 14: Paola Marongiu (Neuchâtel), Barbara McGillivray (KCL), Lexical semantic change detection in Latin: a use-case on medical Latin (Youtube) *room 265

July 28: Luca Brunke (Exeter), Research-based 3D reconstructions of built heritage environments (Youtube) room 349


The programme for the summer 2023 series of the Digital Classicist London seminar is now available. The seminar was organized by Gabriel Bodard (University of London), Megan Bushnell (UofL), Marco Dosi (UofL), Andrea Farina (KCL) and Paula Granados García (British Museum), and brings together presentations and discussions of innovative digital approaches to research, teaching, dissemination or engagement related to the ancient and pre-modern worlds.
Posted in seminar | Leave a comment

Digital Classicist London seminar 2023 CFP

Tondo of Greek kylix; boy with writing tabletCall for Presentations

With apologies for the tight deadline…

The Digital Classicist London seminar invites proposals for the Summer 2023 series. We are looking for seminars on any aspect of the ancient or pre-colonial worlds, including history, archaeology, language, literature, cultural heritage or reception, that address innovative digital approaches to research, teaching, dissemination or engagement. Seminars that speak to the ancient world beyond Greco-Roman antiquity are especially welcome.

Seminars will be held fortnightly through June and July in the Institute of Classical Studies, Senate House, London, and will be simultaneously streamed to remote audiences on Youtube, but we hope most speakers will be physically present in London. We have a small budget to support travel for speakers within the UK.

Please send an abstract of 300 words to <> (clearly marked Digital Classicist London) by the end of Monday May 1.

Digital Classicist London 2023 is organised by Gabriel Bodard, Megan Bushnell, Marco Dosi, Andrea Farina and Paula Granados García.
Posted in Call for papers, seminar | Leave a comment

Mapping the veterans of Upper Moesia using ArcGIS

written by Ana Honcu, Post-doc researcher, University of Iași

This article is about mapping the veterans’ inscriptions from Upper Moesia using ArcGIS software. How can this be done and toward what aims? By applying GIS algorithms to these datasets, we can make various maps and queries that allow us to discuss distribution and spatiality from many different angles. Such an experiment provided us the possibility of better visualization of data in a geographic context and allowed us to identify the specific locations of inscriptions and thus draw conclusions about veterans’ settlements.

A geographic information system (GIS) is a system that creates, manages, analyses and maps all types of data. GIS connects data to a map, integrating location data (where things are) with all types of descriptive information. Simply stated, GIS technology provides a foundation for mapping and analyzing data in a geographical context. This allows better visualization of data in a unique format that leads to discoveries regarding patterns and relationships about and between the data itself.  GIS technology is increasingly employed in the field of archaeology, but it has not yet been extensively applied to epigraphic datasets. Rebecca Benefiel’s study of wall inscriptions from Pompeii offers an excellent demonstration of the potential of this technology in answering historical questions.

Fig. 1.png

We believe that GIS technology can be applied with great benefit also to the study of the veterans’ inscriptions from Upper Moesia. The province of Upper Moesia was selected as an area of interest for quantitative GIS exploration because it had a significant military presence, therefore a representative number of inscriptions, which can be used as indicators for the three measured variables: Roman veterans, their origin, and place of establishment. Creating a digital database that could be keyed to a geo-referenced map would greatly facilitate research involving inscriptions and spatial analysis. Our study has two goals: to demonstrate the usefulness of the application of GIS to a database containing an epigraphical corpus and to identify the main centers of settlement of veterans.

Fig. 1.2

The database was comprised of 164 inscriptions, collected from epigraphic corpora or online epigraphic databases. Fig.1, 1.2 displays the location of all veterans (legionaries and auxiliaries) in the province. The distribution of veteran settlements in Upper Moesia presents an expansive, complex spatial arrangement with 40 settlements of veterans. We can draw a first general conclusion – the preferred areas are the northern, southern, and northeastern provincial borders, cities with colonial (Scupi, Ratiaria) or municipal status (Singidunum, Horreum Margi, Naissus, Ulpiana), the provincial capital (Viminacium), legionary and auxiliary camps (Timacum Minus) castella (for example Bononia), but also settlements with economic potential.

Fig. 2

Fig. 2.1  

The following two maps pinpoint the locations of legionary (Fig 2, 2.1) and auxiliary veterans (Fig. 3). It can be stated that the use of ArcGIS maps and a specific database clearly help map separate categories of inscriptions. Not only the high concentration of inscriptions has a big visual impact, but so does their spread as well, because no part of the territory is empty. This could not be created without digital aid, and the maps illustrate how the topographical distribution of inscriptions can be analyzed in greater detail to provide a multi-layered picture of veterans. ArcGIS maps show that there is a visible clustering: the most numerous veterans come from the two legions stationed in the province (legio VII Claudia and legio IIII Flavia Felix) and the dispersion of the legionary veterans being present in the north and south of the province. Ex-soldiers settled in the north were located near the legionary camps, and the veterans settled in the south of the province were settled through deductio agraria. Most auxiliary veterans settle in the place where they performed their military service (for example, Timacum Minus).

