Issue 518: How do we interpret periods in the CRM
In the 48th CIDOC CRM and 41st FRBR CRM sig meeting (virtual),upon discussing the example for P183 ends before the start of (issue 484), there was disagreement regarding whether a phase of a settlement should be construed as an instance of E4 Period or E7 Activity. The sig decided to start a new issue to address the debate on how to interpret periods in the CRM (settlements and administration of communities involved).
HW: Research on the new issue assigne to Martin Doerr and Athina Kritsotaki.
October 2020
In the 49th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 42nd FRBR – CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, AK & MD presented their HW, a description of the Early Helladic II Period and the Early Helladic III Period defined by the characteristics of settlements. In the examples put forward, Lerna_I would be a period within the settlement activity Lerna-A-B-C.
HW: MD to formulate explicit examples
Post by Martin Doerr (14 June 2021)
Dear All,
This is an example for E7 Activity:
The settlement activity of the population of Lerna IV and Lerna V (E7)
["While Caskey notes a major cultural break between the EH II and EH III remains at Lerna, he argues for a high level of continuity in the following periods, until the site was transformed into a cemetery during LH I. The domestic architecture dating from EH III to LH I (Lerna IV-V, roughly from 2200-1500 B.C.) is therefore considered together as a physical expression of one cultural group, naturally acknowledging and critically examining significant changes over the course of this period. Caskey‟s reports are supplemented by the works of Jeremy Rutter and Carol Zerner, which are particularly important for the EH III and early MH remains respectively. " Following the presentation and analysis of the architecture, the houses are contextualized within the settlement as a whole ]
(Elizabeth Courtney Banks, The Settlement and Architecture of Lerna IV. Lerna: results of excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 6. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2013)
In the 50th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 43nd FRBR – CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, the SIG reviewed the example by MD & AK in support of treating settlements as instances of E7 Activity.
- The settlement activity of the population of Lerna IV and Lerna V (E7)
Discussion points:
TV: is the example to be used in juxtaposition with the example for E4 Period? Or do we not need to do that? The purpose of the issue was to illustrate how we define E4 Periods in the CRM.
MD: we should probably link the example to E4 Period –do we typically repeat examples to superclasses for didactic reasons? Should we rework it to make it suited for E4 Period too?
SdS: maintains that the example looks like an instance of E4 Period instead of E7 Activity. It refers to a collection of actions, not one particular thing that someone did at a given time. However, it could be considered the collective activity of one group. The difference should be made explicit, which requires a lot of work before we can use it in the CRM. The example should not be repeated as such with additional comments in E4. Rather, we should use variants of this example for the respective classes. Showcase that it is the level of granularity in one’s perspective that determines whether an instance of a settlement will relate to an E7 Activity or an E4 Period.
Decision: MD to provide the set of examples and to start an evote on them (HW).
June 2021
post by Eleni on Jyly 4th, 2021
Dear all,
According to the discussion of issue 518 in the 50th sig meeting, the question whether settlements are interpreted as instances of E4 Period or E7 Activity in the CRM, depends on the granularity with which the information is presented in each case.
With that in mind, Martin has created two variants of one and the same example (Lerna IV and Lerna V settlements) to demonstrate the case in point.
The vote is to decide on whether to accept each of the two examples following Martin’s reformulation [see below].
The possible votes are:
* Yes = accept/agree
* No = do not accept/agree
* Other = With other you can either introduce a caveat (e.g.: 'Yes, but there is a typo on word x, fix it.') or you can write VETO, if you wish to stop the proposal, in which case you should also write a justification and reformulate the issue (e.g.: 'VETO, this change is unacceptable because it violates the following principle...')
Please send your e-votes by the 18th of July.
All the best,
Eleni
Settlements as instances of E7 Activity
The settlement activity of the population of Lerna IV and Lerna V (E7)
[The expression "a physical expression of one cultural group" in the following citation of (Banks, 2013) justifies regarding this settlement activity as one instance of E7 Activity, with a distinct identity and unity. In contrast, the mentioned periods such as EH II, EH III , etc. are of more general nature and hence examples of E4 Period only. The citation is:
"While Caskey notes a major cultural break between the EH II and EH III remains at Lerna, he argues for a high level of continuity in the following periods, until the site was transformed into a cemetery during LH I. The domestic architecture dating from EH III to LH I (Lerna IV-V, roughly from 2200-1500 B.C.) is therefore considered together as a physical expression of one cultural group, naturally acknowledging and critically examining significant changes over the course of this period. Caskey's reports are supplemented by the works of Jeremy Rutter and Carol Zerner, which are particularly important for the EH III and early MH remains respectively.] (Banks, 2013)
Settlements as instances of E4 Period
The settlement activity of the population of Lerna IV and Lerna V (E7)
[Whereas periods such as EH II, EH III mentioned in the following citation of (Banks, 2013), etc. are typical examples of archaeological periods (E4 Period), the expression "a physical expression of one cultural group" justifies regarding this particular settlement activity more specifically as one instance of E7 Activity, with a distinct identity and unity. The citation is:
"While Caskey notes a major cultural break between the EH II and EH III remains at Lerna, he argues for a high level of continuity in the following periods, until the site was transformed into a cemetery during LH I. The domestic architecture dating from EH III to LH I (Lerna IV-V, roughly from 2200-1500 B.C.) is therefore considered together as a physical expression of one cultural group, naturally acknowledging and critically examining significant changes over the course of this period. Caskey's reports are supplemented by the works of Jeremy Rutter and Carol Zerner, which are particularly important for the EH III and early MH remains respectively.] (Banks, 2013)
(Elizabeth Courtney Banks, The Settlement and Architecture of Lerna IV.
Lerna: results of excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 6. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2013)
In the 51st CIDOC CRM & 44th FRBRoo SIG meeting, the example re the settlement actibvity of the population of Lerna IV & Lerna V was put to a vote and accepted. The example reads:
Example: The settlement activity of the population of Lerna IV and Lerna V (E7)
["While Caskey notes a major cultural break between the EH II and EH III remains at Lerna, he argues for a high level of continuity in the following periods, until the site was transformed into a cemetery during LH I. The domestic architecture dating from EH III to LH I (Lerna IV-V, roughly from 2200-1500 B.C.) is therefore considered together as a physical expression of one cultural group, naturally acknowledging and critically examining significant changes over the course of this period. Caskey's reports are supplemented by the works of Jeremy Rutter and Carol Zerner, which are particularly important for the EH III and early MH remains respectively.]
(bibliographic reference: Elizabeth Courtney Banks, The Settlement and Architecture of Lerna IV. Lerna: results of excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 6. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2013)
Issue closed