Contributors: Lynn Dyson-Bruce, Paul Gilman, Neil Lang, Bruce
Mann and David Wheatley.
| E.1 Geographic information in HERs: maps and GIS | E.2 GIS and spatial databases | E.3 Using GIS in an HER | E.4 Spatial data standards and documentation | E.5 Historic Landscape Characterisation |
HERs comprise both textual records
of historical and archaeological sites (or events), and also a map based record
of their locations. Historically, in paper-based HERs, the textual (attribute)
record was stored on a card index or record sheet, while the locations
(geographic information) were marked on a series of related maps. HERs in
England usually hold paper maps showing the location of archaeological sites
but while computerised databases have now largely replaced card indexes for
handling attribute data, it has not been until relatively recently that
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have begun to replicate and enhance the
geographic component of HER data.
The way in which archaeological
sites have been mapped varies, but two main types of mapping can be found, with
some HERs maintaining both types (Baker 1999a):
Archaeological constraint areas: this type of mapping attempts to show areas within which
archaeological remains are known and/or suspected to survive. This helps archaeologists, planners,
developers and others to see rapidly whether a particular development is likely
to require an archaeological response.
This may also mean that the areas outside the constraint line might be
considered to be devoid of archaeological interest and some HERs have, for this
reason, decided not to define areas of constraint.
Archaeological extent: in this type of mapping, the areas indicated are the extents
of known archaeological monuments.
Where this extent is only approximately known then it is normal practice
for a line to be defined around the nearest field boundary. It is usual for linear features such as
Roman roads to be delineated and also for find spots to be depicted by a spot
or a circle. Where there is uncertainty
as to whether the location is correct, a dashed line may be used to indicate
this.
The scales used by HERs will vary
but the basic mapping is usually 1:10,000 with more complex areas such as
historic towns mapped at 1:2,500 or even 1:1,250. Some HERs have mapped directly on to paper or film copies of the
OS maps, whereas others use overlays.
The advantage of the latter approach is that the overlay is independent
of the OS map base, which changes over time.
In practice, most HERs will have a
variety of types of maps that have been developed for different purposes and projects. For example, crop-mark sites may be plotted
on separate overlays, which can be placed over the main HER maps to enable the
user to see the crop-mark features within each HER monument.
In HER mapping it is important to
consider the following:
·
the
HER recording manual and user guide should explain how sites have been mapped.
·
a
consistent approach should be taken to mapping, especially across each type of
mapping.
·
there
should be consistent use of symbols, which should be defined in a key either on
the map itself or in the HER recording guidelines or user guide.
Maps form a fundamental tool without which HERs would be unable to function. However, paper maps have their limitations. It can be difficult to keep the map base itself up-to-date. Maps can be time-consuming to use and can be viewed by only a few people at any one time. Only a limited amount of information can be shown on one set of maps or overlays, making it harder to carry out assessment and analysis. For these reasons, most HERs have adopted or are exploring the use of GIS.
GIS has much to offer within local
government, and is now established as the tool of choice not only for managing
spatial information both within archaeological and heritage contexts, but also
for all other areas that deal with spatial data including environmental
management, planning, rights of way, flood management and many other topics.
As a result, many local authorities
have or are establishing corporate GIS-based databases helping to avoid
duplication of effort, make best use of resources and bring together datasets
which were becoming fragmented. Linking
an HER dataset into a corporate GIS means that the HER data can be displayed
and related to other datasets held in the authority. These may be topographical, such as contours and rivers, or other
planning constraints such as conservation areas and SSSIs. This opens up new possibilities for taking a
more integrated approach to planning and conservation.
GIS also opens up avenues for
analysis and research into the historic environment. As desktop GIS software develops and its power continues to grow,
there is increased potential for analysis and visualisation of datasets, for
example in three dimensions or in virtual-reality models. Recent development of web browsers
incorporating GIS is enhancing the potential for sharing and display of
information through corporate intranets and the internet.
There are now many books on the uses
of GIS in archaeology, including edited volumes illustrating the uses of GIS
for research and management of projects (see for example Gillings et al 1999, Lock 2000, Westcott and Brandon
2000) and also more general sources (Wheatley and Gillings 2002, Connolly and
Lake in press). The ADS's GIS Guide to Good Practice (Gillings and Wise 1998) provides
practical guidance for individuals and organisations involved in the creation,
maintenance, use and long-term preservation of GIS-based digital resources and
also provides specific advice for HERs.
The aim of this section of the
manual is to provide a primer on some of the issues to consider before
embarking on system development. It
does not set out to review general functionality of GIS in any detail or to review
the current GIS market place. Rather,
it sets out some of the considerations to be taken into account in establishing
a GIS for an HER, and some of the benefits that can be gained through
successful implementation.
Desktop GIS applications are
relatively affordable, and run on commonly available PC platforms. However, the overall systems cost to put
together an HER application (including procurement, customisation, data
capture, maintenance, mapping) remains high.
Although elements of the system-development life cycle may sometimes be
missed out, this will generally be a false economy. For example, omitting a clear and well-thought-out statement of
user requirements will, at the minimum, make it difficult to measure whether
the system has fulfilled its anticipated purposes, and at the worst, result in
frustrated users and managers who feel ‘let down’. The development of systems that will meet needs over the life of
the system and that enable the information held within them to be transferred
to future systems requires careful planning.
Significant changes after system implementation can be very expensive.
Many local authorities will have
either departmental or corporate policies governing GIS. These may include standards for hardware and
software, data standards and policies for access. GIS is well suited to a corporate approach to data management,
since it can bring together information from different sources, and even
different data types into a single, spatial view. For example, GIS allows users to select a location (for example a
property address) and to display text information from a database of planning
proposals, a listed buildings database, an HER database or other digital
information such as a scanned property deed from the record office or
photographs from the engineer's department.
As with most computing, the
continuing emphasis on communications and IT in higher education ensures that
there is a growing awareness of GIS amongst recent graduates. For existing HER staff, training in the
corporate GIS is generally available either from the local authority or from
commercial training providers. There
are also courses offered by university continuing education departments and
others on the use of GIS in archaeology and for conservation.
| E.2.1 Modelling and documenting spatial data | E.2.2 Systems to work with spatial data (GIS) | E.2.3 Sources of spatial data | E.2.4 Precision and accuracy | E.2.5 Useful websites and references |
Geographic Information Systems are
conventionally defined as systems that capture, store, manipulate and output
geographical information. Geographical
information may be considered as information that is tied into some specific
set of locations on the earth’s surface, including those immediately adjacent:
the sub-surface, oceans and atmosphere.
‘Spatial’ is now starting to become a commonly used term or synonym for
‘geographical’. The term ‘geospatial’
is gaining currency and also describes the trend towards convergence of spatial
technologies such as Global Positioning Systems (GPS), aerial and remote
sensing and context-aware computing.
GIS emerged from three principal
roots: the need for data analysis and display tools, the automation of map
production, and landscape architecture and environmentally sensitive planning.
Although GIS have been available since the 1960s, it is only in recent years
that hardware and software have become sufficiently powerful and inexpensive
for its use to become widespread.
Spatial databases are structured into thematic layers. This means that the system stores geographic data according to the real-world theme to which it relates. A typical spatial database may have separate layers (themes) to represent:
·
Topographic
height (for example a digital elevation model)
·
Soil
type
·
Rivers
and streams
·
Roads
·
Archaeological
monuments
There are two main types of data
used in GIS layers: vector and raster, which differ principally in how the
system represents the geographic component of the data in a computer file. In a
vector representation, the spatial database contains a geometric description of the theme in question,
while in a raster representation regularly spaced samples of something are stored.
Vector data is therefore similar to
data in a CAD package. Each element in the layer is represented by some
geometric entity such as a point, line, or polygon. The process of creating
vector data is similar to drawing, using either a digitising tablet or by
drawing objects on the computer screen and can be time consuming and expensive.
This has the advantages of providing a compact data-storage format, allowing
scalable presentation. Being based on geometric objects, it is straightforward
to link these to text-based records. Vector representation permits easy
quantification of areas and some analytical methods such as network analysis.
Ordnance Survey Landline mapping captured at base scales of 1:1,250, 1:2,500
and 1:10,000 for urban, rural and upland/moorland areas respectively, is an
example of vector data (in this case containing many different layers). Increasingly though OS Landline mapping is
being replaced by the topography layer of OS MasterMap®.
Raster layers are more similar to
digital images, as they are made up of a grid of cells, each of which contains
a value at a particular location. Raster data is usually generated
automatically by scanning paper originals, or obtained from digital sensors (in
cameras, or satellites) and is therefore often rapid and cheap to generate.
However the quality of the raster dataset is dependant on both the resolution
the image is captured at and on the qualtiy of the locational data fixing the
position of the image within the GIS. This is particularly suitable for
applications requiring display of fine detail (for example aerial photography
or historical mapping) but also facilitates many forms of terrain analysis and
simulation modelling. Raster data may be dichotomous (that is, cell values are
either 1 or 0, to provide a black and white picture) or continuous, where each
cell may be assigned a range of values. Examples of widely-used raster data
sources include the OS Siteplan® data (for scales between 1:500 and 1:2,500) and Ordnance Survey
1:10,000 and 1:25,000 scale raster products. Raster data is almost always
supplied in pre-defined areal units or ‘tiles’ based on the OS National Grid.
Typical vector applications include spatially
referenced database applications – for example, location maps, sites,
monuments, artefacts – mapping
applications, managing networks (such as roads and utilities) and terrain
analysis using TIN elevation models. Raster themes are often employed to
analyse continuously varying layers such as slope, elevation or resistivity and
remote-sensed data such as satellite imagery.
Analyses that employ raster data typically include neighbourhood
analysis and overlay operations (for example reclassifying two separate maps of
land use and height to obtain an intersected model of land use at height),
simulation modelling, predictive modelling, decision support, cost surface and
optimum route analysis and visibility analysis.
Many themes could be represented by
either vector or raster data models. Terrain, for example, can be represented
either by a vector model, using a network of triangles (referred to as a
Triangulated Irregular Network or TIN), or by a raster altitude matrix in which
each cell contains the elevation at that location. The choice of representation
depends on a range of factors, including the capabilities of the software,
availability of source data and the intended uses of the data.
Fortunately, most major GIS now work
with both types of information, and can use them effectively together. Many forms of analysis (such as visibility
analysis or hydrological modelling) can be undertaken using either raster or
vector layers, and the two can also be employed together as, for example, when
a satellite image is ‘draped’ over a vector terrain model, creating a ‘digital
landscape’ which a user can explore (rather like a virtual reality ‘fly
through’ (see Figure 39)). It is also possible to
automatically convert data from vector to raster and – with some limitations –
from raster to vector when needed.