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 4.1

We have also applied some spatial analysis, in order to extract new information and meaning from the original data. The result of summarizing data tool is a new layer with polygons (grid/area) with a size of 40 km. The analysis calculated the number of points (location of veterans) that fit into each surface and the total number of inscriptions from the grid/area (Fig. 4, 4.1). The find locations tool identified existing features that meet a series of criteria we specify. In our case, the analysis pinpointed legionaries established at a distance of 200 km from the military camps (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5

In conclusion, viewing results on an interactive map offers the possibility to adjust and adapt analysis until we find the answers we need. Interactive maps create immersive experiences that transform maps from a static view into an opportunity for users to explore. The results demonstrate the potential of the GIS approach in testing the hypotheses produced by traditional epigraphic studies.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Review of Ugarit Alignment Tool

Textual Alignment of Res Gestae: Translation in Historical Languages
by Sisi Xie

Commenting on the Ugarit alignment tool:

1. Introduction

Res Gestae Divi Augusti (RG), written by Augustus during his lifetime, is a direct reflection of the posthumous image that he intended to leave engraved. It was initially inscribed in Latin on two bronze steles in front of the mausoleum of Augustus at Rome. The Greek texts were translations targeted at the Greek audience who might not have direct access to the Latin original. The textual comparison of RG in two historical languages has attracted considerable scholarly attention, before the advent of digital tools. As previous research has shown, text alignment by hand and paper generates reliable and insightful conclusions (e.g. Cooley’s Res Gestae Divi Augusti, 2009, 26–30). The development of digital humanities opens up more possibilities to perform research via diverse approaches, among which Ugarit is a well-developed online tool designed for textual alignment.

Textual alignment, or translation alignment in the case of RG, is one type of annotation to link a word or expression in a text with the matching one in the correspondent text, creating aligned word pairs. Parallel texts can be written in different languages or come from different versions of the same source. Ugarit’s user-friendly interface presents visualized data of textual alignment, including easily recognized translation pairs, alignment statistics, rates of correspondence and others. While enjoying wide popularity in alignment of ancient texts and modern translations, it also shows a research potential in matching texts from multiple historical languages, especially those in which the original version and the translation have been distinguished. RG, like the Rosetta Stone, is a suitable bilingual sample for Ugarit to reveal the correspondence and divergence in source texts and translated texts. It is the aim of this project to examine whether Ugarit could provide a better insight into the comparison of bilingual texts of RG than paperwork, and what more benefits Ugarit could provide than non-digital methods. More specifically the project tries to investigate via Ugarit what strategy the Greek translators adopted and how much the translation followed or deviated from the original Latin.

2. Alignment

With the Latin as source texts and the Greek as target texts, the project connects each word in the translations with source texts. The alignment focuses more on the semantical relation rather than syntactical. Pairs are aligned when an attempt to translate words in the source texts is detected and a Greek equivalence is created, regardless of accuracy. This could result in a higher alignment rate, though some pairs aligned are not necessarily precise correspondents. Further evaluations on whether the translation truly reflects the desired meaning of the source texts and to what aspect the distortion goes are recorded beyond the web tool, using pen or computer. Only the first twelve chapters are aligned given the length of RG. The conclusion of alignment is built on the one hand from the visualisation and statistics automatically generated by Ugarit, and on the other from notes taken manually outside Ugarit.

Ugarit offers general and instantly visible results on the dashboard after the manual alignment process is finished, but information emerges during the process of alignment, much of which cannot be detected from the final visualization. A word-to-word alignment practice continuously reveals the degree of loyalty of Greet target texts to the source texts. Based on the twelve chapters examined, the purpose of translation was to create a Greek reduplication of Latin source texts as precise and comprehensive as possible. A combination of various strategies was used to minimize the chance of negligence and distortion: literal translation, transliteration and liberal translation.

Literal translation, which was the most frequently adopted technique, matched each Latin word with a Greek correspondent and closely followed the word order of Latin source texts. The preciseness of literal translation finds its best evidence on Latin particles, which in most cases were allocated Greek equivalence, though their absence had little influence on the core meaning of the sentences. At times the translators adjusted the word order to make it more idiomatic for the Greek audience. The translation pattern adopted a more flexible structure and appeared like a reorganization of the original puzzle, of which few pieces were left and the overall picture remained largely the same. When applicable, Latin source words were replaced by Greek words of the same part of speech, but exceptions existed. Perpetum as an adverb in chapter 5 was translated into a prepositional phrase διὰ βίου, and similarly prospere in chapter 12 was replaced by κατὰ τὰς εὐχὰς.

