Saturday, June 13, 2026

Open Access Journal: Hadashot Arkheologiyot - Excavations and Survey in Israel

[First posted in AWOL 23 October 2009. Updated 13  June 2026]

Hadashot Arkheologiyot - Excavations and Survey in Israel
ISSN: 1565-5334 

Dear Readers,
Hadashot Arkheologiyot is currently undergoing an upgrade in preparation for its migration to the Israel Antiquities Authority’s Publications Portal ( https://publications.iaa.org.il).
As a result, you may experience temporary difficulties accessing certain articles or navigating between them. Once the migration is complete, we will publish the journal’s new domain.
We apologize for the temporary inconvenience.

http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/images/JOURNAL1_01eng.jpg
Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel (HA-ESI) has been published in print since 1961 by the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums (IDAM) and since 1990 by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). The journal contains preliminary reports of excavations and surveys in Israel, as well as final reports of small-scale excavations and surveys; it also publishes archaeological finds recorded during inspection activities. The journal is bilingual, Hebrew and English; reports submitted in English are translated into Hebrew and vice versa.
  The e-journal www.hadashot-esi.org.il is the digital format of HA-ESI, replacing the printed version. The first digital publication of the journal (No. 116, 2004) is a reflection of the last printed volume. From 2005 onward, the journal will be published on-line only – each year will receive a volume number, continuing the numbering of the printed journal (e.g., No. 117 = 2005, No. 118 = 2006, etc.).   The e-journal is an unlimited data base of archeological reports, including photographs, maps, plans and pottery figures. The reports can be searched by keywords or by means of an interactive map. The results of both types of searches can be printed.
  The reports submitted to the e-journal will be edited in the same manner as in the printed journal (see Guide to Contributors). They will be published on-line with the completion of their editing and translation, and will be ascribed to a specific issue according to the year of publication (issue no. = year of publication). A final excavation report is marked with as asterix*. Announcements of new publications will appear on the Home Page of the e-journal. Prints of reports are available from the web site for personal and educational use only.

[n.b.  Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel is now also accessible without charge or moving wall on JSTOR

 Latest Publications

  • Rahat (South), Section 12
    Author: Ilan Peretz
  • Alon Tavor, Industrial Area
    Author: Alexander Kozlov
  • Be’er Sheva‘, Hadassah Street
    Author: Tal Kayesar
  • Tel Hadid – 2020, 2022
    Authors: Ido Koch and James Parker
  • Mizpe Ramon
    Author: Tal Sapir
  • Ramat Gan, Avraham Park
    Authors: Ayelet Dayan and Alegre Savariego
  • Nahariyya
    Author: Yoav Lerer
  • ‘En Hazeva – 2024
    Authors: Doron Ben-Ami, Chen Elimelech and Adina Notraius
  • Jerusalem, the Old City, Shuq Ha-Zorfim Street
    Author: David Yeger
  • Khirbat el-Malta‘a
    Authors: Emil Aladjem and Neer Lect Ben Ami
    •  

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Volume 137 Year 2025 

     