Figure 39: Using three dimensional
modelling in GIS to examine sites in their landscape setting. [© Essex County Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright, All rights reserved. 100019602. 2007]
It is important to note that users of third-party data should be aware of how the data was created, if good control of spatial accuracy is to be obtained. Ideally, spatial data should be supplied with metadata that records how and when the data was captured, and how it was georeferenced to the National Grid. This is particularly relevant with third-party surveys, where it is vital to fully record and understand the precision and accuracy of the survey and the methods used to georeference it. The widespread use of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) to undertake new surveys has recently made this even more pertinent (see below).
The choice of vector or raster representation is not the only factor in the design of a spatial database. A fully geographic database will consist of three separate information aspects: attribute, spatial and topological components.
The attribute component refers to the non-geographic content of the
data. In an archaeological context, this will include any observations about
interventions, condition, sources and so forth that are stored in a
conventional database.
The spatial component refers to the location of the site or event in
geographical space. Not all attributes may have a geographical component, and
where they do this may be represented by either vector or raster models.
Spatial data, however, also requires
a topological component in order to
fully describe the connections between geographic entities. This contains, for
example, the intersections between lines of a network (such as rivers) and the
geometric relationships between polygons in a vector theme.
Most large GIS systems will provide
mechanisms to store and manage all three of these either ‘in-house’ or by
allowing links to be made with external data sources, as where a polygon on a
GIS layer is linked to an event record in a conventional database.
The term ‘georeferenced’ describes data whose position in geographical space is fully recorded, usually in the form of standard cartographic grid references. The process of fully recording the geographic location of a data theme is usually called georeferencing the data, and is one of the most important stages in the creation of a geographic database.
Georeferencing usually comprises two
steps. Initially, the data will be digitised in whichever system of coordinates
is used in the original map. For vector data, this will involve calibrating the
digitising device to the coordinate system on the map (it is also important to
try to estimate and record the level of precision to which the map is digitised,
as this contributes to the accuracy of the produced data). For scanned data,
the initial stage of georeferencing involves at a minimum locating the corners
of the raster grid in geographic coordinate space. In many cases, such as
aerial photographs, this is not sufficient to accurately georeference all the
raster cells in the theme and it is necessary to set up a more complex
coordinate transformation between the raster and the coordinate system, usually
by identifying control points on the raster and entering their known coordinate
positions. In the UK the coordinate system used for georeferencing is usually
the OS National Grid (more properlly called OSGB36, see below) and if all data
is recorded within this sytem, it may not be necessary to delve further into
the complexities of georeferencing.
To integrate OSGB36 data themes with
sources of data referenced to other coordinate systems, however, it is necessary
for the spatial database to also have a full description of both coordinate
systems. This is required, for example, for the integration of digitised map
data with independently recorded GPS readings. In this case, features on the
map will ‘know’ their OS National Grid locations, but the GPS readings may be
in a different GPS coordinate system (for example WGS84). Unless the spatial
database contains information about how each of these coordinate systems relate
to a common reference system, it will not be possible to visualise or analyse
these two data themes together. This usually involves recording at least the
projection and the horizontal datum of the coordinate system that is used. This
should be printed on the maps, or can be found in publications of the agency
who defined or maintain the coordinate system.
It is usually this second part of
georeferencing which leads to confusion, although fortunately many contemporary
GIS are now supplied with a wide range of pre-configured coordinate systems,
projections and datums which can make things much easier. In order to fully
understand georeferencing, however, it is advisable to have some basic
understanding of geodesy: the study of the shape of the earth and the
determination of the exact position of geographical points. This is
increasingly important because of the growth of surveys undertaken with GPS
receivers and is particularly problematic when it comes to integrating data
about topographic height.
The traditional coordinate system,
on which most of the UKs mapping is based, is usually called the National Grid.
More fully, it is the Ordnance Survey of Great Britain 1936 (OSGB36) and has
historically been defined by a a national network of triangulation pillars. It
is based on a Transverse Mercator projection, made about the 2 degree west
meridian, with the crossing point of this and the 49 north parallel defining a
false origin of 400,000 N, 100,000 E. Height values may be based on one of
several vertical datums around the UK, but for mainland Britain they relate to
the mean sea level at Newlyn in Cornwall (or, more properly, on observations of
those made between 1915 and 1921).
The widespread availability of
accurate, globally-reference survey coordinates has recently rendered
traditional triangulation networks effectively obsolete, and the National Grid
is no longer defined in those terms. Ordnance Survey have therefore established
a new national positioning infrastructure based on the European Terrestrial
Reference framework (ETRS89). This is maintained by a group of permanently
installed GPS receivers around Great Britain, referred to as Active Stations.
These coordinates are now used to define OSGB36 through specifying how to
convert between ETRS89 coordinates and OSGB36. The OS provides transformations
for both plan position (National Grid Transformation, or OSTN02) and for height
values (National Geoid Model, the OSGM02).
Collecting accurate GPS data in the
UK that can be accurately positioned on existing data usually now involves (i)
establishing the receiver’s position in the ETRS89 system and then (ii)
converting those surveyed coordinates using OSNT02 and OSGM02 to their
equivalent OSGB36 coordinates. These stages may be undertaken either at the
time of survey or later, and may be done within the GPS receiver itself, or in
post-processing software.
Older or simpler GPS data may
provide coordinate values in the World Geodetic System (WGS84). This differs
from ETRS89 in that WGS84 is not tied to any point on the earth’s surface. As
such, it can be problematic to accurately convert coordinates in WGS84 and
similar global systems to map coordinates because the surface of the earth is
not stationary (plate tectonics can move two positions on the earth’s surface
by as much as 2cm in one year).
An excellent introduction to the
issues arising from use of GPS-derived coordinates, from an archaeological
perspective, can be found in Ainsworth and Thomason (2003).
The OS National Grid is one of several possible means of describing a position in space, although it is probably the most widely used referencing system in archaeology. The National Grid for Great Britain is a descriptive grid drawn from a single false origin (lying to the south-west of the Isles of Scilly) that allows for points to be referenced to a notional sub-metre accuracy. Conventionally map sheet letters preface points on the grid, for example SK 12345678, where the map sheet represents a 100-kilometre square (SK).
The National Grid also allows for
absolute references expressed in a fully numeric format. For example the reference 345678987654 refers
to a location 345678m east 987654m north of the origin. This numerical format
for references is convenient as most GIS packages do not recognise the letters
associated with map sheets, using co-ordinate systems that depend entirely upon
numeric fields.
Ideally, a location will be
identified to the nearest metre within the National Grid. However, it is not
uncommon to use less precise references – to the nearest 10 or 100m – by
omitting the least significant digits. For example, a reference with only six
figures after the letter code (for example SK123568) or with only 10 digits
(3456898765) refers to a location with a 10m precision, while SK1257 or
34579877 have 100m precision. Clearly it is vital to treat locations supplied
with 10 or 100m precision references with care: they frequently need to be
interpreted to mean ‘the location is somewhere in the square whose origin is
specified by the grid reference’ as opposed to “the location is within 10 or
100m of the reference”. For this reason both the original (source) formats of
coordinates should be stored in HERs, as well as any ‘GIS friendly’ derived
coordinate values (see also section E.2.4).
Note that, although most absolute
grid references will be expressed in twelve figures, all sites locations in OS
100km map squares commencing with H (All of Shetland and much of Orkney) will
have seven figure northings whilst the following map squares (NA, NF and NL
(all covering the Western Isles) and SV covering the Isles of Scilly, have only
five figure eastings.
An online tutorial on the National Grid can be found in the education section of the OS website http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gi/nationalgrid/nghelp1.html
There is a trend towards GIS
becoming easier to use (for example through familiar Windows-type Graphical
User Interfaces or GUIs), with a diversification in the market place to
distinguish between the needs of 'heavyweight' applications, and day-to-day
data analysis and visualisation (sometimes characterised as ‘doers’, ‘users’
and ‘viewers’). Modern desktop GIS applications software (such as Maplnfo®,
ArcView®, ArcGIS®, GeoMedia®) are powerful
programs in their own right, however related software products (ER Mapper,
ERDAS® Imagine) combine sophisticated tools for image-processing
techniques, such as orthorectification and mosaicing aerial photographs, with
some GIS functionality and can be used to prepare raster layers prior to
importing them into a GIS. GIS functions are also being incorporated into a
number of other software products ranging from AutoCAD® – where a
fully-functioning GIS has been built ‘on top’ of the CAD system – down to the
provision of basic mapping functions in Microsoft® Excel®.
If a local authority has chosen a particular GIS, this may be a powerful argument for the HER to do likewise. A corporate GIS will make the task of sharing data with other sections easier and will enable the HER to harness the expertise within the authority, helping to support the system, and possibly to obtain the software at low or no cost. HER managers should still check that this software meets their requirements. These requirements must be realistic - think about how much a facility would be used, and if the requirement is occasional, whether there are cheaper ways of meeting the need, such as using an external contractor.
One element of the user requirement
is likely to be a list of the functions that the GIS is intended to
perform. A useful source of advice is
the Functional Requirement Specification
for GIS (LGMB 1991), available from the Improvement and Development Agency,
formerly the Local Government Management Board (LGMB). This includes a catalogue of GIS functions,
which can be used as a 'checklist' to compare different software products and
to assess if any customisation might be required and what skills would be
needed to achieve the desired outcome.
Target response times for operations that are important to users can
provide a useful benchmark and can be used to make sure that the users'
expectations and the developer's system performance targets are aligned. For example, if the identification of all
records falling within an administrative boundary will be a frequent enquiry
what would be the maximum acceptable time for this to take?
Where paper mapping exists and there
is a need to generate GIS themes from it, then there are essentially two
choices: scanning (which produces raster data) and digitising (which produces
vector data). The choice of these will partly be constrained by cost – it is
far cheaper to scan than to digitise – but this needs to be balanced against
issues of storage and usefulness. As a generalisation, scanned data is useful
for visualisation and for making maps, and is increasingly useful as a
preliminary step in digitising (see ‘heads up digitising’ below). Vector data,
on the other hand, is far more flexible where analytical use is foreseen or
where output mapping needs to have different components of the input data.
Scanning can be undertaken in-house,
although scanners large enough to process whole maps are expensive
(approximately £3,000 - £15,000 depending on features) and time consuming to
set up and use. More commonly, the scanning of a document archive will be placed
in the hands of an outside agency and it is therefore vital that a clear job
specification is established in advance. This should cover the resolution of
the scans, whether they will be monochrome, greyscale or colour, the file
format and compression to be used and should also make clear what quality
checks will be undertaken and whether the job includes user-intervention to
clean the data after scanning. Agencies will probably supply scanned data on
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM and it is advisable to make archive copies of these original
materials quickly and store these under archive conditions.
Digitising paper sources is far more
time consuming, as it involves attaching the map to a digitising tablet and
tracing over the different data elements to, effectively, ‘draw’ the require
data manually. To some extent, digitising in this way has been overtaken by the
use of ‘heads up digitising’ (see below) and by automated raster-to-vector
tools but it remains true that the creation of accurate, well-structured, topologically
correct vector data requires considerable level of human intervention and is an
order of magnitude more time consuming (and hence expensive) than scanning. The
pay-off for this effort, however, is that the resulting data is a great deal
more structured and useful for analytical purposes than any raster product. As
with scanning, it is possible to undertake digitising ‘in-house’ using
digitising tablets. These are available in sizes from A5 up to A0 although
larger tablets are expensive to purchase and difficult to support. The vast
majority of HERs are unlikely to be able to justify purchase of this kind of
equipment unless it is as part of a wider institutional project supporting
other areas as well as archaeology. As such, digitisation projects are likely
to be undertaken by outside contractors as with scanning and it is even more
vital that a thorough agreement is made in advance covering the accuracy,
precision, quality and format of supplied data.
‘Heads up’ digitising refers to the
two-stage process whereby maps are initially scanned, and then vector data is
traced from the scans using the computer screen rather than the digitiser.
Increases in computer power and screen resolutions in recent years have made
this an attractive method of digitising data, which can often be undertaken by
users themselves on an ‘as needed’ basis (although it is difficult to establish
good quality standards in this way). This also makes it more attractive for
HERs to scan paper archives because, if collected with the possibility of
heads-up digitising in mind, then this is now an open-ended strategy that does
not preclude generation of vectors in the future.
Moving between vector and raster
data is possible in both directions, although it is important to understand the
limitations of this. It is relatively straightforward to generate raster data
themes from vector data (for display or for analysis in raster-based GIS) and
most commercial GIS will provide functions for this. Generating vector data
from raster (scanned) themes is, however, far more difficult as the computer
needs to make ‘intelligent’ choices about how the pixels in the raster relate
to geometric entities (lines, areas and so forth) in a vector theme.
Nevertheless, software is available which will take scanned maps, such as
contour maps, and generate vector outputs in the same way that Optical
Character Recognition (OCR) software can generate text from scanned documents.
These can be a valuable first step in generating vector data, reducing some of
the tedious line-following procedures, but (as with OCR software) it is
important to realise that none of these are foolproof, and that automatically
generated vector themes will still require considerable user intervention to
produce topologically-complete, clean vector data. There is a strong argument
for HERs to refrain from becoming involved in decisions about how vector data
is generated, but rather to concentrate on setting down the specification (in
terms of quality, accuracy, precision and so forth) of the data that is
required, and then leaving it to agencies to decide if that is best delivered
by full automation, partial automation or human intervention.
One of the principal sources of
commercial mapping in the UK is the OS, which now provides a wide range of
mapping and other spatial data in digital formats. These may be available to
HER maintainers as part of wider corporate licensing arrangements. All OS data
is subject to Crown Copyright and arrangements will exist in most organisations
for appropriate copyright statements to be included with any maps or output
that uses OS data.
Ordnance Survey provide both raster
products and also vector data sets. Raster products are essentially scanned
versions of OS maps available at a variety of scales and useful as backdrops
for creating, for example, constraint maps. Raster data is available at
1:250,000, 1:50,000 and 1:25,000 scales for different mapping purposes.
Ordance Survey vector datasets are
also available at a variety of spatial scales, and with a wide variety of
thematic information. Among the more useful of these are the Landform PROFILE®
dataset, which represents contours derived from 1:10,000 scale mapping and the
LandLine® dataset which contains layers representing a wide range of
manmade environment including houses, factories, roads, and administrative
boundaries as well as heritage features. LandLine® data is scaled
according to the region with 1:1,250 scale data for urban areas; 1:2,500 scale
in rural areas; and 1:10,000 scale for remote areas such as mountains and
moorland.
The Ordnance Survey’s digital
datasets (particularly LandLine) are currently being replaced with a new
delivery mechanism for GIS data called OS MasterMap® (see below).
Other commercial digital map sources
area available, although none can compete for completeness or up-to-date survey
with the Ordnance Survey. However, for some tasks where OS data is not
available, it may be possible to turn to providers such as Bartholemews (http://www.bartholomewmaps.com/ )
for particular digital map data supplies.
One of the most widely used sources
for digital data is aerial photography, which may be held by larger HER
maintainers in the form of negatives or prints. These can be scanned and
georectified to provide not only data relating to crop and soil mark sites, but
also additional map detail that may not be available in commercial mapping.
Aerial photographic coverage can also be purchased commercially or licensed from
the Ordnance Survey or from a range of commercial resellers such as Getmapping®
(http://www.getmapping.co.uk/).
OS MasterMap® is an
intelligent digital map designed by the OS for use with geographical
information systems (GIS) and databases. It provides significant advantages to
users of digital data, including seamless delivery, the use of a new coding
system and improved metadata about spatial entities. However, it requires
significant investment in new software in order to use it.
OS MasterMap® comprises
topography, imagery, address and ITN (integrated transport network) layers.
Based on the National Grid, the topographic layer contains information on every
landscape feature – including buildings, roads, archaeological features - and
represents a significant evolution from traditional cartography. MasterMap®
depicts the real-world digitally and presents this information as themes in a
series of layers, each layer carrying millions of features. Each feature has
its own unique identifier or TOID® - a 16-digit reference number
that can be shared with other users across different applications and systems.
This allows easier data association and greater accuracy, focusing on
real-world objects on the map. In addition, the Ordnance Survey have released a
high quality Imagery Layer whose images have been fully orthorectified to
represent truly and accurately what is on the ground. The Imagery Layer is available at 25 cm resolution and 24 bit colour.
The Address Layer of OS MasterMap® provides precise coordinates for
more than 26 million residential and commercial properties in Great Britain,
whilst the ITN layer is probably of less use to the HER officer. It enables business needs from navigation to
asset management and from traffic analysis to accessibility studies.
Users of MasterMap® data
should also be aware that, in addition to the data format itself, the delivery
of data with improved positional accuracy (see Positional Accuracy Improvement
programme below) differs between MasterMap® and older formats and
digital products such as Landline®, Profile® and Panorama®.
Further details can be obtained from
the OS website http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/osmastermap/
Since April 2001, the Ordnance
Survey have been undertaking a Positional Accuracy Improvement (PAI) programme
of the 1:2,500 small town and rural map base throughout Great Britain. PAI captures data to a greater absolute
accuracy in relation to the National Grid, resulting in improved and more
consistent data. It is claimed that PAI
will also future-proof the data for the addition of new feature detail as well
as providing a better relationship between the OS 1:2,500 map data and
information captured through GPS.
In simple terms, data that has been
through PAI will have better absolute and relative accuracy than previously
supplied data, but at the expense that it may no longer match existing (legacy)
data products. Where HERs contain data that has been created by reference to OS
data products, there is now a possibility that this data will appear to be in
error because the underlying OS mapping has ‘moved’ slightly. This movement
should not be excessive, but may in some cases result in changes of up to a few
metres.
It would therefore represent good
practice for HER officers to undertake an audit of the data they are
responsible for maintaining to assess how that data was originally created. The
spatial elements of most databases were created against 1:10,000 paper maps
with grid references expressed to the nearest 6 or 8 figures (that is to
nearest 100m or 10m) and should not be affected by PAI. However, if the
boundaries of an HER record are, for example, delineated along the
representation of field boundaries on a 1:2,500 tile, then the shape of that
land parcel may be altered through the transformation processes resulting in
errors in the HER data. Those errors may include spatial (position) errors, but
may also potentially result in topological errors (such as ‘slivers’ and
‘gaps’) where data is processed against new OS datasets.
Where migration to post-PAI Ordnance
Survey data is necessary, then a variety of assistance and tools are available
from OS and from third-party GIS manufacturers to help update HER data to match
OS mapping. These include ‘link files’ of coordinate corrections and processing
tools which, in combination, can provide for automatic (or semi-automatic)
updating of spatial data themes according to the known changes in spatial
position.
Ordnance Survey have produced a
series of documents including a “PAI Companion” that explains the workings and
implications of the PAI in more detail. This can be downloaded in PDF format
from the OS website, which also contains the most up-to-date information about
the progress of PAI (see http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/pai/).
Precision and accuracy are important
issues in GIS. Precision is the degree
to which a measurement is refined while accuracy records the correctness with
which the measurement is taken (Richards and Ryan 1985). Thus a six-figure grid reference may be
accurate but imprecise while a twelve-figure grid reference may be precise but
inaccurate.
Precision and accuracy become
significant when comparing disparate datasets is made possible with GIS. These sorts of issues come to the fore in
GIS because vector displays can give a spurious impression of highly precise
and accurate mapping. Scale, the ratio
between distances on the map and in real space, can be manipulated almost
infinitely in a vector GIS, as areas are
‘zoomed' or 'panned' to suit.
However, simply because it is possible to zoom does not mean that the
data thus displayed will be accurate at the new scale. OS contour data, for example, may be
digitised from 1:50,000 map sheets, at which scale the smallest distance that
can be distinguished is 0.5mm or 5m on the ground. Because this data can be reproduced in the GIS at 1:10,000, at a
resolution one fifth of the original, it does not become more accurate. Thus a point captured on screen against a
1:50,000 map base will be accurate at that scale and not progressively more
accurate to any larger scale to which the map has been zoomed.
There are two approaches to
representing the precision with which heritage objects are located within the
GIS. The first approach (Figure 40), adopted by the former Archaeology Division
of the OS, places the object in the bottom south-west corner of a virtual
square somewhere in which the object is located. For example, an object recorded as a four-figure reference (such
as TQ 77 89) could lie anywhere within that 1 kilometre square. Similarly, a six-figure reference (such as
TQ 724 876) could lie anywhere within a 100 metre square. In both cases, the object would be
represented as a point marked on a map in the south-west corner of the
appropriate square, that is, the point marking TQ 77 89 would be marked at TQ
7700 8900. Variations in this approach
include placing the point in the centre of a square rather than the south-west
corner, (that is, the point marking TQ 77 89 would be marked at TQ 7750 8950)
or in the centre of a virtual circle.
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 40: Representing the location of a heritage object within a 'virtual
space'.
This approach has the advantage
that, since most four-figure references are for stray finds, representation as
a point bears some relation to the object depicted. The approach has the disadvantage that the object will only be
retrieved by a spatial search that includes the point (whether located in the
south-west corner or centre) although the implied imprecision means that the
object could derive from a wider area.
The second approach (Figure 41)
attempts to overcome the spatial retrieval problem by representing the object
as the 'physical space' within which the object might lie, so that a square or
a circle is depicted in the GIS. These
would normally be transparent (that is, only the outline of the object would be
visible) to avoid obscuring other heritage objects lying 'beneath'. In this way, the known boundaries of
monuments and buildings would be visible at the same time as the fuzzy boundary
represented for a stray find or other imprecisely located heritage object.

