DOI article:
Petric̆ević, Milos̆ B.: A contribution to examining the topography of antique Risinium
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.41950#0191
187
by hermeneutics do not refer to what we understand but /zow we understand.6 This certainly
resonates with theoretical issues of aerial archaeology pointed out by Rączkowski. In his
view, theory guides the research process and is responsible for formulating our answers
in the process of interpretation.7
One of the freąuently asked ąuestions in archaeology is the ąuestion of the process of
interpretation — when it begins, what it depends on, is it finał, etc. When we speak of the
process of interpretation, it is important to distinguish between two interpretative ap-
proaches. The First approach focuses on aerial photographs taken intentionally by those
who would do the interpretation, whilst the other approach focuses on photographs the
primary purpose of which was not archaeological interpretation. One can assume that the
process of interpretation is not identical in these two cases.
In the former case it is difficult to say when the process of interpretation begins. Ac-
cording to Rączkowski, it is not even remotely simple to determine the beginning of the
interpretive process; for it occurs in the interpreter’s mind in the course of the observation
and at the same time as moments of so-called exclusion whereby the interpreter decides
whether or not to photograph, i.e., whether or not she/he has recognized something as an
archaeological fmd.8
In the latter case, interpretation of non-intentional photo materiał offers an entirely dif-
ferent dimension in analysis and it is predominantly based on the interpretation of pho-
togrammetric materiał: vertical photographs, vertical stereo pairs, orthophoto, satellite
images etc. As opposed to the first case, where the interpreter during the flight and in the
course of the very process of interpretation selects the positions of visual prospecting fo-
cusing solely on zones indicative to her/him, in the analysis of vertical photogrammetric
materiał the entire surroundings covered by the given photograph or stereo pair are inter-
preted. In this case the interpreter resorts to the process of exclusion during which she/he
selects anomalies or structures for which it is presumed that they are archaeological.
As we can see, there are indeed a host of factors that affect the course of interpretation
in the two aforementioned cases and it is difficult to say which principle is superior. There
are several important factors that affect interpretation in both cases. Every interpretation
carries the burden of the context of perception, convictions, prejudice, scientific experience
in interpretation, or in brief, everything that makes us human beings. Interpretation is
a process whereby the actors — interpreters — execute selection which occurs through
acceptance or rejection of the abovementioned factors.
Brief history of aerial prospecting in Montenegro
The beginnings of aerial prospecting in the territory of today’s Montenegro are linked to
the Austro-Hungarian monarchy and the start of the twentieth century. The military in-
frastructure of this organized State has madę it possible for us to have access to the oldest
aerial images of a part of Montenegrin territory.
6 Olsen 2002, p. 98.
7 Rączkowski 2005, p. 20.
8 Rączkowski 2002, pp. 320-323.
by hermeneutics do not refer to what we understand but /zow we understand.6 This certainly
resonates with theoretical issues of aerial archaeology pointed out by Rączkowski. In his
view, theory guides the research process and is responsible for formulating our answers
in the process of interpretation.7
One of the freąuently asked ąuestions in archaeology is the ąuestion of the process of
interpretation — when it begins, what it depends on, is it finał, etc. When we speak of the
process of interpretation, it is important to distinguish between two interpretative ap-
proaches. The First approach focuses on aerial photographs taken intentionally by those
who would do the interpretation, whilst the other approach focuses on photographs the
primary purpose of which was not archaeological interpretation. One can assume that the
process of interpretation is not identical in these two cases.
In the former case it is difficult to say when the process of interpretation begins. Ac-
cording to Rączkowski, it is not even remotely simple to determine the beginning of the
interpretive process; for it occurs in the interpreter’s mind in the course of the observation
and at the same time as moments of so-called exclusion whereby the interpreter decides
whether or not to photograph, i.e., whether or not she/he has recognized something as an
archaeological fmd.8
In the latter case, interpretation of non-intentional photo materiał offers an entirely dif-
ferent dimension in analysis and it is predominantly based on the interpretation of pho-
togrammetric materiał: vertical photographs, vertical stereo pairs, orthophoto, satellite
images etc. As opposed to the first case, where the interpreter during the flight and in the
course of the very process of interpretation selects the positions of visual prospecting fo-
cusing solely on zones indicative to her/him, in the analysis of vertical photogrammetric
materiał the entire surroundings covered by the given photograph or stereo pair are inter-
preted. In this case the interpreter resorts to the process of exclusion during which she/he
selects anomalies or structures for which it is presumed that they are archaeological.
As we can see, there are indeed a host of factors that affect the course of interpretation
in the two aforementioned cases and it is difficult to say which principle is superior. There
are several important factors that affect interpretation in both cases. Every interpretation
carries the burden of the context of perception, convictions, prejudice, scientific experience
in interpretation, or in brief, everything that makes us human beings. Interpretation is
a process whereby the actors — interpreters — execute selection which occurs through
acceptance or rejection of the abovementioned factors.
Brief history of aerial prospecting in Montenegro
The beginnings of aerial prospecting in the territory of today’s Montenegro are linked to
the Austro-Hungarian monarchy and the start of the twentieth century. The military in-
frastructure of this organized State has madę it possible for us to have access to the oldest
aerial images of a part of Montenegrin territory.
6 Olsen 2002, p. 98.
7 Rączkowski 2005, p. 20.
8 Rączkowski 2002, pp. 320-323.