    • Apollonia, Arsur Castle Oren Tal, Hagi Yohanan and Tamar Harpak [08/05/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Apollonia Oren Tal and Hagi Yohanan [26/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • ‘Arraba Ilan Hadad, Ayelet Levy-Reifer, Nir Distelfeld and Eitan Klein [01/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • Banias Adi Erlich and Ron Lavi [03/07/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Caesarea Ofra Barkai, Roy Jaijel, Jacob Sharvit, Dror Planer and Beverly Goodman-Tchernov [02/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • ‘En Hazeva – 2024 Doron Ben-Ami, Chen Elimelech and Adina Notraius [28/07/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • ‘En Zippori Avishay Levi-Hevroni [02/03/2025] (Final Report)
    • Giv‘ot Reved Igal Radashkovsky [06/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • Hammam Barak Tzin, Alexander Efron, Kojan Hako, Daniel Griswold and Rivka Hazan [03/07/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Horbat Bene Beraq Nissim Zeitoune and Elisheva Zwiebel [06/07/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Horbat Shezaf Tzachi Lang, Ilan Mizrahi and Uri Berger [10/06/2025] (Final Report)
    • Iksal Barak Tzin [26/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • Kefar Uriyya Irina Zilberbod [21/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • Khirbat el-Malta‘a Emil Aladjem and Neer Lect Ben Ami [27/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • Khirbat Habra Igal Radashkovsky [27/02/2025] (Final Report)
    • Legio – 2023 Mark Letteney, Matthew J. Adams, Margaret Cohen, Wiesław Więckowski, Emily Anderson, Julia Chyla, Chana Farrell, Andrea Garza Díaz-Barriga and Yotam Tepper [22/04/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Legio – 2022 Mark Letteney, Matthew J. Adams, Wiesław Więckowski and Yotam Tepper [22/04/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Mizpe Ramon Tal Sapir [04/08/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Arbel Alexander Efron [06/03/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Bitron Shahaf Shaked [18/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Ef‘eh Jacob Vardi and Ferran Borrell [23/07/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Nahal Kohal Shahaf Shaked [20/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Malhata Shahaf Shaked [23/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Mar‘it Lara Shilov Gont [29/04/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Qedesh Royee Assis and Haim Mamalya [01/06/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahal Yarmut Michal Haber [18/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • Nahariyya Yoav Lerer [29/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • Newe Efrayim Shai Barak, Yossi Elisha and Ofer Sion [19/03/2025] (Final Report)
    • Newe Efrayim Dor Golan and Michal Mermelstein [17/03/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Ramat Rahel Irina Novoselsky [14/07/2025] (Final Report)
    • Rekhasim Dan Kirzner and Maria Karkovsky [14/01/2025] (Preliminary Report)
    • Tamra Samar Dallasheh, Rafeh Abu Raya and Haim Mamalya [22/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • Tamra, in the Valley Yair Amitzur [12/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • Tel Gerisa Dor Golan [11/06/2025] (Final Report)
    • Tiberias Royee Assis [27/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • Tiberias Edna Dalali-Amos [05/01/2025] (Final Report)
    • Umm ez-Zeinat Limor Talmi and Dan Kirzner [15/05/2025] (Final Report)
    • ‘Uzeir Yoav Lerer [01/07/2025] (Final Report)

     


     

    Past Issues

     

    AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
    Posted by at 0 comments
    Labels: ,

    Friday, June 12, 2026

    Open Access Journal: Karthago

    See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies 

    Posted by at 0 comments

    LISROP - Land of Israel Study and Research Online Platform

    Faust, Avraham, and Shweka, Roni


     

    Posted by at 0 comments

    Digital Impacts on Archaeological Fieldwork: Advantages and Limitations. Proceedings of the International Workshop held at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, December 4–5, 2024

    Paschalis Zafeiriadis (Editor)
    Markos Katsianis (Editor)
    Søren Handberg (Editor)
    Digital Impacts on Archaeological Fieldwork 

    About the result

    Date:
    2026
    Language:
    English
    Total number of pages:
    272
    ISBN:
    978-618-85360-6-7
    Handle:
    https://hdl.handle.net/11250/5525341
    Result ID:
    019e9234f4a1-34e48c9e-d30f-48cc-90ef-fcaf136987d7

    Publisher

    Norwegian Institute at Athens

    Level in the Norwegian Publication Indicator (2026): Not decided

    Find in the Norwegian register for publishers

    Series

    Papers and Monographs from the Norwegian Institute at Athens

    Print ISSN: 2459-3230

    Level in the Norwegian Publication Indicator (2026): 1

    Find in the Norwegian register for publishers

    Series number: 16

    001-276 — Digital Impacts on Archaeological Fieldwork_cover.pdf

    122 MB

    Published version

    General terms of use

    Copyright 2026 The Norwegian Institute at Athens

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      The Thinking Field: Ring-Fencing Creative Space in Digital Archaeological Practice

      James Taylor

      Holly Wright

      Digital practices are now integral to archaeological fieldwork, yet they often replicate traditional methods rather than leveraging the transformative potential of digital technologies. This paper argues that as best practices evolve (shaped by research agendas, infrastructure development, and data standards) digital field archaeology must consciously move beyond the mere emulation of analog workflows. By embedding digital tools into a socialized practice, we can fundamentally reshape archaeological workflows to foster more critical and reflexive engagements with our data. However, the digital transition risks being co-opted in the name of economic efficiency, perhaps pressurizing the working environment1 and potentially constraining creativity and interpretative depth. To counter this, it is imperative to safeguard spaces for creative exploration and playful engagement within digital workflows, ensuring that digital methodologies enhance, rather than erode, archaeological interpretation. Prioritizing such “space to think” both in the field and in our database fields should foster richer insights into the past and reinforces the epistemological value of digital archaeology.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      Excavations Commons: Sharing Fieldwork Data in the Digital Age