Figure
41: Representing the approximate location of a heritage object as a fuzzy
boundary.
If 'area' features are also depicted
as circular boundaries of approximate diameter (for example an artefact
scatter) it is also worth adopting different conventions for the symbols used,
such as a broken line, or a semi-transparent fill.
Whichever approach is adopted,
recording the actual precision of the object is essential. Both methods will
incur the problem of 'stacked' objects, where more than one object has been
located in the same space. This is a
common GIS problem, not confined to archaeological representation, it also
occurs, for example, when representing the individual property units in a block
of flats in two dimensions. Many GIS
systems are able to indicate a stack of objects when the cursor is hovered over
the objects or the stack is selected. However,
a plot will give the appearance of a single object at the location, unless ID
numbers are included in the plot and these may also 'overprint'. A possible approach to solve this might be
to offset each of the objects slightly, so that they will be visually
distinguishable.
Ainsworth, S. and Thomason, B. 2003 Where
on Earth Are We?: The Global Positioning System (GPS) in archaeological Field
Survey English Heitage Technical Paper (EH Product Code 50788).
Connolly, J. and Lake, M. 2006 Geographical Information Systems in
Archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0521797446)
Gillings, M., Mattingly, D. and van
Dalen, J .(eds) 1999 Geographical
Information Systems and Landscape Archaeology. The Archaeology of
Mediterranean Landscapes 3. Oxford: Oxbow Books.(ISBN 1900188643)
Lock, G. (ed) 2000 Beyond the Map: Archaeology and spatial
technologies. Nato Science Series, Series A: Life Sciences – Vol. 321.
Oxford: IOS Press. (ISSN 1387-6686)
Richards, J.D. and Ryan, N.S. 1985 Data Processing in Archaeology.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0521257697)
Westcott, K.L. and Brandon, R.J.
2000 Practical Applications of GIS for
Archaeologists: a Predictive Modeling Kit. Philadelphia PA: Taylor and
Francis. (ISBN 0748408304)
Wheatley, D. and Gillings, M. 2002 Spatial Technology and Archaeology: the
Archaeological Applications of GIS. London: Taylor and Francis (ISBN
0415246393)
ADS GIS Guide to Good Practice: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/goodguides/gis
Australian and New Zealand Land Information Council: http://www.anzlic.org.au/
Bartholemews maps: http://www.bartholomewmaps.com/
Getmapping® (digital data reseller): http://www.getmapping.co.uk/
Ordnance Survey:
Main website: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/
National Grid tutorial: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gi/nationalgrid/nghelp1.html
Mastermap: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/osmastermap/
PAI programme: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/pai/
| E.3.1 Uses of GIS and spatial data | E.3.2 Linking GIS to text databases | E.3.3 Developing HER layers in the GIS | E.3.4 Mapping features on the GIS | E.3.5 A sample heritage GIS |
The growing popularity of GIS
amongst HERs is understandable, because they are so useful for many everyday
tasks (Figure 42). These include:

