Text versus visualization in the presentation of diachronic analyses of historical objects on the example of the Saint-Nicolas fort in Marseille

Iwona Dudek

doi:10.37190/arc250209

Abstract

The article addresses the communication of knowledge about the evolution of architectural objects. The author’s goal is to emphasize the impact of the form of communication and spatial discrimination applied in analysis on the clarity and level of understanding of presented propositions. The work is based on a diachronic analysis of the Saint-Nicolas fort in Marseille presented in the heritage condition assessment of the fort conducted between 2015-2022.

During the described studies, a detailed analysis of the fort’s evolution was conducted according to two variants of spatial discrimination: the fort considered as a whole and the fort divided into component elements resulting from its function as a fortification work. To highlight potential differences in the interpretation of the report content, two researchers independently analyzed the information gathered there about the object’s evolution. The study utilized a diachronic analysis model allowing for visual (diagrammatic) information transmission, taking into account the degree of perceived dating uncertainty, the number and type of transformations, and their consequences for the form, structure, function, and property status of the object.

Even a cursory analysis of the obtained diagrams shows the specificity and evolutionary independence of individual fort parts and significant differences in the interpretation of the same data by individual analysts. The article presents an analysis of the results, emphasizes the most important differences between traditional communication methods and forms utilizing information visualization, and discusses the potential and limitations associated with the applied analysis method.

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

2025

2(82)

Iwona Dudek*

Text versus visualization in the presentation

of diachronic analyses of historical objects

on the example of the Saint-Nicolas fort in Marseille

DOI: 10.37190/arc250209

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

Abstract

The theme of this paper is the communication of knowledge about the evolution of architectural objects. Our aim is to highlight the impact of

the form of transmission and the spatial discrimination used in the analysis on the clarity and the level of understanding of the proposals made. This

paper is based on the diachronic analysis of the fort Saint-Nicolas in Marseille presented in the expert report on the condition of the fort, conducted

between 2015 and 2022.

In the course of the research reported, a detailed analysis of the fort’s evolution was carried out according to two spatial discrimination variants:

the fort considered as a whole and the fort divided into its constituent elements arising from its function as a fortication work. In order to highlight

potential dierences in the interpretation of the content of the report, two researchers independently analysed the information gathered in the report

on the evolution of the site. The study based on a diachronic analysis model that allows for visual (diagrammatic) representation of information,

taking into account the degree of perceived dating uncertainty, the number and type of transformations and their consequences for the form, structure,

function and ownership status of the site.

Even a cursory analysis of the resulting diagrams reveals the specicity and evolutionary independence of the dierent parts of the fort, as well as

signicant dierences in the interpretation of the same data by dierent analysts. The article presents an analysis of the results, underlines the most

substantial dierences between traditional methods of communication and forms using information visualisation, and discusses the potential and

limitations inherent in the method of the analysis used.

Key words: architecture, representation, fortications, diachrony, information/knowledge visualisation

Introduction

Acquiring and transmitting knowledge about the devel-

opment of architectural sites and complexes is a subject

matter for many scientic disciplines.

Critical analysis and expansion of knowledge can be

done through analysis of historical sources, but also through

examination of the remains of objects that have survived

to the present day. This process often involves specialists

from dierent elds – e.g., linguists, chemists, botanists

Not surprisingly, the data and information collected is com-

* ORCID: 0000-0003-3149-7745. UPR 2002 CNRS MAP, French

National Centre for Scientic Research, Marseille, France, e-mail: iwona.

dudek@map.cnrs.fr

Science is the result of […] an ongoing collaboration of multiple

people over time (Bocheński 1992, 42).

plex and contains various types of uncertainty and incom-

pleteness. This fragmentary data, combined with existing

knowledge, forms the basis for considerations aimed at

proposing the potential development of a site over time.

Furthermore, the knowledge we wish to convey is di-

verse in nature. It can refer to transformations (i.e., changes

and their causes), the morphology and structure of objects,

the materials used, the function, the form of ownership,

the state of the object, its historical context, etc. All these

elements of knowledge are, or can be, the content of the

communication and are heterogeneously charged with un-

certainties – both qualitative (e.g., accuracy of position, or

completeness, reliability, subjectivity and independence of

source) and quantitative.

Communicating this information eectively and trans-

parently to the scientic community, potential stakehold-

ers and, if possible, the general public requires a judicious

92 Iwona Dudek

choice of communication form. Various – often heteroge-

neous – forms of communication are available: text and

multiple forms of pictorial representation, which may be

static (e.g., hand-drawn sketches) or mobile (e.g., videos,

computer animations), using three-dimensional space or not.

Furthermore, a given object can be studied at a specic

moment of its existence (e.g., at the end of the 17

century,

Fig. 1), but we can also consider the path of its evolution,

the history of the changes and transformations it has under-

gone. In the former case we face a synchronic analysis, in

the latter a diachronic analysis

It is not dicult to understand that an in-depth tracing

of the evolution of a given site poses dierent diculties

for the analysts than suggesting its possible formal layout

at a specic point in time

. A detailed examination of these

dierences is beyond the scope of this paper. The focus of

this paper will be on the challenges involved in diachronic

analysis.

The aim of the research underlying this article was to

answer two distinct research questions.

The rst question – the answer to which seems quite

intuitive in truth, but which nevertheless deserves concrete

arguments rather than mere theoretical considerations –

says that the understanding of the content of the diachronic

analysis contained in a particular study by separate ana-

lysts, diers (even in the case of people with similar ed-

ucation and good language skills). However, it should be

noted that the nature and degree of these dierences escape

The concepts of diachrony and synchrony were introduced into

the analysis of language by Ferdinand de Saussure, but their method-

ological potential quickly took them beyond the boundaries of linguis-

tics and they are now used in the epistemology of many other sciences

(cf. De Saussure 1971).