Transliteration was adopted mostly on proper names of Latin that sounded unfamiliar to the Greek audience, such as names of Roman gods, magistrates, or verbs that harboured unique meanings in the Roman context. The translators judged it unnecessary to explain the exact meanings of the proper name, or there was simply no Greek correspondent that made any sense. Fetialis and saliare (salis) were rewrote in Greek alphabet as φητιᾶλις and σαλίων (RG. 7.3, 10.1).

Liberal translation, or loose translation that shows a weaker link with the source texts, occurred in the following conditions: 1) auxiliary expressions were needed to compose a fluent sentence. In chapter 9, besides translating conjunctive adverbs aliquotiens…aliquotiens into τοτὲ…τοτὲ, an additional pair of μὲν…δὲ was added to better suit the Greek idiomatic writing habit. 2) The meaning of the Latin source words required further explanation, or existing Greek vocabularies failed to give meaning to the Latin source words. Triumvirum in chapter 1 was expanded into τὴν τῶν τριῶν ἀνδρῶν ἒχοντα ἀρχὴν, and later in chapter 7 abbreviated into τριῶν ἀνδρῶν. Again in chapter 7, princeps senatus found its explanation as πρῶτον ἀξιώματος τόπον ἒσχον τῆς συνκλήτου. Expansion and differentiated translations for the same word indicate that the translators were not mechanically spotting a resembling piece of a puzzle only by appearance, but their aim was to compose a readable translation when it still fell within their ability. Exempla was used twice in 8.4. The translators make the first into ἐθῶν and the latter μείμημα.

A more flexible word order and a greater degree of liberal translation reflect the difficulty in sorting out proper Greek expressions for Roman events and phenomenons. Sentences concerning political concepts, specified practice and religious affairs experience more omission and distortion. Details in narration are countered by disorder and omission when it comes to the actual power Augustus had gained, which he took caution to veil. The translators thought a single δουλήσας sufficient to describe Augustus’ effort in liberating the Romans, leaving oppressam that modified rem publicam as well as in libertatem untouched (RG. 1.1). In the religious sphere, the translators did not bother to make clear distinctions between groups of priests with variable names and duties. XVvirum sacris faciundis and VIIvirum epulonum were indiscriminately translated into ἀνδρῶν τῶν εροποιῶν. Pontifices and virgines Vestales were only distinguished by their sexual difference, one in masculine τοὺς ἱερεῖς and the other in feminine τὰς ἱερείας (RG. 7.2, 11). Even in literal translation, unintentional distortion or misinterpretation cannot be avoided given the different cultural backgrounds and natures of languages. Imperator in the Augustan discourse does not necessarily contain the absolute rule that αὐτοκράτωρ conveys, and πολεῖς is not perfect equivalence of municipatim (RG. 4 and 9).


Figure 1 Preview Page

Statistics and visualisation generated by Ugarit shed light on the translation tactic from a broader perspective. Visually it is easy to identify the aligned pairs of expressions and the remaining unaligned parts by their differences in colours. At the bottom of the “preview” page, one can find two percentage bars showing the proportion of words aligned (screenshotabove). A summary of the alignment rates in each chapter (screenshot below), which is not given by Ugarit, provides an insight into how fully translated each chapter was. The gaps of chapter 5 and 11 may indicate a considerable number of untranslated Latin words, while that of chapter 10 an attempt by the translators to extend the interpretation of unfamiliar Latin concepts. But for other chapters, no safe conclusion can be drawn, given the nuance in number. A gap of 7% is not necessarily the sign for a looser translation than that of 2%, if taking into account that too many elements have a hand on the final result. One reason for the Latin rates falling below the Greek ones is that word amounts of Latin texts are usually smaller than the Greek, so one untranslated Latin word results in a greater drop of rate than a Greek word.

Figure 2 Alignment rate by chapter

Translation pairs are singled out in a separate chart, with the frequency of each pair included. The chart is potentially useful in detecting if a set phrase in Latin was consistently translated into another set expression in Greek, but to make the statistics more accurate, both texts input have to be lemmatised first. The alignment statistics presented in the bar chart calculate the number of 1-N, N-1 and N-N pairs. For example, it can be safely concluded from the chart of chapter 1 (screenshot below) that 1-1 alignment was the most frequently used translation techniques, which can also be observed during the alignment process. The high frequency of 1-1 alignment could attest to the loyalty of Greek translation to find a correspondence for each word in the Latin texts. Yet the major results, including the proportion bars, translation pairs and alignment statistics, are infected by the alignment strategy and the nature of languages involved. Setting criteria of eligible alignment is based on the users’ judgement of what counts as recognisable translation to their knowledge. Also, the 1-N alignment results not only from the different cultural backgrounds of Greeks and Romans, as Greek texts used more words to explain one Latin word; but also from the fact that each Greek noun had an article, and consequently a Greek noun group contained more words.

