Abstract
This article describes the process of developing an ontology of the domain of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic magic bowls and offers some reflections on its significance in the analysis of these materials. Examples are highlighted to illustrate where the work builds on existing conceptualisations of the domain in secondary literature and where magical and religious materials from the Ancient Near East might stimulate some specialised extension of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (ICOM/CIDOC Documentation Standards Group, 2020). The analogy of ‘bridge building’ is offered as a way for humanities researchers to conceive of the work to produce ontologies of specific domains. This reflection is intended to capture the experience of ‘thinking ontologically’ about sources for the first time and of overcoming misconceptions about the nature and significance of this work.
Highlights
Aramaic magic bowls are ceramic bowls, inscribed with spells composed for named clients in 6th-7th century Mesopotamia (Shaked et al, 2013, p. 1)
The analogy of ‘bridge building’ is offered as a way for humanities researchers to conceive of the work to produce ontologies of specific domains
The starting point for identifying patterns in the features of magic bowls is to formalise an ontology modelling the entities that exist in the domain and the relationships that exist between them (Chandrasekaran et al, 1999, p. 20)
Summary
Aramaic magic bowls are ceramic bowls, inscribed with spells composed for named clients in 6th-7th century Mesopotamia (Shaked et al, 2013, p. 1). Recent advances in the availability of published editions offer an opportunity to move beyond the focused analyses that characterise current research (Bhayro et al, 2018; Ford & Morgernstern, 2020; Shaked et al, 2013) This increased availability presents new challenges for research aiming to explore patterns in the features of spells across the corpus. Ontology development challenges researchers to produce a conceptualisation of their domain, to structure the collection and organisation of information This process offers an opportunity to re-conceptualise sources, as descriptions are produced at the intersection of specialist knowledge domains with established vocabularies and the ideals enshrined in good Digital Humanities practice. The analogy highlights the opportunities for impact in both traditional Humanities disciplines and Digital Humanities methods, which are inherent to ‘thinking ontologically’ about a domain
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