More about the dierences and interrelation of both methodolog-

ical approaches (“diachrony”, “synchrony”) and their use in the human-

ities and social sciences can be found in (Ban et al. 2022; Widdersheim

2018; Chrisomalis 2006; Fitting 1977).

us and can be subject to dierent interpretations. The goal

of the experiment is not to interpret dierences but to pro-

vide means to pinpoint them.

The second question concerns the level of understanding

of the diachronic analysis presented in a given study. The

postulate adopted here implies that the level of understand-

ing of the information on the object’s diachrony provided in

a given study does not depend on how the object under study

is spatially subdivided by the person analysing the text.

In other words, breaking down the object into separate-

ly analysed structures will not modify the analyst’s under-

standing of the evolution of the object.

The work is based on the diachronic analysis of Fort

Saint-Nicolas in Marseille (Figs. 2, 3) presented in the ex-

pert report on the condition of the fort conducted between

2015 and 2022. This paper will briey present the diachron-

ic analysis method used in the research, and implemented

in an online prototype Chronographs. This tool enables the

information entered into the database to be translated into

a visual language (diachrogram, variogram) – taking into

account the degree of uncertainty perceived in the dating,

the number and type of transformations and their conse-

quences on the form, structure, function and ownership

status of the site. The visualisations obtained this way will

be discussed in the context of the most substantial dier-

ences when confronted with traditional methods of infor-

mation transfer, highlighting their potential as well as their

inherent limitations.

State of research

Communicating knowledge with a whole set of nuances

regarding the completeness or reliability of information is

a complex problem. When we study the evolution of ob-

jects, we are confronted with states that change over time.

In the case of architecture, these states always involve the

spatial form, the function (or lack of it, in the case of aban-

doned buildings) and the set of materials used in their con-

Fig. 1. Scale model representing a hypothesis of the layout of the Saint-Nicolas fort in Marseille, showing the structure after its construction

in the 17

century. View from the west (source: Musée d’Histoire de Marseille; Valette 2008)

Il. 1. Makieta przedstawiająca hipotetyczny kształt fortu Saint-Nicolas w Marsylii, ukazująca obiekt po wybudowaniu w XVII w.

Widok od strony zachodniej (źródło: Musée d’Histoire de Marseille; Valette 2008)

Text versus visualization on the example of the fort Saint-Nicolas (Marseille) 93

struction. Not all states and transformations (i.e., causes of

change) are documented, and the documentation is usual-

ly incomplete, full of uncertainties, discontinuities, not to

mention contradictions that can be encountered.

One matter is to get results, it is quite another to com-

municate the ndings to the research community, potential

clients and the wider community. In both cases – in the

research process and in the presentation of its results – we

have the same forms of communication at our disposal:

text and the many forms of pictorial representation (sche-

matic/realistic, moving/static, using three-dimensional

space or not). Each of these forms is more or less suited to

communicating diachrony (conveying information about

time) or for describing synchronous states. Combining

them is a dicult task, requiring choices and compromises

(for example, selecting the content to be communicated).

Natural language is the primary form of communica-

tion. In written form, it allows a wide range of content to

be conveyed – it is used to transmit information about an

evolution (transformations of an object), as well as about

individual states. It can be used on its own, but the most

common examples are hybrid forms of communication,

combining text with forms of pictorial representation to

complete information that is dicult to convey through

language alone (e.g., stratigraphic plans, cartographic doc-

uments, photographs). Hybrid forms of transmission may

involve diachrony (Komorowski, Sudacka 2008; Lorans,

(Marot et al. 2022; Tyshkovskiy 2020) or synchronous

states (Łukacz 2006; Czerner 2024; Bevz, Bevz 2023).

Historical discourse is a specic form of language use

– based on the scientic method and constructed on the

basis of quoted data from source documents, eld and

Fig. 2. The former Fort Saint-Nicolas as seen from Fort Saint-Jean located on the other side of the harbour. The fortification was divided

in two by a boulevard and renamed Fort Ganteaume (lower fort) and Fort Entrecasteaux (higher fort) in 1887 (photo by J.Y. Blaise, 2024)

Il. 2. Widok na były fort Saint-Nicolas z fortu Saint-Jean znajdującego się po drugiej stronie portu. Całość założenia została przecięta bulwarem

na dwie części i przemianowana w 1887 r. – Fort Ganteaume (fort niższy) i Fort Entrecasteaux (fort wyższy) (fot. J.Y. Blaise, 2024)

Fig. 3. View of the interior of the reduit (Fort Entrecasteaux) with visible layers illustrating the fort’s evolution over time.

Note for example, the modifications made to the east wing in the 19

century (right) (photo by J.Y. Blaise, 2023)

Il. 3. Dziedziniec redity (Fort Entrecasteaux) z widocznymi warstwami ilustrującymi ewolucję fortu w czasie.

Warto zwrócić uwagę na zmiany dokonane na wschodnim skrzydle w XIX w. (po prawej) (fot. J.Y. Blaise, 2023)

94 Iwona Dudek

laboratory research. This is to enable verication of both

the propositions made and the reasoning that led to them.

Various forms of method-based renement of the historical

discourse have been introduced.

Gardin’s logicism is an example. This method aims to

analyse scientic constructs, focusing on revealing the ob-

servations, premises and reasoning they contain. The aim

is to explore conicts of interpretation and better dene

the paths chosen to resolve or avoid them (Gardin 1997;

2012).