Figure 3 Alignment statistics of chapter 1


Both the process and results of alignment reveal an interesting combination of translation techniques used in the Greek translation of RG. The translators followed 1-1 literal translation whenever possible, but never aimed to produce an accurate scholarly translation that modern editions of ancient texts strive for. The desired outcome was an easy-to-read but close paraphrase of the original inscribed Latin, in which occasional omission and misinterpretation were tolerable. But this is only a premature observation of the phenomena shown in translation, not the reasons behind them.

The process of judging and deciding whether a translation should be aligned places its users into a similar situation with the Greek translators. They both have to consciously set a standard for eligible translation and to specify the main target of their practice. The repeated practice of moving and clicking the mouse reinforces a clearer awareness of textual correspondence, and the web-page storing alignment results enables frequent and convenient revisit. Statistics and visualisation reveal some aspects of alignment that might be overlooked by traditional alignment, inspiring users to probe deeper and provide explanations for the automatically generated results. Yet the more easily obtained alignment pattern and statistics are not the answer itself, but a reflection of one facet of the answer. The reasons behind such phenomena require more deliberation beyond the online tool. If the project is designed to unravel the reception of Greek provinces of the reign of Augustus and his disseminated propaganda, more understanding of the historical context of the excavated inscriptions and a sound mastery of the Greek language are indispensable. Overall, Ugarit effectively provides a platform to set the texts in alignment, enabling frequent and convenient revisiting and rechecking. It is only the starting point of textual alignment and comparison, but this starting point steps beyond the line that mere paperwork could draw.

Posted in Teaching, Tools | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Review of the Papyrological Editor

Review of the Papyrological Editor of
by Despina Borcea

I. Introduction: Aim & Outline

Released in 2010 as a new platform for what was previously three separate papyrological databases, the Advanced Papyrological Information System (APIS), the Duke Databank of Documentary Papyri (DDbDP) and Heidelberger Gesamtverzeichnis der griechischen Papyrusurkunden Ägyptens (HGV), represents a papyrological research tool with two main functions: to access collections of non-literary texts via its Papyrological Navigator (PN) interface, and to edit such entries and their apparatus criticus according to relevant critical editions via the Papyrological Editor (PE). This review is based on a project designed to encode editorial corrections on several papyri in Leiden+ using the Papyrological Editor (PE) as an instrument, which I encountered while undertaking a module on Digital Classics taught via the SunoikisisDC programme at the Institute of Classical Studies as part of the UCL MA in Classics (2021). The review is intended to assess the usability and accessibility of the PE’s user interface in relation to the general function of the PE model based on the project and its results.

II. Methodology

The first phase of the project was to identify the necessary changes to make in the apparatus criticus of several papyri: for this project, 20 corrections to-be-made were allocated (an example below), taken from The Son of Suda Online (SoSOL) “Editing Assignments” Spreadsheet and applied to the texts. The spreadsheet was used to track both authorship as well as progress status of submissions (see below).

When opening the digital version of a papyrus in the Leiden+ format of the Papyrological Editor, the interface also offers the option to open and download the XML file of the document:

Except for one editorial decision, as to how to expand an abbreviation, all other submissions were either corrections or additions to the apparatus criticus of a papyrus, according to newer editions, as specified on the SoSOL spreadsheet. The changes varied, within the boundaries of editorial corrections to a published document, from supplying and defining numerical values to expanding abbreviations. The figure below shows an example of an editorial correction:

Following the completion of the edits, the changes made were described in brief commentaries, which were submitted for publication simultaneously. The observations shown below describe such changes, alongside other clarifications regarding the digital version not corresponding with the variant on the SoSOL spreadsheet; (as G. Bodard pointed out to me) the online DDB reporting the correction has expanded the abbreviation, whilst the print edition in the BL did not feel the need to:

Finally, the editorial board decided on publishing or vetoing the changes and returned with feedback in both cases. The comments are conveniently accessible via the ‘See All comments’ section of a papyrus presentation page. An example is provided below:

Regarding the progress of the project, my expectations of operating with Leiden+ were not only met, but exceeded by the results. In terms of publication, all corrections made before the set deadline were published, with the exception of those on P.Lond. 3 1254. The modifications on the latter were vetoed not due to errors in the code, but (as N. Gonis observed) because of a more recent re-edition of the text than the one included in the SoSOL spreadsheet. The unambiguous format of Leiden+, strongly resembling the Leiden conventions aided the speed of my code input, which was followed by an extremely prompt feedback timeline. The results were returned with commentaries from the editorial board, as shown in the figure above.

III. Discussion
III.1 Improvable Features

While carrying out the editing , no major faults with the interface accessibility were identified. Thus, the following observations represent potential improvements without which carrying out experiments with similar results would be perfectly possible.

