DATA GATHERING AND URBAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE


In defined context, first of all, ideal urban archaeological potential of Tarsus historic city centre was determined according to association and spatialization of obtained data in varying reliability. Ideal archaeological potential hypothetically define the widest boundaries of Tarsus in its historical development without any destruction. In detail, only results of archaeological studies are not sufficient to understand and spatially evaluate such a multi-layered context town like Tarsus. Therefore, instead of static databank, inventory, or archive, an Urban Archaeological Database allowing spatial queries, assessments and visual inspections was established. However, datasets are evaluated in two groups as primary and secondary datasets according to their reliability. In other words, primary datasets are first-hand scientific information and archaeological documents. The writings of ancient writes and travellers and their visual documents like gravures were evaluated as secondary datasets. In addition, the observations of local stakeholders and/or experts in Archaeology Museum, like ad hoc findings, were evaluated as secondary dataset.


In any case, in Turkey, the basic problem in defined research process within aforementioned method is varying archive systems or archaeological datasets in different institutions and authority. In addition, the secondary datasets should be evaluated together with primary ones. Therefore, the structure of urban archaeological database has to be dynamic and flexible for varying data from different sources and recently obtained data during research project by field investigations or oral history. In this chapter, data gathering process and their use in Urban Archaeological Database is briefly explained.


Research in Archives;

Archive documents and literature about archaeological excavations, inquiry soundings, extensive-intensive surveys and ad hoc findings in Tarsus historic city centre have been investigated. Moreover, maps, plans and visual documents about archaeological findings were evaluated.


−Old maps, aerial views and cadastral maps in the archive of the municipality of Tarsus were examined.

The archive of Research Centre for Cilician Archaeology of Mersin University was investigated for literature review about archaeological excavations, researches and surveys.

The archive of Regional Conservation Council and the archive of Tarsus Archaeology Museum were cross-inquired and investigated in detail, because of their legal responsibilities on the conservation of archaeological resources.

−1948, 1955, 1973 and 1993 dated aerial views of Tarsus Historic City Centre and near surroundings were obtained from Turkish the General Command of Mapping's archive.

the Ottoman and Republican State Archives of the Prime Ministry of the Republic of Turkey were investigated for cartographic documents and official letters might indicate archaeological traces or works.

the archive of national and local press in the National Library was searched for news and papers about archaeological studies or especially ad hoc findings.

the archive of the Museum of Architecture of the Technische Universität Berlin (http://architekturmuseum.ub.tu-berlin.de) to get digital copies of Tarsus Plan prepared by Hermann Jansen in 1935.


Main Page