Pictorial forms of knowledge transfer on architectural

objects (static and dynamic, 2D and 3D) are generally used

to convey information on states, since they allow a more

concise and precise description of the space compared to

text. In the form of diagrams, or when several images of

synchronous states are combined, they can also be used to

illustrate the evolution of objects.

The introduction of the time function into pictorial rep-

resentations requires a decision involving the way time is

represented. In a variety of visual formalisms, time can be

modelled in four dierent aspects – scale, scope, arrange-

ment and point of view (cf. Aigner et al. 2011, 64–67):

– scale – a visual formalism may use ordinal time, and

thus only show the relative order of events (before and

after), or continuous time, allowing the representation of

temporal continuity,

– scope – time-based visual formalisms may employ

both point-based and interval-based data models,

– arrangement – depending on the intention to highlight

the linear or cyclical nature of the events, dierent variants

of linear or cyclic time can be adopted,

– point of view – the same data can be presented using

ordered time (events occurring sequentially one after the

other), branching time (showing alternative scenarios) or

multiple perspectives (showing parallel events in time).

Visual representations introducing the time function

exist in static and dynamic forms. Analytical models and

tools integrating space and time have also been developed

to assist in diachronic analysis. In historical sciences, these

systems are mainly used for research purposes – for ex-

ample, to analyse transitions in settlement systems (Tan-

nier et al. 2021; Ouriachi et al. 2021), the evolution of

urban space (Rodier, Saligny 2010; Lefebvre, Rodier and

Saligny 2008; Blaise, Dudek 2011), the evolution of archi-

tectural objects (Blaise et al. 2016; Dudek, Blaise 2008,

2021b), etc.

In this work, we explore the potential of visual tools to

highlight the dierences in interpretation of independent

analysts.

Methods

A diachronic analysis of Fort Saint Nicolas in Marseille

was carried out in September 2024 on the basis of an expert

report on the state of the historic fort Saint-Nicolas (2015–

2022). The report included a preliminary historical ana-

lysis, a description of the state of conservation of the site,

proposals for its revitalisation and conservation guidelines

(Guérin 2015; 2022). Additional sources and information

come from the association “Citadelle de Marseille”, the

current lessee of the upper-fort, with the mission of restor-

ing the site and making it accessible to the public.

In some cases, where the information presented was

not specic or unambiguous enough, additional primary

and secondary sources available on the internet were also

consulted: historical cartography (Gallica-BnF, geoportal

IGN), historical photographs (Remonter le temps – IGN),

historical background studies and archaeological docu-

mentation (Atlas archéologique – INRAP).

The research uses a diachronic analysis model, associ-

ated with a visual language which allows time-oriented vi-

sualisation of the results, that we developed and explained

in previous research (Dudek, Blaise 2008). The model is

based on a cause-and-eect analysis that identies the

changes made to an object over time (transformations) and

the state of the object as a result of these transformations

An important element of the method is the element of pan-

chrony, dened sometimes as a “cognitive state” (Leszczak

2003) – such as knowledge, for example – which allows the

identity of an object to be conrmed despite the changes it

undergoes. The evolution of a given object is described as

a succession of transformations and states. Transformation

is seen as the diachronic function, subsequent states are

seen as synchronic beings which retain the object’s identity

thanks to knowledge, intuition and experience (Fig. 4).

In the rst phase of the study, the task of participants

was to identify types and scope of the successive trans-

formations of Fort Saint-Nicolas, to specify modications

introduced to the object regarding its form, function and

structure, as well as to provide a concise description of the

historical context .The results of these analyses were pre-

sented in the form of a diachronic table identifying and

describing successive transformations and states, high-

lighting the type of transformation and the elements that

distinguish one state from another.

The key document was the expert report consisting of

a series of A3 documents (131 pages in total). If certain

pieces of information on historical context were missing,

the possibility to use other sources was not forbidden.

The model denes formally 18 transformations and states. The

same “label” is sometimes used to describe both a transformation and

a state. For example, a “decay” transformation is dened as a process of

progressive degradation of an artefact. Whereas a state of “decay” is a sit-

uation, that can be triggered by a long-term abandonment of an artefact or

by a short-term destruction (a re, an earthquake, a hurricane, looting…).

Fig. 4. Synchrony, diachrony and panchrony: an object’s evolution

seen as consecutive transformations (t

, t

, … – diachronic phases)

and states which are their direct consequences

, s

, … – synchronous phases) (elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 4. Schemat przedstawiający model ewolucji obiektu jako

następujące po sobie transformacje (t

, t

, … – fazy diachroniczne)

oraz stany będące ich bezpośrednią konsekwencją

, s

, … – kolejne fazy synchroniczne) (oprac. I. Dudek)

Text versus visualization on the example of the fort Saint-Nicolas (Marseille) 95

Fig. 5. Chronographs prototype interface. A selection of contextual elements for the high fort (reduit) (elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 5. Interfejs prototypowej aplikacji Chronographs – wizualizacja wybranych elementów kontekstu dla wysokiego fortu (redita) (oprac. I. Dudek)

Once organised formally as diachronic table, informa-

tion along with relevant references was then introduced

into the system and visualised using the model’s specic

graphic language (Dudek, Blaise 2021a).

These diagrams can also be drawn (by hand or via a com-

puter). In the process of description and analysis we used

a web application that we called Chronographs

(Fig. 5).