The following two observations concern the visibility of edits on the PE interface. Its potential improvement could render the PE more time efficient. Firstly, while carrying out the experiment, it was observed that there was no method of comparing the proposed draft with the original at the time of editing in the Papyrological Editor. While the ‘Preview’ section proved useful in reviewing the changes made, there was no direct way of examining the edits before saving and previewing them. One example, shown below pertains to P.Lond. 3 1254. Here ‘=>=D>’ was accidentally deleted at the end of the final line (43), but it was not immediately noticeable and thus the PE flagged an error in Leiden+:

As the correction on line 43 was not the only change made on P.Lond. 3 1254, and the reason for the error was not immediately visible, the entire submission was deleted and restarted from scratch. For efficiency purposes, perhaps it would be useful to have a parallel window next to the PE box to show the original version of the Leiden+ at the time of editing. Alternatively, a pop-up text in the preview showing the original Leiden+ of the line, similar to the message showing when holding the cursor over a footnote in the apparatus criticus (figure below; this screenshot is taken from SB 24.16222, as the edits on P.Lond. 3 1254 were not committed), might make the PE interface less overcrowded than the first suggestion (provided there is a way of efficiently storing the original Leiden+ data).

The second observation regarding the visibility of edits in the Papyrological Editor refers to the ‘Preview’ stage. After saving the amendments on the papyri, they were reviewed prior to their submission to the editorial board. As the length of the papyri varied greatly, it was noted that in the longer texts, the changes in the ‘Preview’ stage were not immediately easy to spot. To illustrate this, P.Oxy. 1 43 is used as an example in fig. below on the left. Because of the extensive nature of both the papyrus and its apparatus criticus, as well as the similarity between specific lines, finding and reviewing the edit in line 18 (highlighted) was moderately confusing. For visibility and efficiency purposes, perhaps it would be advantageous to display the changes made in a colour-coordinated mode between the correction in the text and the note in the apparatus criticus, in addition to the ‘(*)’ at the end of the in-line correction. An example is offered in the two figures below:










III.2 Advantages

The overall success of the project, in the form of the corrections’ publication, demonstrates the accessibility of the Papyrological Editor. The ease of navigation in PE is realised through several elements. Firstly, the layout of the editorial window in Leiden+ conveniently presents the reviser with a handful of useful instruments, without overcrowding the interface:



The options presented at the top of the editing window, as above, offer an author without full knowledge of Leiden+ the option to make amendments via a pop-up window (left). The accessibility of the interface is further emphasized by the ‘Find Error’ feature (same figure above), which identifies potential mistakes prior to the ‘Preview’ stage. This is a particularly useful tool for a Leiden+ beginner. The Papyrological Editor also includes a guide to operating in Leiden+ as an alternative (right). The guidelines are detailed in separate sections accordingly. The practical nature of the examples found in the guidelines, highlighted below, facilitates editorial efficiency. The interface retains its overall clarity on the ‘Home’ page as well, which displays the status of the edits in progress, and the outcome of previous submissions:

Lastly, one key strength of the PE lies in the appearance of Leiden+. With the exception that ‘Leiden+ must in some cases be more verbose than traditional Leiden, (…) due to the fact that Leiden+ must be able to be transformed into unambiguous, valid EpiDoc XML’ (Baumann 2013, p. 102), the syntax proved straightforwardly intuitive, because of how closely it resembles the Leiden conventions. The similarity further simplifies the encoding process.

III.3 Overall Assessment

Babeu notes that ‘one strength of this model is that rejected proposals are not deleted forever, and are instead retained in the digital record, in case new data or better arguments appear to support them.’ (Babeu 2011, p.148). An example is shown in the figure below:

By keeping an accessible record of the edits on a papyrus, the PE interface strikes a balance, in that it stores useful information on a papyrus without overcrowding its interface. The point Damon makes about the despair of the philologist at the sight of different editions (Damon 2016, para. 39) is something that manages to avoid, as the PE’s flexibility lies in the possibility of averting or further exploring the prolixity of an apparatus criticus, according to the research needs of the scholar. In this way, the PE manages to ‘support the creation of ‘‘ideal’’ digital editions where the editor does not have to decide on a ‘‘best text’’ since all editorial decisions could be linked to their base data (e.g., manuscript images, diplomatic transcriptions)’ (Bodard and Garcés 2009, p.96).

Moreover, through its accessibility, the Papyrological Editor retains its constant potential to develop further. As such, the DDbDP is not ‘a fixed resource, finished at some date, unwavering and confident that it knows all; rather, it is a collection of conjectures, now easily capable of being revisited, revised, and improved.’ (Baumann 2013, p.105). This observation renders true through the PE instrument, which supports continuous editing, according to the state of the latest papyrological scholarship. In this way, its user friendliness allows the DDbDP collection to remain actual, and therefore relevant.