Figure 42: A GIS generated map showing Bronze Age barrows over Landscape
Types and rivers in Hampshire [© Hampshire County Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 100019181. 2007]
Visualisation of data as spatial distributions (in either two or three dimensions): even a simple distribution (for example Iron Age
settlements in Derbyshire) can provide a powerful aid to understanding or
providing new insights into data. The
ability to view a combination of datasets enhances this potential considerably
(for example Neolithic settlements in relation to water courses, soils and
contours).
Analysing spatial relationships between data: for example finding all records of
upstanding earthworks which lie on arable land. This enables interaction with data and helps to answer research
questions (such as were the location of Bronze Age settlements influenced by
proximity to, for example, natural resources, soils and water) .
Improved decision-making: for example facilities to help identify sites that may be
affected by a planning proposal by using 'buffer zones' - zones of fixed
distance around a selected feature generated by the GIS.
Overcoming the limitations of paper maps: for example editing, availability,
currency, fragility, distortion, storage.
Data integration: if a database is georeferenced, then a number of separate databases can
be brought together in a common environment and viewed together.
Improving data quality: through capturing geographic references directly; automating
transfer of information (for example between GIS and text database); routines
that check data integrity (for example point in polygon analysis to determine
whether a grid reference falls within its assigned administrative boundaries).
Saving time:
through rapid availability of a wide range of sources of information. This is
particularly true where wider institutional systems are available enabling
access to non-archeological data sources as well as conventional HER data.
Most HERs using GIS will also hold spatial data and other information in the HER databases described in this manual. An important consideration in setting up the GIS will be how to create a link to the HER database (Figure 43). The first step in this process might be to export data from the HER database and use it to create points in the GIS (see B.8.4). However, this layer will become out of date as new records are added to the HER and HER managers will also wish to use the GIS to check and correct the locations of existing records in the HER database.

Figure 43: Relationships between HER
text databases and GIS
Various approaches to the problem of
keeping the two systems in step can be adopted:
·
If the
GIS is implemented as a separate system from the HER database then it may be
periodically 'refreshed' with new data from the HER database. Any corrections that are made to site
locations in the GIS will need to be exported (or manually copied) back to the
text database.
·
A
dynamic link may be created between the HER database and the GIS using a
communications protocol to enable grid co-ordinates and other information to be
exchanged between the two systems.
·
An
approach that is not recommended for HERs would be to migrate all the existing
HER data into the GIS and to scrap the existing text database. This is because few GIS products support
complex data structures directly or offer the same flexibility in indexing or
retrieval of information that is recommended for HER text databases.
Windows-based desktop GIS systems can be linked to external text databases using one of the following protocols: OLE (Object Linking and Embedding), DDE (Dynamic Data Exchange) or ODBC (Open Database Connectivity):
OLE is a
protocol and set of function calls that are incorporated into the Windows
operating system. It allows programs to
communicate with each other and is used extensively by Microsoft® to
enable word processor, presentation, spreadsheet, database and other
applications such as GIS to work together efficiently and exchange data. OLE is used to link or embed objects
creating a compound document which can contain other documents: for example an
Access form might contain a Word document, an Excel spreadsheet or a Maplnfo
workspace. Linking means that data is
presented in the compound document but it is retrieved from its original file
using the file name. Embedding means
that data from the original file is incorporated into the compound document.
DDE is
another protocol that is incorporated into the Windows operating system which
allows one application to exchange data or to trigger an action in another
application. DDE is a protocol for
manipulating applications programmatically and allows data to be extracted,
macros or programs to be run or information to be listed. There is some overlap in functionality with
OLE but DDE is older, less robust and a more basic method of enabling
communications between different applications.
DDE is used for programs that do not support OLE, for example to create
links between databases and ArcView GIS.
DDE is also used for controlling programs across a network (a function
not currently supported by OLE).
ODBC is a
common language definition and a set of protocols that allows a database
application held on a client machine to interact with a different database
application held on a server across a network.
For example, using ODBC, an Access database held on a work station can
query and exchange data with an Oracle database on a network server. For this to happen, ODBC drivers that are
appropriate for the application software need to be installed on both the
client machine and the server machine.
The way information has been
modelled in the HER text databases will have a significant influence on the way
the spatial information is constructed.
The current data model may be based on MIDAS (Lee 1998) or derived from
earlier monument-focused systems.
Different attributes or data fields from the text database will be
referenced in the GIS and used to create different layers or themes. A problem that will need to be accounted for
is that data may not be entirely consistently recorded throughout the database:
for example a monument-focused database may have contained some information
about events and the HER may be in the process of implementing the
event-monument-source data model. In
developing HER layers in the GIS the following will need to be considered:
·
the
initial data load from HER text database to GIS (see B.8.4)
·
subsequent
updates of the GIS layer (that is, with new records entered into the text
database)
·
subsequent
updates of the text database (that is, with updates to grid references or new
records imported from the GIS).
The ideal 'relationship' between
text database and GIS is one in which data can be entered either through the
GIS or through the text database, but this requires a close connection between
the two systems. This is generally
provided by a computer-generated record number (such as the HER number for monument
records) which is used to link information held in data tables in the two
systems. The HER text database will
normally control the allocation of unique identifiers for monuments, events,
sources and consultations. Users would
go to the HER text database to create a new record and then, using an OLE or
DDE link, go into the GIS to add or modify spatial data. With this type of link, core record details
are copied from the text database into the GIS and spatial references are
copied back from the GIS into the text database.
An even higher degree of integration
between GIS and text database would allow users to start by creating a new
record in the GIS. To achieve this the
GIS needs to be able to activate the text database to generate the next unique
identifier in the sequence.
When configuring the link between
the GIS and the text database, users also need to consider what information
will be passed between the two systems and specify appropriate rules for
updating. Useful information to pass
back from the GIS will include grid references, administrative boundaries and
environmental features such as soils and geology. Useful information to pass from the text database will include
monument type, period and building materials.
HER users also need to consider what
information they wish to generate 'on the fly' in the GIS and what they wish to
record directly in their text database.
For example, a corporate GIS system may contain a large number of
boundaries such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs)
and SSSIs Visual inspection of the GIS
or a spatial query can readily identify which monuments lie within any of these
boundaries without the information being directly attached to the monument
records in the text database. HER managers
are thus able to differentiate between important information about the monument
status that they wish to appear on screen and in reports (for example scheduled
status) and spatial queries that can be built up according to need in the GIS.
Mapped features representing the
'real world' are abstractions and symbols are used that can be readily
understood or related to a key. For
example, at a scale of 1:1 million, a city may be represented as a point - a
completely abstract representation but one which is understandable and
appropriate to the scale of mapping.
Larger-scale maps generally use less abstract symbols, so for example at
1:10,000 the same city will be represented by the outlines of buildings, roads,
gardens and so forth.
In GIS, features can be represented
using points, lines, polygons and 'poly-lines' (a continuous line consisting of
multiple lines joined together). All of
these have their uses in representing archaeological and historic
features. For example, points could be
used to represent find spots and also perhaps to indicate the location of
features where these are already shown on the map, for example points within
building outlines. Points are also
useful for showing site locations in distribution maps at scales where polygons
and polylines simply would not be visible.
Lines can be used to indicate linear features such as roads, canals and
railways.
In deciding which shape to use, it
is important to consider to what purpose the data will be put. If, as in many cases it will be, the aim is
to indicate the extent of a monument or building, then polygons will be most
useful. If the purpose is to show
discrete find spots then points are more appropriate. The next issue is how and where these shapes are to be drawn and
the accuracy that is required; the scale of the apping available will affect
the decision.
It is difficult to give detailed
guidelines but the issues discussed below are worth taking into consideration.
Where the extent of the monument is
known and especially where the monument or building is clearly visible, then
there are advantages in showing the extent of the monument on the GIS. This enables users to see the monument or
building in relation to other features in its landscape setting. Figure 44 shows an example of.the use of polygons
to plot the early 19th century defences south of Chelmsford in
relation to contours, thus allowing their topographical location to be
understood.

Figure 44: A GIS layer showing the
use of polygons to show the extent of the early 19th-century defences at
Chelmsford. [© Essex County Council 2007and © Crown Copyright, All rights reserved. 100019602. 2007]
Where the extent is uncertain, then,
as is often done with more conventional mapping, the boundary could be drawn
using the nearest modern boundaries that enclose the known features (metadata
should be recorded explaining why the polygon has been drawn in this way).
Uncertainty can also be represented
by symbols. For example, solid lines
might be used to represent known boundaries, while uncertain boundaries could
be represented by broken (dotted) lines.
Some GIS may allow 'mixed' symbols within a polygon (for example where
only one boundary is uncertain), though in most, a separate line would need to
be digitised over that part of the polygon.
Many sites recorded in HERs require special consideration in land-use planning, for example sites that are afforded statutory protection, which may have a legally defined boundary showing the protected area (Figure 45). The protected area may differ from the full extent of the monument site, such as a monument site that survives partially as earthworks and partially as cropmarks, with the better preserved portion of the site being scheduled. For these reasons, it is recommended practice to create separate layers within the GIS depicting the extents of protected sites, for example a Scheduled Monument (SM) layer would be created for scheduled monuments. These can then be displayed over other polygons that might show features or monuments both lying within and outside the protected area. It is recommended that HERs should, where possible, obtain digital boundaries from the organisation responsible for maintaining them, for example scheduled monuments from English Heritage. It has been recently agreed in Scotland that the RCAHMS displays site polygons as known extents, while the HERs/SMRs display site polygons with buffer zones. The extent of those buffer zones and so forth are still being discussed but agreement should be reached by end of 2006.