The participants taking part in the experiment were two

researchers (architects by training) who have been carrying

out joint research in the eld of diachronic analysis of ar-

chitectural objects over the years. They are well acquainted

with both the French language (understanding), the dia-

chronic analysis model used in the study and the web ap-

plication Chronographs. Both had an initial but only curso-

ry knowledge of the contents of the expert report. The time

devoted to the analysis was not limited (analysis of the ex-

pertise, documentation and content feeding). This phase of

the study took them 15 and 11 days respectively.

On the basis of the information provided to the system

(types of transformations and states, their characteristics

and the dating of the transformations with indications of

their accuracy), interactive diagrams are generated. They

represent a given understanding of the evolutionary pro-

cess (Fig. 6).

The procedure of the second phase of the study, in-

cluded the same steps – analysis of the expertise, docu-

mentation and content feeding – preceded however by

This application is an online research prototype that we created

to support diachronic analysis in the UPR2002 CNRS MAP. For the

diachronic analysis of the Saint-Nicolas fort, we used a version the in-

terface of which is still undergoing modications (http://anr-sesames.

map.cnrs.fr/chronographs/yca/search_objectsT.php; accessed: October 5,

2024).

a subdivision of the fort into components in relation to its

function as a fortication work. This involved the com-

pletion of ve diachronic tables. The second phase of the

study was completed by only one researcher (the study

took 20 days).

Exploration of the first research question

In order to answer the rst research question, we sought

to identify dierences in the interpretation of the content of

the expert report. To this end, two analysts independently

interpreted the information on the object’s evolution con-

tained in the report.

A comparison of the diagrams obtained by the two an-

alysts shows interesting dierences (Fig. 7). These diver-

gences concern:

– assessment of the uncertainty of dating (variogram,

dotted lines indicate uncertain dating),

– perception of the duration of certain transformations

(e.g., the introduction of new functions Fig. 7a),

– identication of individual transformations or group-

ing them together (Fig. 7d, e),

– evaluation of the character of a given transforma-

tion – morphological/functional/structural modications

(Fig. 7f),

– evaluation of the state of the object (Fig. 7b),

– evaluation of the importance of a given transforma-

tion to the evolution of an object – (variograms, amplitude

of shape and function lines, thickness of lines for structural

changes).

The dierences noted also concern the number and type

of transformations reported, the trend of the object (growth,

decline, stability, etc.) and the importance accorded to the

individual transformations (Fig. 8). The emergence of

96 Iwona Dudek

the above-mentioned dierences can be ascribed both to

the nature of the documentation under analysis – a nar-

rative using texts

and complementary visual documents

calling for a considerable interpretation step – and to the

impact of each analyst’s work habits.

It is also important to note the elements of compatibility

between the two analyses which, for someone who is not

familiar with the model and its graphical language or who

has no experience of reading these diagrams, may remain

dicult to discern. Both analysts consider the object as

a whole, i.e., without dividing it into its constituent parts

(cf. second research question). Both also recognise the sale

of the upper-fort to the city (2010) as a separation (seces-

sion) of this element from the lower-fort – which remains

in the hands of the army. This is a sobering choice, as this

interpretation received 0 out of 10 votes in the discussions

that preceded the documentary analysis, during the work-

shops with students. This might be related to the level of

knowledge of the fort’s history and the decision to focus on

the continuity of the site’s function and ownership. Despite

the dierences in interpretation, the overall density of in-

formation (i.e., the density and clustering of transforma-

It should be noted that the expert report used as a basis for the

analyses has a variable temporal granularity (sometimes the transforma-

tions are grouped together, sometimes the individual transformations are

listed year by year) and that, despite its chronological presentation, it often

contains temporal leaps (digressions) or repetitions inherent in the text.

tions) appears similar, as does the legibility of the main

periods of the site’s redevelopment.

Exploration of the second research question

In the second phase, another analysis of the fort’s evolu-

tion was carried out, this time introducing a subdivision of

the fort’s components in relation to its function as a forti-

cation work – reduit (réduit), the rst ring of fortications

(première enceinte), the second circuit of fortications

(enceinte extérieure), the lower fort (bas fort), outworks

and glacis (les ouvrages et glacis extérieurs). This makes it

possible to exploit the multiple perspectives formalism in

the study of their development (Figs. 9, 10). The analysis

was carried out by analyst A.

The assumption made was that the level of understand-

ing of the evolution of an object – on the basis of a docu-

ment that already possesses a certain granularity of infor-

mation and a narrative structure – does not depend on how,

in the course of analysis, we break it down into separately

analysed elements. Behind this premise was, the con-

dence that once the transformations and subsequent states

of the fort Saint-Nicolas had been determined, dissecting

this information for the components of the fort would be

a simple and almost “automatic” task – which turned out

not to be the case.

In practice, it became clear that the new spatial subdi-

vision called for a new, even more in-depth analysis of the

Fig. 6. A fragment of a diagram showing the evolution of the haut fort (reduit) based on the expertise report.

A variogram shows the scope and intensities of change: shape (red line), function (blue line) and structure and materials (yellow line).

The evaluation of the importance of the changes caused by a given transformation can be read from the amplitude (shape and form)

or the thickness of the line (structure). Dotted lines indicate uncertain dating.

A diachrogram shows the order, type (a, b, c) and dating accuracy (d, e, f) of the transformations and their impacts

(state – colour of the state line; and growth trends – increase or decrease of the state line) (elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 6. Fragment diagramu ewolucji wysokiego fortu (redita) powstałego na podstawie ekspertyzy konserwatorskiej.

Wariogram ukazuje odnotowane zmiany: formy (linia czerwona), funkcji (linia niebieska) oraz struktury i materiałów (linia żółta).

