EDUCATIONAL LINKS



Survey Density and Spacing

The density of geophysical measurements taken per unit area can profoundly affect the quality of survey results. Dense measurements can result in the location of small archaeological features (such as post holes, small hearths, etc.) that might otherwise go undetected. Click the link below for an example of improved feature resolution with intensive surveys. 
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/ld36/close.htm


Modes of Data Presentation 
The way in which data is displayed can alter perceptions about the nature and magnitude of anomalies. Archaeogeophysists use a number of digital image processing techniques to extract feature information from the raw data. The results can be displayed in a variety of ways. Click here for a couple of examples. 
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/ld36/fentrace.htm

For another example of a stacked trace plot, see the link below.
http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/geop/sluss_r2.gif

The use of shadowing effects and digitizing archaeological features can enhance the presentation of survey results.  Click below to see an example from Navan Fort, Ireland. 
http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/navan/navan.htm

The results of multiple types of geophysical surveys can be combined by using a technique known as color compositing.  The Whistling Elk Subsurface Imaging Project contains an example of this technique. 
http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/Whistle/Composite.htm



Magnetic Surveys 
Magnetic surveys can be particularly informative about subsurface deposits because they respond to changes in iron compounds in soils, burned areas and features, and the presence of iron artifacts. 
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/ld36/grad.htm 
http://www.planetinternet.it/archaeosurvey/

Civil War battlefields provide excellent opportunities to conduct magnetic surveys.  The large amounts of iron associated with these sites produce excellent results. 
 http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/geop/geop.htm#PRARIE_G

Magnetic survey produced quality results at historic Pokagon Village where resistivity and conductivity surveys were not effective due to very dry conditions.

http://www.nd.edu/~mschurr/pokagon99.html

 


Magnetic Susceptibility 
Human occupation, through practices of burning and admixing of burnt or imported materials, tend to increase the magnetic susceptibility of soils at settlements. Click on the links below to see different expressions of magnet susceptibility.

http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/ld36/magsus.htm


Ground Penetrating Radar

Ground penetrating radar (GPR) has been used to document a number of archaeological sites that have become buried over time. The link below shows how this technology can be used to map house structures buried under volcanic lava flows and to locate burials, both prehistoric and forensic. 
http://www.geophysical.com/archlaw.htm

GPR has been used in Europe to locate Viking roads in Denmark and the graves of individuals that were victims of the Spanish Flu in Norway. 
http://www.sensoft.on.ca/arche.htm 
http://www.planetinternet.it/archaeosurvey/

A general explanation GPR in archaeology and great images of a Japanese burial mound and Anasazi kiva in Utah. 
http://www.sciam.com/exhibit/062298radar/kiva.html

Ground penetrating radar was used at Navan Fort (Ireland) to explore subsurface archaeological features.

http://www.csulb.edu/~bambos/navgpr.html


Geoelectric Survey Methods 
Human activity results in changes in the soil's ability to resist or conduct electrical current.  Both positive and negative changes in resistivity can be indicators of cultural anomalies. Click on the link below to see some examples from archaeological sites in Italy. 
http://www.planetinternet.it/archaeosurvey/

Performing both resistivity and conductivity surveys on the same site can produce a more complete picture of the archaeological features that lie below the ground surface. 
http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/Whistle/Cross.htm

Click on the link below to try a resistivity simulation.
http://www.gla.ac.uk/Inter/Computerpast/archtltp/geosurvey/geosurv.html


Geophysics and Cultural Resource Management 
Geophysical techniques are increasingly becoming an important part of cultural resource management. Survey techniques can produce rapid results and do not involve the destruction of archaeological features. Technical advances over the past two decades have made geophysical surveys a viable option in the CRM realm. Click on the link below to see several examples of CRM project results. 
http://www.crai-ky.com/geophysical/


Metal Detectors 
Metal detectors can serve as valuable tools by complementing information collected by using other geophysical techniques.  Metal detectors can also be used alone to produce interesting results.  See the following link for a description of metal detection methodology.

http://www.har-indy.com/Methods.html

Click on the link below to see how metal detectors and GPS were used to further understand a poorly documented battle in the southwestern United States.

http://www.gpsworld.com/feature/1097victorio/victorio.htm

Metal detection has also been used to analyze the Battle of the Little Big Horn.
http://www.mwac.nps.gov/libi/



Multiple Technique Studies
The use of multiple geophysical techniques on a single archaeological project can produce unique data.  As a result, subsurface archaeological features are more easily identified.  See the links below for examples.

The Hinxton Quarry Project used magnetometry, magnetic susceptibility, and electrical resistivity to define archaeological features.
http://www.eng-h.gov.uk/reports/hinxton/

The Whistling Elk Project included electrical resistivity, electromagnetic conductivity, magnetic gradiometry, and ground penetrating radar to aid  in the identification of archaeological features.
http://www.cast.uark.edu/%7Ekkvamme/Whistle/Whistle.htm


References
Full text documents are available on-line regarding the use of geophysical techniques in archaeology. Detailed survey procedures are also available at the first link below.
http://www.ttser.demon.co.uk/geophys/Dox.htm

Effectiveness of Geophysical Techniques in Detecting Certain Classes of Archaeological Material

http://www.terraplus.com/papers/wynn.htm

http://www.soton.ac.uk/~jb3/geo.html

 Geometrics offers a series of geophysical papers that address archaeological and non-archaeological issues.  Some are available in PDF format and others are available in print.

http://www.geometrics.com/sci.html

Geophysical Data in Archaeology: A Guide to Good Practice
Published by Archaeology Data Service, United Kingdom. A guide to digital preservation of geophysics data by Armin Schmidt with contributions from Tony Austin, Andrew David, Kate Fernie, William Kilbride, Paul Linford, Julian Richards, and Damian Robinson. Also provides a good history of archaeological geophysics and guidelines for documenting a geophysical survey.