III.4 Greater Research Purposes

If used as a springboard, the model of the Papyrological Editor of may accommodate three possibilities. Firstly, its accessible interface could constitute a model for non-papyrological projects, to create textual databases for material in other languages. Secondly, its academically creditable and user-friendly approach, guaranteed by the assessment of an accredited editorial board, could also represent an example for other digital projects, both in the general sphere of Classics and outside. In this way, collections of printed editions of non-papyrological texts could acquire digital versions placed under constant review by authorised editors and thus become relevant databases for scholarly research, without the risk of being outdated. Finally, the content of the collections, constantly actualised through its Papyrological Editor, can be a springboard for other projects, through its Open Access license. An example is University of Helsinki’s PapyGreek project, mentioned by Vannini in her review of

IV. Conclusion

As outlined in the previous segments, the accessibility of the PE interface of renders it an effective research instrument for specialised papyrologists and classical enthusiasts alike. Its user-friendliness is firstly reflected in the overall successful completion of the experiment, contradicting the original expectations of an author with no prior experience in digital papyrology. The PE interface model’s main lie in the straightforwardly useful board at the top of the editing window, the clear Leiden+ guidelines (accessible via the same window), and in particular the ‘Find Error’ feature, as well as the overall coherent design of the PE in relation to the PN, which facilitate ease of navigation. One other noted advantage was the straightforwardness of Leiden+, similar to the Leiden Conventions. Conversely, improvable features of the PE relate to its display: better time efficiency could be achieved if a parallel window with the original Leiden+ would appear at the time of editing; likewise, visibility of edits could be further emphasized in the ‘Preview’ section—particularly relevant for papyri with an extensive body and apparatus criticus.

The overall assessment of the interface renders it a balanced tool in its flexibility, transparency, and actuality. Thus, the purpose of the PE of is reached, as it represents the means through which ‘to give digital form now to the mature state of textual scholarship represented by print editions, while leaving open the possibility of adding the underlying image and transcription data when and if opportunities arise.’ (Damon 2016, para. 40). Moreover, ‘permanent transparency’ as ‘the guiding principle behind SoSOL’ is achieved via the edit-probing of a proficient editorial board, which may render the PE of a more competent and credible a research tool than other user-friendly instruments with informative purposes (e.g., Wikipedia). In this way, classicists (and others) without training in the sphere of Digital Humanities can contribute to the sphere of papyrology without being detrimental to the academic accuracy (and therefore, credibility) of this resource. The PE may also constitute a springboard for other research initiatives, through its model, approach, and content. Whether as an accessible digital tool in its own right or a springboard for other such initiatives, the Papyrological Editor of is an instrument which facilitates, through its accessible interface and model, continuous and up-to-date research, both in the sphere of Papyrology, as well as beyond it.

Posted in EpiDoc, report, Teaching | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Report on 3D imaging placement at the ICS

By Lucy Rumble

This summer I undertook a two-week Roman Society Museum & Heritage Summer placement at the Institute of Classical Studies (ICS), University of London, under the supervision of Gabriel Bodard. I was tasked with continuing work started in 2019 to create 3D digitisations of items held within the Ehrenberg Collection. The collection comprises a variety of Greek and Roman artefacts spanning several centuries, which were gifted to the ICS by Victor Ehrenberg. The opportunity was a perfect fit for my own interests as I have just completed a BA in Ancient, Medieval and Modern History at Durham University, and am due to embark on the MA in Digital Humanities at UCL this autumn.

Before I arrived at the ICS, Gabriel provided me with some video tutorials and suggested that I familiarise myself with the theory and practice of photogrammetry, the process of combining multiple 2D images to create a 3D model using specialised software. The tutorials provided me with sufficient knowledge to photograph the objects myself, and to merge them using Agisoft Metashape and Autodesk MeshMixer. Over the two-week period, I was able to successfully digitise six items from the library’s collection, putting aside a couple more after several failed attempts at producing a complete model. These latter items were similarly imaged from inside a light tent (shown above right), but their uniformly black surfaces proved too reflective for the software to accurately identify and so the model was repeatedly rendered with gaps. Through trial and error, I learnt that more detail often correlated with greater accuracy in the final 3D model as the software was able to detect a higher number of overlapping points.

Despite its largely black surfaces, this lekythos was successfully rendered due to the slight variation provided by the decorative orange band around its body and the chipped surface of the neck.

Digital model of sherd

Over the course of the second week, I attempted the task of digitising two objects which required every angle to be photographed (example left). While the bases of figurines and lekythoi did not need to be photographed, sherds and other fragments must be captured from every angle. To achieve this, I needed to create two models which showcased each half of the object. I could then “stitch” these together using Agisoft Metashape to create a complete model. This was the most challenging aspect of my experience, compounded by the software which took a considerable time to run through each element of the digitising process.

As a technique, photogrammetry is hugely beneficial to recording our cultural heritage, and the published models provide a more interactive and widely accessible way of viewing physical objects within a collection. This manner of archiving historical data comes as a natural response to the digital age and emphasises the continued importance of preserving, cataloguing, and displaying such data. Uploading 3D models online maintains public interest in historical items and has the potential to reach a global audience. The ICS library set up its project with just these aims in mind. Indeed, the Sketchfab collection is particularly beneficial in this instance because the Ehrenberg bequest is a handling collection. Its objects are intended to be interacted with, but constraints on physical space and members of staff who can supervise such handling mean that it is not possible to do so every day. Digitisation therefore removes these constraints and will eventually allow every item within the Ehrenberg collection to be accessed online. It was a privilege to contribute to this important work.