Ocenę znaczenia zmian spowodowanych daną transformacją można odczytać na podstawie amplitudy (funkcja i forma)

lub grubości linii (struktura). Linie przerywane wskazują niepewne datowanie.

Diachrogram ukazuje kolejność, typ (a, b, c) i precyzję datacji (d, e, f) transformacji oraz ich skutki (stan – kolor linii stanu;

i tendencje wzrostu – podwyższenie lub obniżenie linii stanu) (oprac. I. Dudek)

Text versus visualization on the example of the fort Saint-Nicolas (Marseille) 97

Fig. 7. The evolution of the fort Saint-Nicolas conducted by two researchers (A and B) based on expertise report.

The illustration highlights the most substantial types of divergence:

a) introduction of a new function (butcher’s shop);

b) A – perceives destructions of the upper fort as the deterioration of a fragment of the whole site,

B – highlights the severe deterioration of the citadel during the revolution (decay transformation);

c) A – highlights demolitions between 1830 and 1833;

d) differences in the discretisation of the transformations 1875–1879 – the period of upgrading of prisons,

A – groups the transformations, B – lists the individual transformations;

e) B – focuses on the demolitions in 1954, 1964–1967 and 1980;

f) 1954 – transformation of the old windmill tower into a monument,

A – considers it as a change in form only, B – presumes a change in function as well (elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 7. Zestawienie diagramów analiz ewolucji fortu Saint-Nicolas w Marsylii przeprowadzonych przez dwóch badaczy (A i B)

na podstawie ekspertyzy konserwatorskiej. Ilustracja podkreśla najważniejsze typy rozbieżności:

a) wprowadzenie nowej funkcji (masarnia);

b) A – postrzega zniszczenia górnego fortu, jako degradację fragmentu obiektu,

B – podkreśla poważny stan degradacji cytadeli w trakcie rewolucji (decay);

c) A – zwraca uwagę na wyburzenia w latach 1830–1833;

d) różnice w dyskretyzacji przekształceń 1875–1879 – okres modernizacji więzień,

A – grupuje przekształcenia, B – wymienia wprowadzane zmiany;

e) B – podkreśla wyburzenia w latach 1954, 1964–1967 i 1980; f) 1954 – przekształcenie wieży starego wiatraka na pomnik,

A – odnotowuje zmiany formy obiektu, B – zakłada również zmianę funkcji (oprac. I. Dudek)

expert report and the documents it contained. Moreover,

in the course of this work, a number of gaps came to light

that made it necessary to rene the accuracy of the data -

mainly in terms of dating and spatial precision.

The difference in understanding of the spatio-tem-

poral development of the whole object between the two

approaches (with and without decomposition into compo-

nents) proved to be noticeable.

Breaking down the fort into its subparts also improved

the readability of the diagrammatic presentation (Fig. 10).

Among other things, this has resulted in:

– lower density of information in each diagram,

– better visibility of consecutive states [e.g., revealing

the decline of the upper fort (Fig. 10a) less legible in the

diagrams for the whole fort (Fig. 7b) or the impact of the

construction of the new boulevard, the incorporation of

part of the lower fort into the fort Entrecasteaux (Fig. 10d)

is unaccountable in the analysis without subdivision of the

fort (Fig. 7)],

– better understanding of relationships between the var-

ious components (e.g., the annexation/secession of parcels

during the exchange and resale of the land surrounding the

fort) (Fig. 10c). The subdivision of the fort into several

components reveals the interconnections between them,

– underlining of distinct periods of demolition in the

various parts of the fort.

The rst phase of analysis was like reading a text with

comprehension – at the level of the spatio-temporal granu-

larity of the expertise. The second phase forced us to break

down the original text’s granularity and thus to break down

the original perception patterns. This enabled us to grasp

information that had not been spotted in the initial analysis,

98 Iwona Dudek

contributing to the renement of our understanding. Visu-

alisation of the results of the interpretation – by introduc-

ing non-verbal thinking – allowed identication of unre-

vealed relationships between components and highlighted

patterns in the object’s development (Figs. 10, 11). It trig-

gered a substantial improvement of our understanding of

the object’s evolution.

Conclusions

“Intellectual understanding” can be language-based

(verbal thinking) or image-based (non-verbal) – when we

“think” without words. For a number of reasons, at the

verbal level there is a greater risk that dierent people

will interpret the content of a given message dierently

(Korzybski 1951). This suggests that, regardless of the form

of communication used, there should not be an assumption

of equal understanding of the content and facts presented

therein by dierent researchers.

The preliminary results of our study showed important

dierences in the interpretation of the same data by the two

analysts (preliminary corroboration of the postulate raised

in the rst research question). These dierences were iden-

tied using a model that allows a series of consecutive

transformations and states to be described and visual-

ised. This model requires a detailed specication of the

interpretative choices made. The associated visual for-

malism highlights these dierences and makes it easier to

pinpoint them. This provides a focus for discussions and

improves the quality of communication for a better under-

standing of the evolution of the object. However, attempt-

ing to explain the nature of the dierences identied is be-

yond the scope of this paper.

It should be noted that this model forces the selection of

a single “evolutionary path” for an object. In cases of seri-

ous doubt and alternatives need to be shown, other types of

visualisation that use branching time should be used. We

described such solutions in (Blaise et al. 2016)

Verication of the second research question showed that

the choice of spatial granularity used to analyse the data

can radically aect its comprehension, and that the level

of our understanding increases with the need to recompose

the underlying information (refutation of the postulate ad-

opted in the second research question).

