© OpenStreetMap contributors
- Add External Layer
- Upload Shapefile
- Layer Tutorial
- Close
Use the checkbox () to show or hide a layer.
Use the radio buttons () to select a layer to use with the identify function.
- Layers
- Opacity
Available layers
Search for marine data across UK organisations
- API
- How-To
- About
- Contact MEDIN
- Share
Metadata: Dover Urban Archaeological Database Project
Abstract:
The Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (now Historic England) developed its 'Urban Archaeological Database' programme in the 1990s. 35 of England's historic towns were identified as needing enhanced baseline datasets of archaeological information, of a comprehensiveness and detail that was beyond that which Historic Environment Records (HERs) can usually provide. These enhanced datasets were termed 'Urban Archaeological Databases' (UADs). Dover was one of the towns identified as requiring a UAD. Urban deposits are often highly complex, representing many phases and periods of activity in a single location. They can also be much disturbed making interpretation difficult. Urban deposits can also be very deep, either due to topographical reasons (many towns being in riverside locations) or to the accumulation of occupation debris over a long period of time. In addition, the urban context requires greater accuracy of representation and depiction in the HER than rural data. Smaller and more congested ownership plots mean that a slight error in depiction can lead to landowners being required to carry out unnecessary or inappropriate archaeological investigation during construction works. Historic towns are also among the most important archaeological sites in the country. Being located beneath modern towns implies a constant threat that only accurate information and improved understanding can help to reduce. The difference between how archaeological information is represented in a HER and a UAD is essentially one of detail. For example, prior to this project the Classis Britannica fort in Dover was represented by a single HER record, linked to a single HER GIS point. The work of transforming this into UAD format involved breaking the fort record into multiple new records each of which depicts a feature within the fort such as the walls, a gate, a barrack, a granary etc. Each component has its own record and its own GIS depiction. Similarly, the Event records (an Event is an archaeological activity such as an excavation or watching brief) in a HER are usually represented by a single record per Event linked to a single GIS entity. Under the UAD standard each intervention unit within an Event eg each individual trench, test-pit or borehole, is represented by a separate HER Event record. These can be grouped to indicate the relationship between them, but they are recorded separately, thus allowing additional information to be recorded such as the deposit sequences and depths of layers. These in turn can be used to develop a deposit model that can further aid understanding and prediction. Following the completion of the data work, an Archaeological Characterisation was developed. Characterisation can be briefly explained as the process of generalising and synthesising the raw data in the UAD to improve understanding. Within urban archaeological contexts it identifies the main activities that the data represents, where these activities are taking place and how they inter-relate. It should be noted, however, that as a summarising activity, characterisation always risks over-simplification, resolving complex data into too tidy a pattern. Characterisation is therefore best understood as a model, not a map, of past activity. The final stage of the project was to use the enhanced UAD data and the Archaeological Characterisation to develop a strategy that will help to improve how the archaeological resource is managed. This is to both safeguard it, and to identify ways to exploit it for the benefit of inhabitants and visitors. The method selected to do this was to develop an Archaeological Plan that would provide a strategy for managing Dover's archaeology.
Data holder:
Archaeology Data Service
| Other details | ||
| Internal code | Internally assigned metadata identifier | 11526 |
| Title | The title is used to provide a brief and precise description of the dataset such as 'Date', 'Originating organisation/programme', 'Location' and 'Type of survey'. All acronyms and abbreviations should be reproduced in full. | Dover Urban Archaeological Database Project |
| File Identifier | The File Identifier is a code, preferably a GUID, that is globally unique and remains with the same metadata record even if the record is edited or transferred between portals or tools. | b3ee9846bf0f7c158067a11d23ccafd0 |
| Resource Identifier | This is the code assigned by the data owner. | COLL_ID_1003834 |
| Resource type | The resource type will likely be a dataset but could also be a series (collection of datasets with a common specification) or a service. | dataset |
| Start date | This describes the date the resource starts. This may only be the year if month and day are not known | 2016-03-16 |
| End date | This describes the date the resource ends. This may only be the year if month and day are not known | 2020-06-30 |
| Spatial resolution | This describes the spatial resolution of the dataset or the spatial limitations of the service. | inapplicable |
| Frequency of updates | This describes the frequency with which the resource is modified or updated i.e. a monitoring programme that samples once per year has a frequency that is described as 'annually'. | notPlanned |
| Abstract | The abstract provides a clear and brief statement of the content of the resource. | The Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (now Historic England) developed its 'Urban Archaeological Database' programme in the 1990s. 35 of England's historic towns were identified as needing enhanced baseline datasets of archaeological information, of a comprehensiveness and detail that was beyond that which Historic Environment Records (HERs) can usually provide. These enhanced datasets were termed 'Urban Archaeological Databases' (UADs). Dover was one of the towns identified as requiring a UAD. Urban deposits are often highly complex, representing many phases and periods of activity in a single location. They can also be much disturbed making interpretation difficult. Urban deposits can also be very deep, either due to topographical reasons (many towns being in riverside locations) or to the accumulation of occupation debris over a long period of time. In addition, the urban context requires greater accuracy of representation and depiction in the HER than rural data. Smaller and more congested ownership plots mean that a slight error in depiction can lead to landowners being required to carry out unnecessary or inappropriate archaeological investigation during construction works. Historic