Figure 45: Great Chesterford
scheduled area [© Essex County Council 2007 and © Crown
Copyright, All rights reserved. 100019602. 2007]
It is important to be aware of the
implications of the scale of mapping against which heritage objects are
captured or displayed. Map making is a
process of reducing complexity and maps are drawn in a way that emphasises
important features while suppressing unimportant ones. This is the 'selection and simplified
representation of detail appropriate to the scale and/or the purpose of a map'
(ICA 1973). Thus, if the width of a
road on a 1:1,000,000 map were to be accurately measured, its representation
would be considerably wider than the a real-world width of the road. As roads are important features on maps they
need to be emphasised and, as a result, on the map any adjacent features are
shifted.
Because successively smaller scales
of mapping are more generalised, an object whose position was captured against
a small-scale map will, when displayed against a larger scale of map, appear to
be in the wrong place (and vice versa).
For example, the outline of a building captured against a 1:10,000 OS
raster map will not be reliably displayed against 1:1,250 OS Landline because
the digitised boundaries will not match the Landline boundaries. This effect is most marked when digitising
from very small-scale mapping. For
example, if Roman roads were digitised from a 1:1,000,000 map base, when
displayed against a 1:10,000 map base, they might be up to 1 km away from their
expected position. Thus, a dataset
captured at small-scale is unsuitable for display against a detailed large-scale
map.
As a general guide, 1:10,000 is the
smallest scale of mapping against which the boundaries of archaeological
monuments or features should be captured.
For the outlines of detailed features, such as buildings, larger scale
mapping such as 1:2,500 or 1:1,250 is preferable. Smaller scale mapping (for example 1:25,000 or 1:50,000) may be
useful for capturing general area information (such as the bounding extent of a
large field-walking survey).
In each case, it is essential that
the scale chosen is related to the purpose to which the information will be
put. Details of the scale of map used
in data capture should be documented in metadata.
In archaeology it is common practice to record the location of features using six or eight-figure grid references, for example TQ 367425. This convention presents real problems when translated into GIS because these co-ordinates represent the bottom left-hand (or south-west) corner of a square. A six-figure grid reference actually represents a 100 metre square, while an eight-figure grid reference represents a 10 metre square. The actual location of the archaeological feature lies somewhere within the square, at an imprecisely defined and perhaps uncertain point.
If locations expressed as grid references are exported directly into a GIS and displayed as point data, the maps produced can be misleading. This is because the process of exporting the data can displace knowledge about the precision with which the grid references have been recorded.
For this reason ‘padding’ grid
references with zeros added to the end of the numbers is a practice that can
rarely be justified because, without supporting data, the process of exporting
grid references from a text database into GIS can make it impossible to
reconstruct whether the location of a find was generalised to the nearest major
grid line, or fortuitously aligned with it.
HER managers can avoid the loss of
this important information if the following measures are taken:
·
ensuring
that the HER text databases generally contain information relating to the site location,
and recording both how the grid reference was derived and its precision. Points can be created in the HER’s GIS based on grid references exported from
monument records in HER text databases while retaining a link between the two
systems. Data relating to the accuracy
of the grid reference can be exported to the GIS alongside the grid references
and used to select an appropriate symbol to depict the point.
·
ensuring
that metadata relating to the accuracy of the source of the locational
information is recorded. If a site
location is given to six or eight figures in a source but is depicted as a
point accurate to 1m in the GIS, then the level of precision must be recorded
in metadata.
GIS systems are made up of 'layers'
of information, which can be overlaid, combined and analysed to create new
information. For example, the location
of a number of archaeological sites could be compared to the location of
aspects of the environment (Figure 46).

Figure 46: Examples of layers in a
GIS
These can then be used to identify
sites which lie within the boundaries of particular soil types, creating new
information (very useful, for example, in identifying impacts of
agri-environmental schemes, set-aside, and so forth) (Figure 47).