Information on research materials related to the publication (in

Polish and English) can be found at: “The online content” (https://www.

map.cnrs.fr/visualCatalogue/index.html, accessed: October 8, 2024).

Fig. 8. Summary of quantitative differences between the two analyses:

a) difference in the number and types of transformations included in the two analyses,

b) difference in the assessment of the complex’s growth trend (in terms of percentage),

c) differences in the assessment of the importance of morphological changes,

d) differences in the assessment of the importance of structural changes,

e) differences in the assessment of the importance of functional changes (elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 8. Podsumowanie różnic ilościowych między dwiema analizami:

a) różnica w liczbie i typie transformacji uwzględnionych w obu analizach,

b) różnica w ocenie trendu wzrostowego kompleksu (w ujęciu procentowym),

c) różnice w ocenie wagi zmian morfologicznych dla poszczególnych transformacji,

d) różnice w ocenie znaczenia zmian strukturalnych dla poszczególnych transformacji,

e) różnice w ocenie znaczenia zmian funkcjonalnych dla poszczególnych transformacji (oprac. I. Dudek)

Text versus visualization on the example of the fort Saint-Nicolas (Marseille) 99

It is clear that the present study is based on a limited

number of analyses

and at this stage the conclusions pre-

sented should not be generalised in any way. The perceived

dierences in interpretation shall be veried on a larger and

more diverse sample of individuals. Similarly, the analysis

of the degree of understanding of the evolutionary process

of the site should take into account the next levels of spa-

tial division of the site (e.g., down to the level of individual

bastions and curtain walls, grouped in relation to the sides

of the world – that is, the potential attack sides of the forti-

cation work).

These analyses can be carried out by architecture, ar-

chaeology and history students taking part in the summer

workshops organised annually at the Citadelle

(upper

A total of three analyses were carried out by two dierent re-

searchers.

Atelier numérique estival “A l’assaut de la Citadelle” (https://www.

map.cnrs.fr/fr/pedagogie-emploi/formation/, accessed: October 11, 2024).

fort). More in-depth work, which will also aim to com-

plete and cross-reference the existing information, is the

subject of our collaboration with the association “Citadelle

de Marseille”.

Summary

Communicating knowledge about the evolution of

archi tectural objects is a complex problem. Its quality and

eectiveness are inuenced, among other things, by the

choice of the forms of transmission, their structure, and

the clarity and precision with which the information is for-

mulated. The pragmatic aspect, i.e., the target audience for

the message, is another important factor. The number of

controversies concerning the dierences in ndings and

viewpoints between specialists in the diachronic studies

is widely known. However, it is much rarer for scientic

studies to raise questions about the reasons for and nature

of these divergences. This is why we decided to use the

Fig. 9. Compilation of variograms of the subparts of the Fort Saint Nicolas in Marseille.

Use of “multi perspective” time formalism and contextualisation to gain an insight of the main phases in the site’s evolution.

Placing the entire analysis in a broader historical context, helps to read possible causes of successive transformations

(elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 9. Zestawienie wariogramów dla zidentyfikowanych części fortu Saint-Nicolas w Marsylii.

Wykorzystanie czasu „wielopoziomowego” w celu uzyskania lepszego wglądu i podkreślenia głównych faz rozwoju obiektu.

Możliwość umieszczenia całości analizy w szerszym kontekście historycznym

pozwala na lepsze zrozumienie przyczyn i skutków kolejnych przekształceń obiektu (oprac. I. Dudek)

100 Iwona Dudek

knowledge acquired in the eld of information visualisa-

tion and knowledge visualisation to investigate this prob-

lem. The case study on which we decided to carry out a se-

ries of analyses is a complex object – the fort Saint-Nicolas

(Marseille).

Using the documentation made available to us by the cu-

rator, a series of analyses of the evolution and current state

of the site were carried out. The results of these ana lyses

revealed not only the diversity, but also the specicity of

the dierences in interpretation of the same data

by dier-

Fig. 10. The result of an analysis of the evolution of Fort Saint-Nicolas, with a formal breakdown of the site into five constituent elements.

The diagram is completed by contextual elements selected to make it easier to perceive previously unnoticed trends:

a) severe degradation of the upper fort,

b) the effects of the construction of the boulevard cutting the fort in two,

c) the exchange and resale of the land and facilities surrounding the fort,

d) the attachment of a part of the lower fort to the upper-fort

(elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 10. Rezultat analizy ewolucji fortu Saint-Nicolas z formalnym podziałem całości obiektu na elementy składowe.

Schemat uzupełniono o wybrane elementy kontekstowe ułatwiające dostrzeżenie wcześniej niezauważonych trendów (diachrogramy):

a) degradacja fortu wyższego,

b) skutki konstrukcji bulwaru przecinającego fort na dwie części,

c) wymiana i odsprzedaż gruntów i instalacji otaczających fort,

d) przyłączenie części dolnego fortu do fortu górnego (oprac. I. Dudek)

Text versus visualization on the example of the fort Saint-Nicolas (Marseille) 101

ent researchers. The second question was to ana lyse the im-

pact of the spatial granularity of the analyses on the level of

understanding of the site’s development. Here again, some

preliminary but unambiguous conclusions were drawn: the

choice of spatial granularity in data analysis can signi-

cantly impact the understanding of the evolution of an ob-

ject and the level of understanding is increased by the need

to compile the information it contains.

Presenting the results of the interpretation in an appro-

priate visual form (using non-verbal reasoning methods)

facilitates the perception of relationships between the data,

information and knowledge elements so depicted.