My contributions were not only beneficial to ongoing work at the ICS, but also provided me with valuable experience in this aspect of digital humanities ahead of my postgraduate course. The opportunity to work largely independently greatly increased my confidence, and I found photogrammetry relatively easy to pick up with rudimentary knowledge of photography. Particularly useful was the link Gabriel provided to a document recording ongoing difficulties encountered during photogrammetry. Not only did this emphasise the relative novelty of my work, but also encouraged me to experiment with both the photography and software elements of the process. The reward of finding my own solutions and the ability to contribute something tangible to the ICS library’s ongoing digitisation project were most valuable.

This two-week placement at the ICS provided me with an enjoyable and valuable insight into the field of digital humanities. It pushed me to work independently and equipped me with the skills and confidence to tackle new digital tasks. I am grateful to the Roman Society for their organisation and funding and to Gabriel and the staff at the ICS Library for their welcome and support. I am excited to continue my work in the digital humanities field, and I hope that my contributions to collections at the ICS are helpful to future scholars.

Digitised items from the Ehrenberg Collection can be viewed at

Posted in report, Teaching | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Report on Durham/ICS Digital and Practical Epigraphy Course 4-8 April 2022

Report by Julius Guthrie, Charlotte Spence & Elena Tzoka.

In the first week of April 2022 a training workshop was held at the Institute of Classical Studies, University of London, to provide an introduction to the core issues and methods involved in epigraphy. The focus of the workshop was on skills for Greek and Latin epigraphy, including squeeze-making, photogrammetry, and EpiDoc, a community of practice, recommendations and tools for the digital editing and publication of ancient texts based on TEI XML. As digital humanities continues to become an increasingly important part of the field, this aspect of the training was particularly welcome.

The training was offered by Gabriel Bodard (ICS), Katherine McDonald (Durham), and Irene Vagionakis (ENCODE project, Bologna), with contributions from Caroline Barron (Durham), Matilde Grimaldi, and others. This workshop was generously funded by the AHRC Early Career Fellowship ‘Connectivity and Competition’ (grant AH/R010943/1; PI Katherine McDonald), the Institute of Classical Studies and Durham University.

A drying squeeze on Latin inscription. Photo: Julius Guthrie.

Summary of Content:

Each day of the course was split into two. The first half of the day, until roughly 1pm, was used for watching self-paced videos that had been pre-recorded by the instructors. The second half of the day was interactive. For in-person participants this was classroom-based learning and a chance not only to ask questions, but to put skills viewed online to the test in a practical setting. These classroom sessions featured a guest lecture from a professional epigraphist. For online participants, the afternoon structure was similar and they joined those in the classroom via a hybrid format.

Ink illustration of Latin inscription, by Charlotte Spence

The week began with an online, self-paced introduction to the theme of the week, which included a series of videos that introduced us to epigraphy and the practical skills that epigraphists require in order to read, record, and work with inscriptions. These included showing how squeezes are formed and how drawing inscriptions might help us capture details that would be nearly impossible to see in person or on pictures. The guest lecture delivered by Dr Matilde Grimaldi focused on how useful the art of illustration can be in academic work. Many of the examples presented clearly showed how greatly a clear illustration can improve the clarity and understanding of ideas and arguments.

On the Tuesday, the focus switched to understanding and practicing photogrammetry as a tool for epigraphy. Aykan Akcay, the guest lecturer, exhibited his own field work and guided us through the process of gathering images that would eventually be turned into 3D models. In addition, the lecture illustrated how different digital light settings may help in reading worn inscriptions and revealing subtleties that were otherwise not visible with the naked eye. Using the programmes Agisoft Metashape and Autodesk Meshmixer, participants were then able to attempt their own photogrammetry on a range of objects supplied.

Charlotte Spence capturing photographs of a statuette for photogrammetry. Photo: Katherine McDonald

The Tuesday also contained an optional evening component, with a talk given on a project cataloguing the inscriptions of Libya and creating an online corpus using EpiDoc. This provided a fascinating insight into how skills learned on this course could be applied in practice.

On Wednesday the emphasis was on the production of computer-readable databases with the self-paced videos introducing us to XML, EpiDoc and the programme Oxygen. This was a great opportunity to engage with the skills we had heard being discussed the previous evening.

Caroline Barron speaking on Identifying Fakes and Forgeries in Latin Inscriptions. Photo: Katherine McDonald.

The guest lecture was delivered by Dr Caroline Barron and focused on the creation of epigraphic forgeries, both the addition of inscriptions later to ancient objects, such as ash chests, as well as the creation of entirely fake objects. A discussion of the production of epigraphic corpora was necessarily included and was incredibly illuminating; our understanding of epigraphy as a discipline is shaped by the decisions of these early individuals.