      Diamantis Panagiotopoulos

      Although archaeology is currently evolving at a rapid pace by reinventing itself as a discipline for the study of cultural heritage and by expanding its methods, fields of interests, and aims, the way in which archaeologists treat excavation data continues to defy all efforts at conceptual rethinking, clinging to standards of scientific practice that have long become obsolete. This is quite paradoxical, since new digital tools and—more important still—new social and scientific priorities urge us to overcome the traditional divide between published and unpublished data and to enhance the character of modern archaeology as a collaborative discipline. The present paper seeks to problematize these current challenges by addressing three major aspects of modern excavation projects: a) archaeological ethics of transparency, b) theoretical discussions about archaeological knowledge production and c) purely practical issues of archaeological data management systems. The main objective of this approach is to demonstrate not only the pressing necessity but also the feasibility of a “transparent” excavation and furthermore to discuss some digital concepts and tools that can transform archaeological fieldwork to a genuine field of cultural commons.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      What Digital Documentation Can and Cannot (Yet?) Do – The Case of iDAI.field

      Lisa Steinmann

      Fabian Riebschläger

      Thomas Kleinke

      Nicolas Antunes

      Simon Hohl

      Digital documentation has become widely accepted in archaeological fieldwork, although many projects still use database systems that replicate traditional, analog workflows rather than embracing fully digital processes. This phenomenon limits the interoperability and comparability promised by digital documentation. The development of iDAI.field—a software solution jointly developed by the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) and the Head office of the GBV Common Library Network (VZG)—illustrates both the potential and the challenges associated with standardized digital documentation. Initially developed to overcome the problems of isolated project-specific databases, iDAI.field aimed to standardize data management through a unified, relational database. However, early versions faced issues such as complex synchronization, expensive licensing, and data quality problems due to extensive use of free-text fields and ad hoc documentation practices. These challenges prompted a comprehensive redesign and development of a new, open-source solution incorporating features like offline functionality, a flexible data model, multilingual support, and improved usability. Despite advances, fundamental tensions remain between the goals of standardization and the nuanced, qualitative nature of archaeological data. Users frequently adapt database features creatively, reflecting their preference for qualitative, flexible recording practices. This suggests inherent limits to complete standardization, echoing historical debates within archaeology about balancing structured data with rich, reflexive narratives. Ultimately, digital tools like iDAI.field highlight the ongoing challenge of developing systems that enable interoperability and comparability while preserving the contextual depth essential to archaeological interpretation.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      Deploying Mobile Digital Tools in Archaeological Field Documentation

      Periklis Chrysafakoglou

      Kyriakos Sgouropoulos

      Apostolos Sarris

      Dushka Urem-Kotsou

      The adoption of digital technologies in archaeology has already surpassed the experimental stages of their application, with the use of digital tools forming an integral part of modern archaeological research. The rapid developments of technological progress and increasingly user-friendly utilization of modern methods have permeated almost every process of archaeological research. These developments in archaeology have sparked the interest and engagement of researchers from fields of technological sciences. Τhe development of the capabilities of mobile devices and network technologies in recent years has significantly assisted the use of digital applications and tools in archaeological data collection processes in the field. Thanks to the utilization of many different methods, the combined collection of archaeological data of different types became possible. Characteristic was the increase and improvement of the collection of descriptive data, as well as the accurate collection of spatial data. Main areas of application of modern digital methods concerned geospatial analysis and the remote sensing technologies, such as GNSS, GIS and geophysical techniques, unmanned aerial vehicles, visualization, photogrammetry, 3D modeling, and digital documentation. The methods and applications of digital archaeological documentation have evolved greatly, reflecting the variety of different needs of individual archaeological projects. This has given each scientific team the opportunity to choose the appropriate combination of methods, digital applications, and tools depending on the needs of the research. Finally, the emergence of AI technologies in archaeology has given new momentum to data processing and analysis.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      Digital Archaeological Recording Systems: Innovations in Methodology from the Gourimadi Prehistoric Site in Southern Euboea