Fig. 11. Summary of the total number of states and transformations identified during the analysis of the fort seen as unique object

(Fort Saint-Nicolas) and during the analysis with separation into components. The reduction of complexity of the components analysed

resulted in a greater variety of perceived states and transformations. In this presentation of information, a strong similarity

can be drawn between the reduit and the first ring of fortifications

(elaborated by I. Dudek)

Il. 11. Podsumowanie liczby stanów i transformacji zidentyfikowanych w trakcie analizy całościowej (fort Saint-Nicolas) i podczas analizy

z rozbiorem na elementy składowe. Zmniejszenie złożoności analizowanych komponentów wpłynęło na większą różnorodność postrzeganych

stanów i transformacji. W tym ujęciu danych istnieje silne podobieństwo pomiędzy reditą oraz pierwszym pierścieniem fortyfikacji

(oprac. I. Dudek)

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Isabelle Guérin (heritage architect) for providing the do cu -

mentation used in this research, to the “Citadelle de Marseille” asso cia tion

for its cooperation and for making the site available for the summer work

shops, and to Isabelle Fasse and Jean-Yves Blaise for organising the work-

shops. To the latter, we would like to express our gratitude for the time he de-

voted to the analysis of the entire fort according to the established criteria.

References

Aigner, Wolfgang, Silvia Miksch, Heidrun Schumann, and Christian

Tominski. Visualization of Time-Oriented Data. Springer, 2011.

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2016703.

Ban, Fabrizio, Stefano Roascio, Francesca Romana Paolillo, Mattia

Previtali, Fabio Roncoroni, and Chiara Stanga. “Diachronic and

Synchronic Analysis for Knowledge Creation: Architectural Rep-

resentation Geared to XR Building Archaeology (Claudius-Anio

Novus Aqueduct in Tor Fiscale, the Appia Antica Archaeologi-

cal Park).” Energies 15, no. 13 (January 2022): 4598. https://doi.

org/10.3390/en15134598.

Bevz, Volodymyr, and Mykola Bevz. “Hypothetical Reconstruction

of the Planning Structure and Architecture of the High Defensive

Wall of the Midtown of Lviv for the 13

–14

Century.” Cur-

rent Issues in Research, Conservation and Restoration of Historic

For ti fications, no. 19 (2023). https://doi.org/10.23939/fortifica-

tions 2023.19.153.

Blaise, Jean-Yves, and Iwona Dudek. “Concentric Time: Enabling Con-

text + Focus Visual Analysis of Architectural Changes.” In Foun-

dations of Intelligent Systems. ISMIS 2011. Lecture Notes in Com-

puter Science, edited by Marzena Kryszkiewicz, Henryk Rybinski,

102 Iwona Dudek

Andrzej Skowron, and Zbigniew W. Raś. Springer, 2011. https://doi.

org/10.1007/978-3-642-21916-0_67.

Blaise, Jean-Yves, Iwona Dudek, Waldemar Komorowski, Tomasz Węc-

ławowicz. Architectural transformations on the Market Square in Kra -

kow. A systematic visual catalogue. Ocyna Wydawnicza AFM, 2016.

Bocheński, Jan Maria. Współczesne metody myślenia. W drodze, 1992.

Chrisomalis, Stephen. “Comparing Cultures and Comparing Processes:

Diachronic Methods in Cross-Cultural Anthropology.” Cross-

Cul tu ral Research 40, no. 4 (2006): 377–404. https://doi.org/

10. 1177/1069397106287926.

Czerner, Rafał. “Dwa ołtarze z »rogami« ze stanowiska El Darazya

w Marina el-Alamein w Egipcie.” Architectus 77, no. 1 (2024): 12–8.

https://doi.org/10.37190/arc240102.

De Saussure, Ferdinand. Cours de Linguistique Générale. Payot, 1971.

Dudek, Iwona, and Jean-Yves Blaise. “Profiling Artefact Changes:

A Methodological Proposal for the Classication and Visualisation

of Architectural Transformations.” In Digital Heritage, Proceedings

of 14

International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia,

edited by Marinos Ioannides, Alonzo Addison, Andreas Georgopou-

los, and Loukas Kalisperis. Archaeolingua, 2008.

Dudek, Iwona, Jean-Yves Blaise. “Accès cartographique au corpus

d’étude du Projet SESAMES – diachrogrammes et de variogrammes

les évolutions des 15 cas d’étude.” Rapport scientique. Marseille:

UMR 3495 MAP CNRS/MCC ; ANR (Agence Nationale de la Re-

cherche), halshs-02945469. 2021b.

Dudek, Iwona, Jean-Yves Blaise. “Diachrograms – a theoretical frame-

work for the modelling and analysis of a heritage artefact’s diachron-

ic evolution. Extension of the model and of the corresponding visual

formalism.” halshs-03070375v2. 2021a.

Fitting, James E. “The Structure of Historical Archaeology and the Im-

portance of Material Things.” In Historical Archaeology and the Im-

portance of Material Things, edited by Leland Ferguson. The Society

for Historical Archaeology, 1977.

Gardin, Jean-Claude. “Le questionnement logiciste et les conits d’in-

terprétation.” Enquête, no. 5 (1997): 35–54. https://doi.org/10.4000/

enquete.1043.

Gardin, Jean-Claude. “Modèles et Récits.” In Épistémologie des scienc-

es sociales, edited by Jean-Michel Berthelot. Presses Universitaires

de France, 2012.

Guérin, Isabelle. Expertise Patrimoniale du Fort d’Entrecasteaux. Notice

patrimoniale, Marseille, 2015. [unpublished report].