The next day, Thursday, very much drew together the various strands of the course up to that point, and allowed participants the opportunity to really be epigraphists through the medium of a field-trip to Old St. Pancras Gardens. In particular, the excursion was useful for giving participants a genuine understanding of the practical challenges that can be presented by landscape, weather and ethics (the site is a graveyard); all of which can be studied in a classroom but only really understood after fieldwork. Techniques such as using a racking light meant that letter shapes which had initially been completely invisible literally came to light and helped participants create a fuller transcription of the text.

Friday, as the last day of the course, was used as an opportunity to ask questions, practice skills and present work completed for informal feedback in a supportive environment. Participants seem to have found this especially useful, since it gave an opportunity for everyone to listen to the challenges encountered by each person while learning the various tools introduced throughout the week.


One of the most difficult challenges for a skills-based workshop is to appeal to a diverse audience, with differing levels of knowledge about the subject and divergent areas of interest. This report has been co-authored by three individuals who approach epigraphy from entirely different angles: one works primarily of cursed-tablets, one is a predominantly political historian and the other examines material evidence for women in Roman Athens. Despite our varied interests, we each of us found this course to be remarkably stimulating, enjoyable and informative. One author, in particular, has since gone on to consider how the digital aspects of the course could allow them to turn a project they are working on into an online database.

Workshop participants documenting a grave monument in St Pancras Old Cemetery. Photo: Katherine McDonald.

The split day approach with self-paced videos followed by collaborative discussions and practical engagement was a particular success. This approach encouraged individualisation, not only in terms of what was of interest, but in terms of overcoming specific problems when learning new skills. The ability to return to footage over and over, to pause and to rewind allowed participants to gain a full and deep understanding of issues and skills that would not be possible if simply delivered orally. It also gave everyone a chance to develop detailed questions for the afternoons and to think ahead regarding what they would do in the practical sessions.

Overall, this course was a fantastic introduction to digital and practical epigraphy, and credit should be given to those, mentioned above, who organised and delivered it, and thanks to the Institute of Classical Studies for hosting the workshop.

Julius Guthrie, University of Exeter
Charlotte Spence, University of Exeter
Elena Tzoka, University of Durham

Posted in EpiDoc, seminar, Teaching | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Digital Classicist London 2022 programme

The programme for the summer 2022 series of the Digital Classicist London seminar is now available. The seminar was organized by Gabriel Bodard (University of London), Paula Granados García (British Museum), Kelly McClinton (Oxford) and Valeria Vitale (Alan Turing Institute), and brings together presentations and discussions of innovative digital approaches to research, teaching, dissemination or engagement related to the ancient and pre-modern worlds.

All seminars are streamed live at 17:00 UK time (UTC+1) on the Digital Classicist Youtube channel, and from June 24 onward will also be held in room 349 of Senate House, London. Details of individual seminars at the links below.

  • Fri May 27, 2022 Matei Tichindelean (University of California Los Angeles), Digital Reconstruction of the Akhenaten Torso in the Brooklyn Museum (online) (details) (Youtube)
  • Fri Jun 10, 2022 Scott Madry (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Historical Ecology of Southern Burgundy (online) (details) (Youtube)
  • Fri Jun 24, 2022 Valeria Vitale, Katherine McDonough (Alan Turing Institute), et al., Antiquities and the Machine: computational methods for the study of the representation of historical sites on Ordnance Survey Maps of Great Britain (in-person) (details) (Youtube)
  • Fri Jul 1, 2022 Farnoosh Shamsian (University of Leipzig), Learning Ancient Greek in Persian through digital annotations (remote speaker) (details) (Youtube)
  • Fri Jul 15, 2022 Alice Clinch (Cornell) & Jari Pakkanen (Royal Holloway), Documenting ancient plasters in 3D: comparing standard and focus-stacking macro photogrammetry (in-person) (details) (Youtube)
  • Fri Jul 29, 2022 Reuben J. Pitts (KU Leuven) Corpus of the Epigraphy of the Italian Peninsula in the 1st Millennium BCE (in-person) (details) (Youtube)

Registration is not required. All welcome.

Posted in seminar | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Digital Classicist London 2022 call for papers

The Digital Classicist: Advanced digital methods applied to the study of the ancient world

The Digital Classicist London seminar invites proposals for the Summer 2022 series. We are looking for seminars on any aspect of the ancient or pre-colonial worlds, that address innovative digital approaches to research, teaching, dissemination or engagement. Seminars that speak to the ancient world beyond Greco-Roman antiquity are especially welcome.

Seminars will be held fortnightly through June and July in the Institute of Classical Studies, Senate House, London, with the possibility for audience and speakers to be present or remote (although we hope most speakers will be physically present in London, circumstances allowing). We have a small budget to support travel for speakers within the UK.

Please send an abstract of 300–500 words to <> (clearly marked Digital Classicist London) by Sunday April 10.

Posted in Call for papers, seminar | Tagged , | Leave a comment