      Denitsa Nenova

      Paschalis Zafeiriadis

      Zarko Tankosic

      This paper examines the implementation of innovative digital recording methodologies at the prehistoric site of Gourimadi in southern Euboea, Greece. Over six years of excavation, the project has developed an integrated digital infrastructure that addresses the complex challenges of recording stratigraphic relationships and architectural remains at a multi-period settlement site. The methodology combines spatial recording technologies, relational database architecture, and photogrammetric approaches within a coherent theoretical framework. The paper assesses both the technological implementation of the digital workflow employed and its epistemological implications for archaeological practice. The digital recording system employs a semi-hierarchical structure of spatial units, using single-context recording methods adapted to allow sub-contextual division when necessary. Field data collection utilizes mobile technology through iPad-based database entry, while spatial recording combines total station measurements with photogrammetric techniques. The integration of these diverse data sources through relational database structures and GIS permits sophisticated spatial analysis while maintaining contextual associations. In this paper, we situate these methodological innovations within broader theoretical discussions of archaeological computing, spatial analysis, and knowledge production in the digital era. We argue that effective digital recording systems must balance technological efficiency with sound archaeological principles, maintaining contextual relationships while enhancing data integration and accessibility. This study demonstrates how contemporary archaeological methodology can leverage digital tools to address traditional challenges of archaeological recording while creating new possibilities for interpretation and analysis.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      Fantasies and Fallacies of Going Digital at Palloures

      Victor Klinkenberg

      When excavations began at the Chalcolithic site of Palloures in 2015, a fully digital documentation system was implemented with the expectation that it would enhance efficiency and produce more accurate and detailed data compared to traditional analog methods. Nearly a decade later, this paper evaluates whether these expectations were met. While digital recording has indeed improved the accuracy and level of detail in archaeological documentation, the large volume of data generated has posed challenges for accessibility and ease of use. Our experience suggests that the most critical factor in data quality is not just the technology itself but the comfort and efficiency with which fieldworkers can enter and process information. By designing a documentation system that prioritizes usability—ensuring that digital tools facilitate rather than hinder fieldwork— archaeologists can engage with digital recording in a manner comparable to traditional methods, mitigating concerns about a loss of embodied experience. While the system has largely delivered on its initial promises, our experience underscores the substantial investments required, both financially and in terms of labor, as a significant portion of the team is dedicated to managing digital tasks during excavation.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      Trends in a Technical Tradition. A Reflexive Evaluation of the Impact of Digital Technology on Field Visualization Practice in Satricum (Italy)

      Loes Opgenhaffen

      This paper explores the interplay between digital innovations and traditional practices in archaeological field recording. It examines how technologies either sustain or challenge established technical traditions. The extent to which digital technologies have influenced existing practices is analyzed through the reflexive recording of field illustration at the excavations of ancient Satricum, applying a revised version of the “Tradition in Transition” methodology (TiTM). This methodology serves as a framework for recording and assessing the underlying mechanisms, methods, technologies, and physical and intellectual processes that have shaped and continue to shape archaeological (visualization) practice. TiTM integrates practice theory with reflexivity and draws on technological and visualization methodologies. It was originally designed to assess the impact of new technologies on existing technical visualization traditions but has proven to be a useful tool for documenting production processes, including embodied practice and intangible aspects that occur in the mind; these can be understood as “paradata”. The present study identifies key trends shaping archaeological visualization, emphasizing the balance between innovation and continuity. Due to the inherently creative nature of archaeological visualization and its long history of adopting new tools, the tradition appears to be in a state of transformation—integrating new technologies while continuing to produce familiar-looking results.

    • Academic chapter

      2026

      From Tools to Transformation: Tracking Change, Imaginaries and Canonization Processes in Digital Archaeological Fieldwork

      Markos Katsianis

      Paschalis Zafeiriadis

      This contribution offers a critical review of digital fieldwork, examining the pace of change, the aspirations, the achievements, the challenges, and the enduring constants in the adoption of digital technologies in archaeological fieldwork. While digital methodologies have significantly enhanced fieldwork recording and data management, they often emphasize technical transformation at the expense of addressing the underlying workflow tensions and complexities introduced by these very processes. By tracing the historical trajectory of digital archaeology, from its early computational applications to contemporary developments, we explore how the integration of digital technologies has reshaped fieldwork methods, data structures, team roles, and the widespread adoption of digital tools. Our analysis attempts to situate these changes within a broader discussion that considers the influence of “digital imaginaries” and the processes of “disciplinary canonization.” As digital methodologies continue to gain legitimacy within archaeological practice, it is vital to reflect their impact critically to ensure that technological advancements align with ethical standards and epistemological perspectives. By doing so, we can perhaps mitigate the unchecked prioritization of technology over the interpretive, social, and ethical foundations of archaeological research.

    • Introduction in anthology

      2026

      Digital (Un)Doings: A Foreword to Digital Impacts on Archaeological Fieldwork

      Paschalis Zafeiriadis

      Markos Katsianis

      Søren Handberg

     

     
    Posted by at 0 comments
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)