Guérin, Isabelle. Fort Entrecasteaux, Diagnostic patrimoniale. I – con-

texte/historique. Département des Bouches-du-Rhne – Commune

de Marseille, 2022. Accessed September 2, 2024, at https://cita-

delledemarseille.org/sites/lacitadelledemarseille/les/2024-03/DI-

AG-FORT-I-CONTEXTE-HISTOIRE-reduit.pdf.

Korzybski, Alfred. “The role of language in the perceptual process.” In

Perception. An approach to personality, edited by Robert Blake and

Glenn V. Ramsey. Ronald Press Company, 1951.

Komorowski, Waldemar, and Aldona Sudacka. Rynek Główny w Krako-

wie. Ossolineum, 2008.

Lefebvre, Bastien, Xavier Rodier, and Laure Saligny. “Understanding Ur-

ban Fabric with the OH_FET Model Based on Social Use, Space and

Time.” Archeologia e Calcolatori 19 (2008): 195–214.

Leszczak, Olgierd. “Problem czasu w semiotyce: idiosynchronia – dia-

chronia – panchronia.” The Peculiarity of Man, no. 9, (2003): 301–

30.

Łukacz, Marek. “Badania architektoniczne reliktów murowanej zabudo-

wy pod zachodnią częścią Rynku Głównego w Krakowie.” Materiały

Archeologiczne 36 (2006): 143–67.

Marot, Émeline, Élisabeth Lorans, Samuel Bédécarrats, et al. “Le monas-

tère de Marmoutier: de l’hôtellerie à la maison du Grand Prieur

(10

–19

siècle).” Supplément à la Revue archéologique du Centre

de la France, FERACF, 2022. Published April 15, 2022. Accessed

Octobre 8, 2024, at https://marmoutier.univ-tours.fr/index.php.

Ouriachi, Marie-Jeanne, Hélène Mathian, Elisabeth Zadora-Rio, Fré-

dérique Bertoncello, François Favory, and Xavier Rodier. “From

the Conceptualisation of the Transition to Its Modelling: Interdis-

ciplinary Feedback on the TransMonDyn Experiment.” In Settling

the World. From Prehistory to the Metropolis Era, edited by Léna

Sanders. Presses Universitaires François-Rabelais, 2021. https://doi.

org/10.4000/books.pufr.20047.

Rodier, Xavier, and Laure Saligny. “Modélisation des objets historiques

selon la fonction, l’espace et le temps pour l’étude des dynamiques

urbaines dans la longue durée.” Cybergeo: European Journal of Ge-

ography, 2010. https://doi.org/10.4000/cybergeo.23175.

Tannier, Cécile, Alain Franc, Marie-Jeanne Ouriachi, and Elisabeth Zado-

ra-Rio. “Between Models and Narratives: Transitions in Settlement

Systems.” In Settling the World. From Prehistory to the Metropolis

Era, edited by Léna Sanders. Presses Universitaires François-Rabe-

lais, 2021. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pufr.19990.

Tyshkovskiy, Philip Yu. “History and Development Prospects of the Mil-

itary Department’s Infrastructural Complexes in Vyborg.” Architec-

ton: Proceedings of Higher Education 3, no. 71 (2020). https://doi.

org/10.47055/1990-4126-2020-3(71)-7.

Valette, Robert. Maquette du fort Saint-Nicolas. [photo]. Published

March 27, 2008. Accessed October 12, 2024, at https://commons.

wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maquette_du_fort_Saint-Nicolas.jpg.

Widdersheim, Michael M. “Historical Case Study: A Research Strategy

for Diachronic Analysis.” Library & Information Science Research

40, no. 2 (2018): 144–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2018.06.

003.

Streszczenie

Tekst versus wizualizacja w prezentacji diachronicznych analiz obiektów historycznych

na przykładzie fortu Saint-Nicolas w Marsylii

Tematem artykułu jest komunikowanie wiedzy o ewolucji obiektów architektonicznych. Celem autorki jest podkreślenie wpływu formy przekazu

oraz dyskryminacji przestrzennej zastosowanej w analizie na jasność i poziom zrozumienia przedstawionych propozycji. Praca opiera się na analizie

diachronicznej fortu Saint-Nicolas w Marsylii przedstawionej w ekspertyzie stanu zabytkowego fortu dokonanej w latach 2015–2022.

W trakcie opisanych studiów przeprowadzono szczegółową analizę ewolucji fortu według dwóch wariantów dyskryminacji przestrzennej: fort roz-

patrywany jako całość oraz fort podzielony na elementy składowe wynikające z jego funkcji jako dzieła fortykacyjnego. Aby uwypuklić potencjalne

różnice w interpretacji treści raportu, dwóch badaczy niezależnie przeanalizowało zgromadzone tam informacje na temat ewolucji obiektu. W ramach

badania wykorzystano model analizy diachronicznej pozwalający na wizualne (diagramatyczne) przekazanie informacji, uwzględniając stopień po-

strzeganej niepewności datowania, liczbę i rodzaj przekształceń oraz ich konsekwencje dla formy, struktury, funkcji i statusu własnościowego obiektu.

Nawet pobieżna analiza uzyskanych diagramów pokazuje specykę i ewolucyjną niezależność poszczególnych części fortu oraz znaczące różnice

w interpretacji tych samych danych przez poszczególnych analityków. W artykule przedstawiono analizę wyników, podkreślono najważniejsze różnice

między tradycyjnymi metodami komunikacji a formami wykorzystującymi wizualizację informacji oraz omówiono potencjał i ograniczenia związane

z zastosowaną metodą analizy.

Słowa kluczowe: diachronia, architektura, fortykacje, reprezentacja, wizualizacja informacji i wiedzy