10. Sigillography - SunoikisisDC/SunoikisisDC-2023-2024 GitHub Wiki

Handling of sigillographic data (XML, Machine Learning, Decision Trees)

SunoikisisDC Digital Classics and Byzantine Studies: Session 10

Date: Monday June 17, 2024. 16:00-17:30 BST = 17:00-18:30 CEST.

Convenors: John McEwan (Saint Louis University), Alessio Sopracasa (Sorbonne Université/CNRS UMR 8167)

Youtube link: youtu.be/_6yXk8LARBY

Slides: Combined slides (PDF)

Outline

This session presents a joint reflection on the management of data from medieval sigillography in Western Europe and in the Byzantine Empire. In the case of Byzantine sigillography, we will first explain the need to standardise editing practices by developing a data model known as SigiDoc, which will enable better re-use and interoperability of the data thus produced; secondly, we will highlight the creation of a digital infrastructure shared by all the SigiDoc-based projects, with the aim of creating constant and mutually beneficial interaction between them and, finally, a virtual corpus of Byzantine sigillography In the case of Western Sigillography, we will investigate the potential of large sigillographic datasets by considering the Digisig project, which brings together sigillographic information from many different resources to enable researchers not only to discover seals, but to analyze, compare and combine information from multiple reference works.

Required readings

  • J.A. McEwan, ‘The past, present and future of sigillography: towards a new structural standard for seal catalogues’, Archives and Records, vol. 41 (2017), pp.1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2017.1353412.
  • A. Sopracasa, M. Filosa, S. Stoyanova, ‘The Digital Enhancement of a Discipline: Byzantine Sigillography and Digital Humanities’, magazén | International Journal for Digital and Public Humanities 1/1 (2020), 101–128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30687/mag/2020/01/006.
  • Gabriel Bodard and Polina Yordanova. 2020. ‘Publication, Testing and Visualization with EFES.’ Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Digitalia 65-1:17–35. Available: http://studia.ubbcluj.ro/download/pdf/1328.pdf
  • J. Kalvesmaki, “Introducing Athena Ruby, Dumbarton Oaks’ New Font for Byzantine Inscriptions,” in Inscriptions in Byzantium and Beyond: Methods – Projects – Case Studies, ed. A. Rhoby, Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung 38 (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2015), 121–26. http://hw.oeaw.ac.at/7674-9inhalt?frames=yes.
  • F. Codine and G. Sarah, “Du plomb au pixel: Transcrire les légendes des monnaies du haut Moyen Âge,” Revue Numismatique 168 (2012): 261–77. Available: https://www.persee.fr/doc/numi_0484-8942_2012_num_6_168_3183.

Further readings

  • J.A. McEwan, ‘The challenge of the visual: making medieval seals accessible in the digital age’, Journal of Documentation, vol. 71, iss. 5 (2015), 999-1028.
  • J.A. McEwan, ‘New approaches to old questions: digital technology, sigillography and DIGISIG’, in Medieval Studies, Digital Methods, vol. 1 (2022).
  • Alessio Sopracasa, Martina Filosa et al. (2023), SigiDoc Guidelines: Byzantine Seals in TEI-XML (version 1.1). Available: http://sigidoc.huma-num.fr/.
  • C. Neuefeind et al., ‘Signed, sealed, delivered – digital approaches to Byzantine sigillography’, it - Information Technology, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1515/itit-2023-0030.

Resources

Exercise

Option 1

Visual vs typological rendering of a diplomatic transcription in Byzantine studies

  1. Read J. Kalvesmaki’s and F. Codine and G. Sarah’s articles together with the relevant part of A. Sopracasa, M. Filosa, S. Stoyanova’s.
  2. Compare how different disciplines in Byzantine studies handle the digital diplomatic transcription of the inscriptions on their objects:
  • Sigillography: Dumbarton Oaks collection seal BZS.1951.31.5.770;
  • Numismatics: silver miliaresion of the emperor Constantine V (751-775) from the American Numismatic Society collection 1997.31.125;
  • Epigraphy: building inscription of the Emperor Isaac I Komnenos (1059), IOSPE V.11.
  1. What are the different choices made by the editors of these objects and what do you think these choices imply? How do they relate to the images that illustrate these editions?

Option 2 tba