Figure 47: A new GIS layer:
archaeological sites on arable land
| E.4.1 National and international spatial standards | E. 4.2 Sharing spatial data | E.4.3 Useful websites and references |
A number of national and
international standards have been developed in the last few years to encourage
consistent depiction of geographic space, and work is ongoing to discuss
conventions for heritage datasets.
Spatial data require recording
standards concerning issues relating to accuracy, scale and resolution that do
not normally arise in relation to other types of data. This section of the manual only summarises
the issues, as more detailed guidance is available from a number of other
sources, with various textbooks providing introductions to the problems that
may arise. A useful starting point for
HERs is the ADS's GIS Guide to Good
Practice (Gillings and Wise 1998) and section E.3 of this manual gives
guidelines on creating and managing layers in an archaeological GIS. The MIDAS
mapped data Annexe addresses the specific needs of
describing depiction of MIDAS inventory entries on maps, and the maps
themselves, for example in a GIS (Geographic Information System), covering both
individual features and layers.
Both in the initial capture of data and for subsequent maintenance and additions in the GIS, there are issues concerning standards which need to be considered if the spatial information is going to be usable. Because many of the outputs of GIS are visual, these pictures can be very persuasive. But GIS are only a model of the real world and the model can only be as good as the quality and appropriateness of the data within it. Data standards help users to control this and to be in a position to say whether data is 'fit for purpose’.
A number of different standards
issues relate to spatial data and the following points should be considered:
How will spatial data quality be controlled?
Data quality can usefully be thought of as either compliance to a
specification or the meeting of customer needs.
What metadata or documentation should be recorded?
Metadata might include information about a whole dataset (what it is,
when it was captured, at what scale, against what base map product) or about
individual items within it (who captured it, on what date and at what scale if
variable).
How will new data be captured? What are the
standards for capturing information of different types? For example, a 1:10,000 base map may be
appropriate for capturing point data, but will be less useful for capturing the
outline of a building. An appropriate
standard must be adopted for each case.
What standards will be applied to the way data is displayed?
What symbols will be used? How will
uncertainties over the precision of location, fuzzy boundaries and so forth be
represented?
How will data be imported and exported from the system?
Who are potential data suppliers and customers for digital data? What are their requirements and can they be
met?
How far should changes made to the data, or the source of the originals,
be documented?
For each of these areas working
practices need to be agreed and documented for use within the HER and related
to standards in use within the organisation as a whole and to externally agreed
data standards.
A number of national and international standards have been developed to encourage consistent depiction of geographic space and work is ongoing to discuss conventions for heritage datasets. A non-exclusive list of relevant standards and organisations that are concerned with spatial data standards would include the following:
·
BS 7666 specifies the manner in which
address information should be specified, and is important within Local
Government and the Utilities. Archaeologically, it may prove most useful in the
consistent provision of address information, for example for Listed Buildings.
·
FGDC the United States Federal
Geographic Data Committee’s Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
is, perhaps, the best known and established of geospatial data standards, the
current version having been first released in 1994, and updated in 1998. This
standard underpins much of the US Federal Government's work with geospatial
data, and is also used by other collectors of spatial data. The standard was
recently enhanced, and is available in a variety of commonly used formats.
·
ISO 15046 is a draft standard from the
International Standards Organisation Technical Committee TC/211 that addresses
geographic information and geomatics. The draft standard appears modelled upon
current FGDC practice, and offers powerful options for extensibility and
modification within the wider standards framework.
·
OGIS (Open Geodata Interoperability
Specification) is an initiative by the vendor-led Open GIS Consortium (OGC).
OGC is looking to increase the ease with which geospatial information may be
passed between products, and OGIS is one important aspect of this work.
·
The National Geospatial Data Framework (NGDF) was an important co-operative
initiative aiming to provide effective means of access to geospatial data that
is collected and held by government and the public and private sectors. It will
be replaced by the GiGateway (see below).
Fully describing spatial data is
essential to using it, archiving it and deciding on how best to use it. It is
also an essential first step in designing information systems that
interoperate. Because of this, it is good practice to store spatial metadata as
well as the attribute, topological and geographic components of a spatial
database.
Metadata standards are necessary to make sure that that different users can find out about the suitability of data from different sources. This is particularly important if users need to compare metadata describing HER data with metadata describing, for example, rights of way or environmental information. Metadata standards set out what information should be recorded for a particular dataset and in what format. Some kinds of information may be regarded as compulsory (should always be recorded) while others may be optional either because they may not be universally relevant, or because they are useful but not essential. Metadata for a spatial dataset will enable users (or interoperating systems) to know, for example, the dates when a spatial data layer was created and/or modified, the date of the source mapping from which it derives, the scale, accuracy and precision of the data and any copyright issues that pertain to the layer and so on. Metadata standards enable metadata to be validated so that meaningful comparisons can be made between diverse spatial data sources.
There are a number of metadata initiatives within the UK
geospatial community. The most relevant of these is probably UK GEMINI (GEo-spatial
Metadata INteroperability Initiative) launched in 2004 following a
collaboration between the Association
for Geographic Information (AGI) and the Cabinet Office e-Government Unit, with additional
representation from national and local government and the academic
community. Adherence to the UK GEMINI
profile, which will replace the Gigateway Discovery Metadata Specifications
(the NGDF Standard) as the UK's national geospatial metadata profile, allows
for the creation of discovery metadata with both ISO 19115 (Geographic
Information –Metadata) and the national e-Government Metadata Standard
(eGMS), ensuring compliance with both. Adopting UK GEMINI will also simplify
the process of publishing
metadata via Gigateway's Data Locator.
Further details can be found at http://www.gigateway.org.uk/metadata/standards.html.
GiGateway replaces the National
Geospatial Data Framework (NGDF). It provides a free web service aimed at
increasing awareness of and access to geospatial information in the UK; offers
assistance and guidance on the collection of metadata to national and
international standards and provides purpose built software. GiGateway services
include a Data Locator to find out
what geographic datasets exist, Area
Search to find out more about specific localities and Data Directory to help locate organistions which supply geographic
data, products and services.
NGDF produced a metadata standard
for spatial information, compatible with the Dublin Core. HERs have been
recommended to follow the Dublin Core for electronic resources other than GIS
as this provides a standard content-description model widely used on the
internet (see Miller and Greenstein 1997). At the time of writing, GiGateway is
currently working on redevelopment of its MetaGenie
product to create metadata in line with UK GEMINI (see above). Until then, the
AGI Information Services Team urge data creators to start or continue using
MetaGenie v1.0 alongside the GiGateway
Discovery Metadata Specifications (Association for Geographic Information
2003) to produce and publish geospatial metadata.
Further details can be found at the
GiGateway website (http://www.gigateway.org.uk/default.html).
The Intra-governmental Group on
Geographic Information (IGGI) was established in 1993 to enable central
government to liaise effectively and exchange best practice in the use of
geographic information. It aims to increase the efficiency of central
government while enabling it to meet its responsibilities for provision of
geographic information to the general public. Details can be found at the IGGI
website http://www.iggi.gov.uk/welcome.php.
There are many advantages to sharing
spatial datasets both within an organisation (such as a County Council) and
beyond. Within large organisations shared access to spatial data can help
integrate different activity areas and prevent duplication of data within the
organisation (which can, in turn, lead to redundancy within the datasets and
unnecessary cost through duplication of both expenditure and effort).
There are also many advantages to
making HER data available outside an organisation, although this raises wider
issues relating to freedom of information, ownership of information and
protection of heritage resources.
In both cases, there is a clear need
to integrate any approach to spatial information with wider initiatives that
may exist within the organisation. Many HERs will be components of wider
corporate database and GIS strategies and will need to fit within these in
order to benefit from data sharing within the organisation, while both local
and national government is now coming to terms with the requirements of the
2000 Freedom of Information Act (The
Stationery Office 2000)and how best to meet obligations placed on it under
that.
Intranets are closed networks that
are established by organisations to serve the computing needs of their
staff. An intranet may be small, for
example a number of computers connected to a Local Area Network (LAN) within a
building, but can be very large, for example the computing networks for a
series of buildings connected to a Wide Area Network (WAN). In a WAN the buildings may be widely
separated, as is the case in organisations with regional offices, such as
English Heritage or multinational companies.
The technology that links the computers is similar to that used in the
internet. The difference is that use of
an intranet is restricted to those with security clearance and a valid
password. Intranets are enclosed inside
a firewall to secure the information held on corporate systems from
unauthorised access.
Intranets provide secure
environments within which many users can gain access to shared resources. For
GIS users, this can mean that different groups within a larger organisation can
have access to the same spatial data themes permitting easier sharing of
spatial data between, for example, HER, planning, rights-of-way and environment
groups. This level of integration, however, usually requires significant
investment by the wider organisation both in terms of technical infrastrucure
and effective management.
At present, very few (if any) HERs have made it possible for the general public to directly access spatial information on the internet. There are few technical restrictions on this, with several solutions available for ‘map serving’ or for creating internet interfaces to databases. There are however, currently two main issues preventing this:
1.
Such
projects would be expensive to establish and maintain. Clearly, direct access
to ‘live’ data is rarely desirable, and so data must be regularly output from
the main HER system usually requiring human intervention. Servers and infrastructure
also require management for which few HERs are currently funded. Meeting the
requirements of the Freedom of Information Act may change the economics,
however.
2.
There
are significant concerns about the impact on the heritage resource of making accurate,
spatial locations for known archaeological sites available to the general
public. It does not require a leap of imagination to see such resources
becoming a favoured resource for the metal-detecting community and therefore
producing a significant increase in damage to recorded (and in many cases
Scheduled) monuments. Again, it is currently unclear how the requirements of
the 2000 Freedom of Information Act will impact on this issue.
One recent example of online access
to spatial information is Pastmap, a map-enabled query system for Scotland's
Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings, and the National Monuments
Record. This requires users to register, and once registered displays
user-defined maps for the locations (and boundary polygons) for Scheduled
Ancient Monuments, and locations of Listed Buildings, entries in the National
Monuments Record of Scotland and Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes (http://www.pastmap.org.uk/). (See also
F.8.4.1)
Dublin Core http://dublincore.org/
Arts and Humanities Data Service
(AHDS):
Main
website http://ahds.ac.uk/
Archaeology
Data Service (ADS) http://ahds.ac.uk/archaeology/
Metadata
advice http://ahds.ac.uk/creating/information-papers/metadata/index.htm
IGGI website http://www.iggi.gov.uk/welcome.php
GiGateway (formerly
NGDF):
Main
site http://www.gigateway.org.uk/
Metadata standards pages http://www.gigateway.org.uk/metadata/standards.html
Z39.50
Z39.50 http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/z3950/z3950.html
NISO
brochure http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z3950_Resources.html
E.5 Historic Landscape
Characterisation
Lynn Dyson-Bruce
Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC), as applied in England, aims
to provide an historic ‘time depth’ perspective of the landscape.
Traditionally HERs have been based
primarily on point, and/or polygonal data on maps, usually limited to specific
findspots, buildings or monuments. This leaves parts of the landscape
unclassified as to its cultural heritage. These blank spaces on the map may be
perceived by those outside the sector as being of no or limited archaeological
or historical value. In contrast, the HLC is a total coverage model, although
at present it covers primarily the rural landscape. HLC has developed in
response to changing outlooks and new government policy.
Using a range of sources, primarily
cartographic, HLC assesses and classifies the current landscape in broad
historic terms, on the basis of a combination of morphology and interpretation.
HLC provides an audit of what has survived within the current landscape,
expressed in terms of its historic origins and development. The precise
classification and methodology used varies between counties and regions (for
more details see Taking Stock of the
Method - Aldred and Fairclough 2003), but the basic principles are similar:
a pre-defined series of specific HLC Types or broader Character Types which can
be grouped into broad categories based on for example urban, enclosed
landscapes and woodlands. The important characteristic is that a time or period
element is incorporated. Without
placing any hierarchy or value on this analysis it enables an HER to assess
what has survived, from what period, so that it may be managed appropriately.
HLC builds on Landscape Character
Assessment (LCA) carried out by the Countryside Agency to address the need for
a new approach to landscape assessment which looked at the whole of England's
countryside rather than just specific designated areas. HLC complements LCA in
many ways, looking in more detail at historic components of the landscape and
increasingly forming a fundamental building block in this landscape assessment
process.
For LCA the landscape is assessed in
terms of topography, geology and soils, ecology, and culture to allocate areas
to a number of generic Landscape Character Types (LCT) which, in conjunction
with informed judgement and interpretation are used to build the LCA. They are
becoming increasingly GIS based applications and are being used to underpin
various landscape management strategies and policies, informing a wide range of
issues. Detailed regional LCA’s have been brought together to form an
overarching national typology, creating broad character areas, resulting in The Character of England Map (See CCN website and LCA Types and Areas Maps).
The HLC has also been compared to
various LCAs across the UK with varying results (Dyson-Bruce et al 1999, Odell
pers. comm., Wakelin pers. comm.) showing similarities in some areas,
significant differences in others, although the reasons for this have not yet
been fully researched.
Websites:
Countryside Character Network (CCN)
web site http://www.ccnetwork.org.uk/. for background to LCA, including
methodological developments, speclialised urban LCA, and relationship between
HLC and LCA.
Countryside Agency: Topic paper on LCA: http://www.countryside.gov.uk/Images/LCA_Topic_Paper_5_tcm2-21906.pdf
From a paper based exercise in the early 1990s HLC has developed to what
is, currently, a developing yet sophisticated Geographic Information System
(GIS) application. Practitioners not only have to be knowledgeable about
archaeology, history and landscapes but also be highly IT and GIS literate. It
is GIS which has revolutionised how we perceive spatial data and has enabled
the creation of intelligent cogent maps in conjunction with data
analysis and manipulation.
Historic Landscape
Character or Historic Land-use Assessment (HLA): Uniformity of principle
Methodology has generally varied in detail from project to project, but
whichever approach has been used
HLC/HLA projects all share a number of common elements in that they all:
·
assess
the total rural landscape
·
look
at landscape time depth by assessing surviving features
·
assess
landscape change through history
·
assess
historic origins of the landscape
·
are
usually applied at 1:25,000 scale
·
apply
a well defined (if variable) methodology
·
use a
specified range of historic landscape types, grouped into themes or categories for
example enclosed land, industrial, 20th century, or single
attributes, or types for example field types, by form, patterns woodland types for
example ancient woodland.
They differ in philosophy and application in that HLA assess the landscape as to current and historic land use as well as historic character, whereas HLC assesses primarily historic character.
England
In England HLC began with the
seminal work carried out in Cornwall in the early/mid 90s (Herring 1998). This
was initially a paper based exercise, developed from traditional LCA
methodology; but has since become an integrated GIS application (see example
figure 48 and 49). To date nearly half of England has reached completion under
the leadership of English Heritage in partnership with the relevant Local
authorities. (For updates on progress see the EH web site)
The East of England (EofE) HLC
project, is the only application of HLC in England that uses a single but
evolving methodology to ensure a consistency of application and analysis across
a region (Dyson-Bruce 2002).
English Heritage commissioned a
survey of HLC methodology in 2003 to develop a toolkit for future HLC
applications in an attempt to harmonise HLC methodologies and to establish best
practice across England. This resulted
in ‘Taking Stock of the Method’ (Aldred and Fairclough 2003). The survey
reviewed past methodologies into three major phases of development across
England, and from these developed a series of proposals and established
standards, as a toolkit for best pratice and future application. This document
now informs the methodologies of all current HLC applications in England.
Websites: Cornwall HLC: http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=5747
English Heritage: ‘Taking Stock
of the Method’ EH website http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1293 (Aldred and Fairclough 2003).
In 2003 English Heritage undertook a
detailed review of the various methodologies employed and have proposed an ‘HLC
Toolkit’ to inform future HLC’s. This aims to ensure that certain standards
are met, and to facilitate a uniformity
of approach across England.

Figure 48: The first HLC in England
– carried out in Cornwall. [©
Cornwall
County Council 2007 and © Crown
Copyright. All rights reserved. 100019590. 2007]

Figure 49: A
selected area of the HLC for Cornwall [© Cornwall County Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 100019590. 2007]
Historic Land-use Assessment (HLA)
started in Scotland in 1996, led and centrally managed by the Royal Commission
on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS) and Historic
Scotland (Historic Scotland), in conjunction with the Local Authorities
(Dyson-Bruce et al 1999). A single uniform GIS based methodology is
being applied across the country and approximately half of Scotland had been
completed at the time of writing.
The approach uses a range of single period types (current and relict) which reflect historic land use as well as character. This can result in complex maps showing palimpsests of multi-periods of discernable use within the landscape and consequently these types have been grouped into 14 broad categories, for ease of display for example Fields and Farming, Woodland and Forestry. These provide an over-arching framework, within which the specific types give the supporting detail. (Fairclough and Macinnes 2003)
Website: RCAHMS has an interactive website,
which is constantly updated, illustrating the HLA, (see - http://jura.rcahms.gov.uk/HLA/start.jsp),
a sample screenshot from the website is illustrated below (figure 50).

Figure
50:
HLAMAP – HLA as applied in Scotland, (from the RCAHMS website). [© RCAHMS 2007 and
© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved.100020548
2007]
Wales has adopted a different
approach, and has defined a ‘Register of Landscapes’ of specific or outstanding
interest (Cadw 1998) which ranks and values specific selected areas, but not
the whole landscape. However an HLC is about to be implemented, to ensure all
of the landscape has been assessed, in accord with the English and Scottish
approaches.
Websites:
Cadw:
http://www.cadw.wales.gov.uk/ ).
Publication of Historic Landscapes
is at - http://www.cadw.wales.gov.uk/upload/resourcepool/Historic%20Landscapes9277.pdf
Across both England and Scotland, a
basic range of sources have been used, to inform, and support the HLC (Panel 10).
Key datasets commonly used include the modern OS maps, the mid 19th
Century 1st Edition and often an intermediary dataset like the
1950’s OS maps or aerial photography. The key factors dictating their use are
that they must be:
·
Readily available – paper or digital in format
·
Cover
the area in question
·
At an
appropriate scale
In each county there are additional
locally available datasets to inform and enhance the HLC, including Tithe and
Enclosure maps from which an HLC may ‘pick and mix’.
The outcome of these initiatives is
the creation of a broad national audit of our historic resource at the
landscape scale, based on common principles. It is an approach that complements
and supports other historic data such as the HER, or NMR. HLC/HLAs can be
applied at a range of scales from district to county to regional.
HLC is now a fully GIS application,
with an increasing level of complexity of databases, either linked flat files
or incorporating geodatabases (object-oriented). The methodology is developing
and maturing with greater experience and breadth of application. GIS also
enables digital combination of HLC data with other datasets.
A wide variety of outputs can be
created, not just custom coloured maps creating schematic or thematic maps at
various scales, but also analysis and statistics, which in turn generate charts
and graphs, based on the underlying databases of information supporting the GIS
mapping of HLC. There is increased flexibility and interoperability of systems,
not only between GIS software but with other standard PC software. This
facilitates data exchange and use.