towns are also among the most important archaeological sites in the country. Being located beneath modern towns implies a constant threat that only accurate information and improved understanding can help to reduce. The difference between how archaeological information is represented in a HER and a UAD is essentially one of detail. For example, prior to this project the Classis Britannica fort in Dover was represented by a single HER record, linked to a single HER GIS point. The work of transforming this into UAD format involved breaking the fort record into multiple new records each of which depicts a feature within the fort such as the walls, a gate, a barrack, a granary etc. Each component has its own record and its own GIS depiction. Similarly, the Event records (an Event is an archaeological activity such as an excavation or watching brief) in a HER are usually represented by a single record per Event linked to a single GIS entity. Under the UAD standard each intervention unit within an Event eg each individual trench, test-pit or borehole, is represented by a separate HER Event record. These can be grouped to indicate the relationship between them, but they are recorded separately, thus allowing additional information to be recorded such as the deposit sequences and depths of layers. These in turn can be used to develop a deposit model that can further aid understanding and prediction. Following the completion of the data work, an Archaeological Characterisation was developed. Characterisation can be briefly explained as the process of generalising and synthesising the raw data in the UAD to improve understanding. Within urban archaeological contexts it identifies the main activities that the data represents, where these activities are taking place and how they inter-relate. It should be noted, however, that as a summarising activity, characterisation always risks over-simplification, resolving complex data into too tidy a pattern. Characterisation is therefore best understood as a model, not a map, of past activity. The final stage of the project was to use the enhanced UAD data and the Archaeological Characterisation to develop a strategy that will help to improve how the archaeological resource is managed. This is to both safeguard it, and to identify ways to exploit it for the benefit of inhabitants and visitors. The method selected to do this was to develop an Archaeological Plan that would provide a strategy for managing Dover's archaeology. |
| Lineage | Lineage includes the background information, history of the sources of data, data quality statements and methods. | This dataset was collected by Kent County Council and provided to the University of Bradford for long term archive and management |
| Related keywords | ||
| Keyword | General subject area(s) associated with the resource, uses multiple controlled vocabularies | Marine Environmental Data and Information Network |
| General subject area(s) associated with the resource, uses multiple controlled vocabularies | Protected sites | |
| General subject area(s) associated with the resource, uses multiple controlled vocabularies | Marine archaeology | |
| Geographical coverage | ||
| North | The northern-most limit of the data resource in decimal degrees | 51.1393 |
| East | The eastern-most limit of the data resource in decimal degrees | 1.347 |
| South | The southern-most limit of the data resource in decimal degrees | 51.1092 |
| West | The western-most limit of the data resource in decimal degrees | 1.284 |
| Responsible organisations | ||
| Role | The point of contact is person or organisation with responsibility for the creation and maintenance of the metadata for the resource. | pointOfContact |
| Organisation name | Archaeology Data Service | |
| help@archaeologydataservice.ac.uk | ||
| Role | The owner is the person or organisation that owns the resource. | owner |
| Individual name | Paul Cuming | |
| Heritage.conservation@kent.gov.uk | ||
| Role | The custodian is the person or organisation that accepts responsibility for the resource and ensures appropriate care and maintenance. If a dataset has been lodged with a Data Archive Centre for maintenance then this organisation is be entered here. | custodian |
| Organisation name | Archaeology Data Service | |
| help@archaeologydataservice.ac.uk | ||
| Role | The originator is the person or organisation who created, collected or produced the resource. | originator |
| Individual name | Paul Cuming | |
| Heritage.conservation@kent.gov.uk | ||
| Role | The distributor is the person or organisation that distributes the resource. | distributor |
| Organisation name | Archaeology Data Service | |
| help@archaeologydataservice.ac.uk | ||
| Resource locators | ||
| Locator URL | Web address (URL) that links to the resource | https://doi.org/10.5284/1083531 |
| Dataset constraints | ||
| 20.1 Limitations on Public Access - Access constraints | This states `otherRestrictions` from ISO vocabulary RestrictionCode and is an INSPIRE/GEMINI requirement. | otherRestrictions |
| 20.2 Limitations on Public Access - Other constraints | This states any limitations on access to the data. Multiple occurences are allowed here. One entry shall be from the INSPIRE Metadata registry and the other free text should be part of the resource `Have specific limitations`. | https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/termsOfUseAndAccess. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
| 21.1 Conditions for Access and Use - Use constraints | This states `otherRestrictions` from ISO vocabulary RestrictionCode and is an INSPIRE/GEMINI requirement. | otherRestrictions |
| 21.2 Conditions for Access and Use - Other constraints | This states any constraints on use of the data. Multiple conditions can be recorded for different parts of the data resource. If no conditions apply, then `No condtions apply` is recorded. This uses free text. | Open access |
| Available data formats | ||
| Data format | Format in which digital data can be provided for transfer | Documents |
| Format in which digital data can be provided for transfer | Geographic Information System | |
| Version info | ||
| Date of publication | The publication date of the resource or if previously unpublished the date that the resource was made publicly available via the MEDIN network. | 2021-01-26 |
| Date of last revision | The most recent date that the resource was revised. | 2021-01-26 |
| Date of creation | The date that the resource was created. | 2020-06-30 |
| Harvest date | The date which this record has been (re)harvested from the provider. | 2026-04-12 |
| Metadata date | The date when the content of this metadata record was last updated. | 2025-02-24 |
| Metadata standard name | The name of the metadata standard used to create this metadata | MEDIN |
| Metadata standard version | The version of the MEDIN Discovery Metadata Standard used to create the metadata record | 3.1.2 |