Figure 51: A screen capture from GIS
- Illustrating the more detailed HLC study of field boundaries in an area just
north of Harlow, which is one of the mineral study areas in Hertfordshire. The
thick grey lines represent modern OS mapping of surviving boundaries, whereas
the various superimposed coloured lines reflect different periods of historic
mapping, such as Estate, Tithe and Enclosure maps. This illustrates the degree
of boundary loss and change through the past two centuries. This will enable
dating of surviving field boundaries or sections thereof for future land management. [© Hertfordshire County Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright, All rights reserved. 100019606. 2007]
Consequently the HLC approach is
under constant change and development in response to changes in thinking,
political drivers and pressures, in parallel with improved GIS technology and
data (see case studies below) in order to create a better application and also
one for wider and specialised use.
·
Urban
HLC Enhanced forms
of HLC are being developed, for example Urban based HLC, using a more fine
grained approach – assessing and classifying the urban environment in greater
detail than rural HLC (see below). This approach is currently being developed
in Lancashire, Cornwall, Northern England and in Hertfordshire (a pilot study
in Stevenage). See illustration from Cornwall, figure 52. It is thought this
more detailed approach will sit alongside Historic Buildings and Conservation
Areas and the more recent Extended Urban Survey’s (EUS) providing an historic
urban context for more detailed studies and site based data.
·
Coastal
HLC – currently
being developed by EH to assess the coastal margins, from the High Water Mark
(HWM), out as far as the statutory
limit (12 nautical miles). This will assess not only any historic data but also
archaeological potential based on geology and topography. This is in response
to current and future threats to such archaeological and historical material
within the littoral coastal zone, from, for example, coastal erosion, deep
fishing and mineral extraction.
·
An
enhanced HLC, also
incorporating fieldwork, looking in detail at field boundaries, their history
and current condition in response to the proposed areas for minerals
extraction, has been applied in Hertfordshire (Bryant and Hunn 2004)

Figure 52: Urban HLC as applied in
St Austell Cornwall [© Cornwall County
Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All
rights reserved. 100019590.
2007]
There are many questions and/or
issues to be considered before embarking on integrated data management of HLC
in conjunction with HER datasets. What it is intended to achieve and why? How
the product might be used in the future and how it fits in with the HERs IT and
GIS data structure within its parent organisation. Serious consideration should
be given to the pragmatic, logical and effective steps needed to create what
would be a useful and universal tool, also the manner in which it might
subsequently be developed and applied.
In planning to create an integrated
series of records to form a more complete HER one must consider the diverse
nature of the various datasets, in detail, scale and quality. In any approach,
where the data will be combined in some way, it will be essential to have
national standards and guidelines to ensure a uniform approach and a
compatibility of standards and the resulting datasets. This would have the
added advantage of adding credibility to heritage asset management and records.
Such a nationally established HER
and HLC protocol could extend the range and effectiveness of current methods of
heritage management, contribute further to conservation, landscape management,
development control work, research and so forth, and allow the heritage sector to
operate on the same national basis as other regional or national bodies in
areas such as, Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS), Strategic Environmental
Assessments (SEA) and to help inform change indicators such as ‘Countryside
Quality Counts’.
The main approaches to combining HLC
with HER datasets may be either as parallel or integrated datasets. Integrated, object oriented geo-databases
would be a way forward, but would require good GIS skills to achieve this more advanced
GIS data structure, with improved conformity in data quality and content, not
least well defined and generally accepted spatial extents.
The data within the various HERs is
variable in content, quality and structure, reflecting a wide variety of
material from single finds to complex and extensive excavations, and
development over a long period of time. On HER mapping sites are usually located by a six figure
NGR and represented in GIS as an X-Y point – although there is an increasing
thrust to convert these points to polygonal data, reflecting the sites true
geographic coverage. Other digital data includes for example, the National
Mapping Programme (NMP).
HLCs also differ in nature, quality
and form with great variation between phases in the development of the
methodology and their application across England. Recent projects have shown
that the assimilation of different forms of HLC to create cross-border models
can be achieved (for example Went et al 2003: Green and Kidd 2004: Chris
Blandford Associates 2004).
Given that the data held within the
HER record is complex and variable, often held in different data structures how
is HLC best used or incorporated with such digital datasets?
(See ‘Is there a Point in the
Polygon?’ Dyson-Bruce 2004) http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/News/ArchivedNews.htm Historic Environment Record News Feb
2004
There may be many ways of doing
this, in practical or technical terms - but the following ideas or types of
approach are suggested:
To achieve some national strategy to
gain conformity in data, a rationalisation, with defined data standards and
structure may well be required to synthesise all these variable forms of data,
both HLC and HER in themselves, prior to their being brought together in a
single or series of linked databases into a fully integrated HER. This would
enable full and consistent interoperability, application and analysis. The
drawback is that, this may stymie future development and change, but on the
other hand would ensure national conformity in data gathering, collation,
analysis and management. However due to
the diversity of dataset structure and content in the HLC and HER there may be
no single solution.
Given the variability of HLCs, the integration of all HLCs into a
nationally consistent dataset would require a rationalisation of the data, and
data migration into new data structures with various levels of synthesis and
interpretation of the extant data. A clear and well defined vision would be
required to ensure conformity.
For an HER there would have to be
some data cleansing or filtering process of duplicate, suspect and inconsistent
data. In addition point data may need to polygonised, which introduces issues
of where to place the boundary of
sites. For example, Listed Buildings, which may have an unclear spatial
definition – what part of the building, or series of buildings, how much of the
grounds or curtilage are to be incorporated, that is, what is its ‘footprint’?
Similarly, Scheduled Monuments may have
an defined edge that may well not conform to OS digital data. All these would
require digitising as unique polygons, with all associated records.
One could cluster data together,
such as finds scatters, crop marks or clusters of listed buildings with other
historically significant buildings. This would require definition of a cluster
– number, proximity, area and so forth, using consistent criteria, for example
perhaps using a convex hull technique (whereby GIS ‘lassos’ a line, around a
cluster of selected point data into a group which may then be represented as a
polygon, possibly with an additional buffer zone). However the information would require additional interpretation
by type, period, or a synthesis. Again they may well not conform to OS defined
areas. These clusters or groupings of data could form various ‘management
layers’, representing a new layer of generic or categorised information within
the HER. This could perhaps be more easily understood and assimilated by other
users that are non-archaeologists.
Whilst this process is being initiated
and implemented, it would be opportune to fully consider future applications.
With appropriate thought the data cleansing and manipulation could provide the
answer to a wider variety of remits and end uses, that is a more useful
streamlined management tool and resource.
Alternatively the HLC and HER
datasets could sit in parallel with each other to be used interactively within
GIS, for reactive or iterative display or analysis. The separate datasets are
displayed within GIS using the functionality within GIS display (using legends
to allow overlaying of multiple datasets – transparency and appropriate
symbology), or for analysis (for example by spatial location, or by using
attributes).
One option is for a hierarchical
system: the overarching broad HLC with the finer grained detailed HER, both
possibly displaying at different scales. So as one zoomed in the HLC would fade
as the HER records came into sharper focus. Hertfordshire County Council has used a series of nesting
polygonal data for redefining the HER – which proved time consuming and thus
may not be universally practicable (S Bryant pers. comm.).
The HLC and HER datasets could be
combined into a single resource – as a ‘single source of truth or information’
whereby the HLC becomes an integral part of the HER system.
exeGesIS SDM Ltd has developed an ‘HLC Module’ for the HBSMR system whereby, using a rules based, hierarchical system (see figure 53), of broad generic groups or categories (macro), with types, sub-types or attributes providing the detail (micro), with associated material, has enabled an integration of the HLC within the HER. It is an inter active system, the HER and HLC are embedded together into their spatial context. This approach has been piloted in Norfolk in its application of HLC.

Figure
53: A
screen capture of the HBSMR Help manual – this approach embeds the HLC within
the HER
[© exeGesIS
SDM
Ltd. 2007].
Increasingly as areas are completed, the issues of data management, maintenance and update, of not only the basic records but also the subsequent syntheses, will need to be addressed. With time, data will be updated, errors found and corrected with new interpretations and additional data gathered, requiring inputting not only in to HER but HLC datasets. HER data is readily updateable, within extant GIS systems designed for such purposes. The HLC as yet does not have a well defined management system, and there are other related issues. For example the HLCs represent a timeline of data synthesis of the state of the landscape at that time – therefore there are additional issues of archive copies, with live updated current versions of the HLC, that is versioning of the GIS dataset to create an established series of time-lines or versions of update.
Other issues are that of
dissemination, training and use of such records within the wider community,
costs or fees for use, training, web access and management. Who is going to
provide the resource for the maintenance of these new more holistic,
encompassing and integrated HERs?
HLC has many uses and applications from simple viewing of layers to more complex analysis.
It is advised to consult The Applications of HLC (Clarke et al 2004), illustrated here, which describes in detail, the main uses to which HLC has been put to date – though it is thought there are many other potential applications yet to be identified.
The ranges of application vary from
heritage, archaeological potential mapping, sensitivity mapping, conservation
zones, landscape (LCA), farming, agri-environment schemes, minerals, coastal
zone management, planning (strategy and policy), development control, research,
local applications, parish surveys and public outreach. The list is constantly expanding with
greater awareness of HLC and HER data and with greater experience.
![Figure 54: Entry Level Scheme for CAP reforms [© LaMIS 2007]](images/fig54.jpg)
Figure 54: Entry Level Scheme for
CAP reforms [© LaMIS 2007]
HLC in conjunction with other historic
data can support the Entry Level
Schemes (ELS) and Higher Level Schemes (HLS) under Common Agricultural Policy,
replacing the former Countryside Stewardship and ESAs schemes. The Land
Management Information Service (LaMIS) illustrated here (figure 54) is one
response to this issue. It supplies
map-based information, including HER data, to assist farmers and other land
mangers in devising appropriate ELS and HLS applications and in meeting their
cross-compliance obligations.
The potential for modelling HLC has
yet to be realised and here there is great promise awaiting development. Future
modelling may well be dictated in response to various issues, of HLC in
conjunction with other data – whether historic or from other sources, for
example ecological, natural, census, sociological. A few ideas are noted below,
to stimulate further work.
Similarly, the people who may use HLC in pursuit of their activities
range far and wide in their backgrounds and levels of expertise and will no
doubt expand as HLC data becomes more widely known and accepted.
Panel 10: Potential Modelling
for HLC |
HLC has been used with a variety of forms of historic data either for visual display or interactive analysis in various applications. The difficulties of combining HER and other historic datasets with HLC have been highlighted and examined as parts of various projects involving GIS analysis. Each approach handled the HER and other historic data with HLC in differing ways, in response to various issues and scales of application. These case studies illustrate some of the issues and problems in combining such different forms of historic records.
In Suffolk HLC has been used as an independent backdrop to select HER point data to compare distribution patterns in Suffolk to the HLC. In addition certain ecological records have been plotted to establish if there are any correlations with distribution and HLC. (E. Martin, pers comm.)
Scotland
In Scotland a selection of
prehistoric (Neolithic and Bronze Age) NMR point data was modelled in
comparison to the HLA to see how past land-use affected monument survival and
condition; how an RCAHMS Farm Building Survey on Sanday, and the HLA,
independently complemented each other; and how RCAHMS fieldwork compared with
the HLA on Skye and in the Grampians (Dyson-Bruce et al 1999).
The following three case studies
were carried out in response to the ODPM’s Sustainable Development reports
targeting the South East for circa 1 million new homes in the next 25-30 years.
English Heritage sought to develop a series of proactive responses, guiding and
informing appropriate development based on modelling ‘historic character’
rather than issuing a series of the more traditional heritage constraints in
such scenarios. The London-Cambridge-Stansted Study sought to define a
strategic analysis based on sensitivity to inform the process of development.
Whereas the Milton Keynes and Thames gateway studies already had pre-defined
zones for development and sought to develop integrated historic environment
modelling to inform and guide future development in these areas. (Further
details of all of the projects are available on the, see details below).
London-Stansted-Cambridge – M11 (Went et al 2003): The LSC- M11 work
highlighted the problems in taking two radically different HER’s (one monument
based, the other event based) in adjacent counties and incorporating them into
two county-based HLC’s using the same methodology (see figure 55). The results
confirmed that a certain screening or filtering of the HER data was required
(which was unfortunately outwith the remit of the project, but is currently
being progressed).

Figure 55: HLC Sensitivity Zones Map
from the LCS-M11Study. [© English Heritage 2007, © Essex County Council 2007 and © Crown
Copyright. All rights
reserved. 100019602. 2007 and ©
Hertfordshire County Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 100019606, 2007]
The project sought to provide a
strategic approach of devising a ‘sensitivity system’ to the HLC data to
facilitate strategic planning; the where,
what and how. A scoring system was used, based on:
·
Age,
rarity or special interest
·
History
of change
·
Landscape
coherence
·
Dominant
characteristics
From these a generic model of
low/low-moderate/moderate/high sensitivity scores were generated, which gave a
range of 21 sensitivity zones (Figure 55). Associated with these are various
advisory notes on criteria and capacity for and the zones correlated to current
development proposals.
Milton Keynes South Midlands (Green and Kidd 2004) :The MKSM work
took a different approach, using comparative analysis of HLC and HER with other
data to inform 15 ‘Historic Landscape Zones’. These zones were then used in
defining criteria for location assessment for potential growth.
The Historic environment was assessed
using
·
Historic
landscape - HLC
·
Historic
buildings – Listed Buildings
·
Archaeological
sites – SM and HER data
·
Visual
setting
A rating of positive, neutral and
negative (serious/moderate/minor) was then assigned to the data to suggest a
potential spatial framework for the Milton Keynes Growth Area (see figure 56).
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 56: Illustrating some of the
outputs from the MKSM study [©
Buckinghamshire
County Council 2007 and © Crown
Copyright. All rights reserved. 100021529. 2007]
Thames-Gateway, (Blandford and Associates and EH, 2004): This study
developed an integrated historic environment approach. Thames Gateway used the
datasets to create three themes or heritage management layers:
·
Historic
Landscape - HLC
·
Urban
Areas – primarily Listed Buildings
·
Archaeology
– HER data
The project separated the major forms of heritage data
into comparable suites of information as they could not be incorporated
satisfactorily into a single integrated suite of data. These three ranges of data were used to
inform a final layer of ‘Historic Environment Characterisation’, with 140
character areas.
The future of HLC relies on wide ranging use and lateral application, not only within the heritage sector but within many other disciplines. HLC is capable of various enhancement projects, looking into either fine grained detailed studies of field types or parish studies involving earlier sources, for example tithe and enclosure or estate maps. An overarching HLC synthesis producing a national HLC generic map of landscape history and development is surely an end objective, which would complement the maps produced by the Countryside Agency.
Natural
England (formerly Countryside Agency ) Landscape Character Assessment:
http://www.countryside.gov.uk/LAR/Landscape/CC/countryside_character.asp
http://www.countryside.gov.uk/LAR/Landscape/CC/landscape_character_assesment.asp
guidance and links to downloadable topic papers on LCA with HLC, GIS,
sensitivity, development and other issues
Countryside Character Network- for
general information http://www.ccnetwork.org.uk/
CIS – Countryside Information System http://www.cis-web.org.uk/home/
DEFRA – Department for Environment Food
and Rural Affairs http://www.defra.gov.uk/
English Heritage
Sustainable Communities: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.5976
·
The London Cambridge Stansted M11 Study - http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/hist_env_issues_lscreport.pdf
·
The Milton Keynes Study http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/CB47_02_StrategicDevelopment.pdf
· Thames Gateway http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/Final_report_textonly.pdf
Historic
Landscape Characterisation: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1293
·
Using Historic Landscape Characterisation http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/a4report.pdf
ELC –
European Landscape Convention, Council of Europe, EEC
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/176.htm
HS – Historic
Scotland http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/
- for general information.
Land
Management Information System LaMiS –
an electronic Geographic Information System which enables farmers to develop
appropriate land management, either for day to day management, long term
planning agri-environment schemes or to formulate new plans for
diversification. It is being piloted in
Hampshire, North Yorkshire Moors and Sussex. http://lamis.everysite.co.uk/lamis/
MAGIC – MAGIC is the first web-based
interactive map to bring together information on key environmental schemes and
designations, in one place. MAGIC is a partnership project involving seven
government organisations who have responsibilities for rural policy-making and
management, and although it has been designed to meet the needs of the partner
organisations, the facility is available to anyone over the Internet.
RCAHMS – Royal
Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland
http://www.rcahms.gov.uk/
- for general information. The site has
an an excellent web based introduction to HLA in Scotland.
http://jura.rcahms.gov.uk/HLA/start.jsp
- for online maps of the HLA of completed areas in Scotland
RCAHMW - Royal Commission on the Ancient
and Historical Monuments of Wales http://www.rcahmw.gov.uk/
One question currently echoing around Local Authorities is what can we do with Historic Landuse Assessment (HLA) data? In Aberdeenshire this is being addressed by integrating part of the HLA data into the Sites & Monuments Record (SMR). HLA not only presents a broad indication of the sweep from moors in the highlands down to farming in the lowlands, it also tells a more complex story. After the dataset had been made available across Aberdeenshire’s Planning Service as an overlay on its GIS, there was uncertainty about what to do with this story. Multiple landscape types varying in period and use proved to be difficult to interpret for untrained staff. Considering the pressures that Development Control (DC) officers already faced in dealing with planning applications and the numerous issues to consider as potential constraints, it was decided to incorporate HLA into the planning system in a different way from its existing overlay. Responsibilty for interpretation of the data resided with the Archaeology Service within the Council, which allowed the logical step of moving information from HLA into the SMR so that landscapes could be presented as archaeological sites (see figures 57 and 58).
Obviously not all landuse types as defined in HLA can be made into archaeological sites. HLA on the whole provides a historical landscape setting in which the monuments lie, something that will be used in the contexts of strategic policy decisions in the future. For the purpose of examining how rare landscape types in HLA could be integrated into planning it was decided to use Designed Landscapes as the initial example.
As with all Local Authorities there is a separate inventory for Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes. The Inventory for Aberdeenshire contains 26 examples of national importance, leaving a far greater number identified through HLA falling outside of the ‘special consideration’ given to those on the list. By taking such landscapes and giving them archaeological designations the following processes had to be undertaken:
1.
Using the Designed Landscape type as a template, as
displayed on the HLA overlay, the landscapes were added to the archaeological
GIS overlay as polygons defining the exact area covered. The polygons were then linked to an entry in
the SMR database. This had the effect of creating a unique site record for each
designed landscape that integrated seamlessly into the overall SMR.
2.
A consensus was reached among the parties that would
normally comment on planning applications relating to designed landscapes as to
how all comments would be presented to a developer. This involved the
Environment Planners (landscape, projects, natural heritage), the Built &
Cultural Heritage Planners (listed buildings, conservation, archaeology) and
where appropriate selected team leaders/managers. A new flagging system was
established in which all parties were informed of a pending application and
allowed to forward their comments to one document that went out in response.
3.
A new model development brief dealing solely with the
archaeological concerns of designed landscapes was written. This allowed a
standard set of mitigation measures aimed specifically at designed landscapes
to be put into place that supplemented other planning considerations such as
Tree Preservation Orders and so forth. This model brief can also act as an aid
for a developer during pre-scoping talks prior to a formal application being
submitted.
4.
New supplementary planning guidance notes were written with
the aim of clarifying for planning staff what a designed landscape is, the
typical features found within it, and what to preserve.
5.
A draft version of the new Archaeology Policy for the Local
Plan was created. The new policy will include HLA as a whole and act as a broad
context for all the landscape types that may be flagged up in the future as
being nationally or regionally important.

Figure 57: HLA overlay showing a Designed Landscape [© Aberdeenshire
Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All
rights reserved. 100020767.
2007]
The immediate benefit of SMR integration and removal of the HLA dataset from the DC process was that it removed the need for extensive training in interpretation and guidance for staff. The additional problem of why DC should consider HLA in the first place, when there are currently no policies that mention it, was also resolved, as the land-use types now became archaeological sites on the GIS overlays. Following this successfully adaptation of one part of HLA to suit the planning system, in particular development control, we can draw several conclusions:
1.
HLA should be presented to a Council in two formats: the
first is the original dataset that anyone can use at a strategic level. The
second is a modified version of the data that is simpler to use and understand
by untrained staff. This could follow Aberdeenshire’s example of putting
selected portions of the data such as designed landscapes or relict landuse
types into other, current, databases such as the SMR so that staff do not have
to do the interpretation.
2.
The policies in the Structure and Local Plans need to take
into account HLA and the question of landscape setting within their wording. This
will ensure that policy teams and DC consider HLA.
3.
Guidance notes and development briefs have to be written for
each landscape type that is to be protected in order to achieve consistency and
understanding, including dealing with the practical need to manage the key
features of these landscapes without precluding acceptable development. This goes beyond the current guidelines
issued by HLA.
4.
When dealing with entire landscapes there will always be
several sections of Planning that will want to comment on applications. A
unified approach must be adopted for responses so that a developer knows what
is wanted from the outset.
By integrating the important landscape types from HLA into the SMR and packaging them with their own guidance notes and so forth, a very flexible system can be created that adapts to changing pressures from developers. It also makes the landscapes easier to understand for planning staff and could perhaps help form a detailed manual on HLA interpretation for the future in the Council. But perhaps the most important aspect is that the story HLA is telling is no longer being missed.

Figure 58: SMR overlay showing same
Designed Landscape as an archaeological site [© Aberdeenshire
Council 2007 and © Crown Copyright. All
rights reserved. 100020767.
2007]