Pattern to process: methodological investigations into the formation and interpretation of spatial patterns in archaeological landscapes

My research has shown that the type of regional archaeological data analysis required by landscape archaeological approaches is an area where both theory and method are still in their infancy. High-level theories about the occurrence, scope, and effects of processes such as centralization, urbanization, and Hellenization/Romanization cannot yet be supported by middle range theory, which itself cannot be developed until the basic business of generating information of sufficient quality about the archaeological record has been tackled. Currently, archaeological data can be made to fit almost any interpretation generated, ultimately, on the basis of the ancient written sources. If we are to escape from this selfreinforcing cycle, research should perhaps no longer be focused on the classical themes generated by culture-historical approaches, but should seek its own proper field of operation. In the area of methods and methodology, I have demonstrated the pervasive influence of systematic research and visibility biases on the patterns that are present in the archaeological data generated over the past 50 years or so. There are mechanisms at work, both in the traditional archaeological interpretation of limited numbers of excavated sites and historical sources, and in the landscape archaeological approach, that cause the systematic undervaluation of unobtrusive remains. The significance of systematic biases in both the coarse site-based data sets resulting from desktop and ‘topographic’ studies and the more detailed site-based or ‘continuous’ data resulting from intensive field surveys has become much clearer as a result of the studies reported here. This should have practical consequences for the ways in which we study the existing archaeological record, plan future landscape archaeological research, and conduct field surveys. Site databases, the traditional starting point for regional archaeological studies, can no longer be taken at face value; rather, they require careful source criticism before being used to support specific arguments and hypotheses about settlement and land use dynamics. My studies have also shown that future data collection, whether through field survey, excavation or other methods, has to take place in a much more methodical manner if we are to produce data that are sufficiently standardized to be successfully exchanged, compared, and interpreted by others – guidelines for which should become embodied in an international standard defining ‘best practice in landscape archaeology’.

FAIR survey:Improving documentation and archiving practices in archaeological field survey through CIDOC CRM

Classical & Mediterranean Archaeolog

Devilish details : fine-tuning survey techniques for ephemeral sites

The Rural Life in Protohistoric Italy project investigates small surface scatters from the Bronze and Iron Age, found during field walking surveys in Calabria, Italy. In this article we argue that detailed, multidisciplinary investigations of such ephemeral sites are crucial for our understanding of protohistoric rural society and land use. We illustrate our methodology of integrated surface recordings, geophysical methods, small test pits and laboratory studies with the case study of the Late Bronze Age site T231. The implications of this case study for regional settlement models are discussed

Post-depositional subsidence of the Avellino tephra marker bed in the Pontine plain (Lazio, Italy):Implications for Early Bronze Age palaeogeographical, water level and relative sea level reconstruction

Land subsidence has played and is still playing a significant role in coastal wetlands worldwide and in palaeogeographical reconstructions of such wetlands. The varying thickness of compaction-prone sediments over a stable subsurface is a key factor in determining its magnitude and in locating the most affected areas. In the coastal low-lying Agro Pontino (Lazio, Italy), subsidence of the past 90 years has been mapped using historical elevation data. Due to the fortunate preservation of distal Avellino tephra (AV-tephra, ca. 1900 cal. BCE) within its marshy strata, discovered a decade ago, detailed palaeogeographical reconstruction of the landscape in preparation for an assessment of its land use suitability in the Early Bronze Age (EBA) was possible. Current altitude variations of water-lain tephra in lake areas assumed to be connected necessitated a closer look at its original deposition altitude and the role of post-depositional subsidence. Recent subsidence patterns proved very useful for distinguishing stable from subsidence-prone areas. Two different EBA palaeo lake environments are distinguished: an inland and a near-coastal lake. The AV-tephra altitude variation within these lakes partly marks differential post-depositional subsidence within these lakes. Calculation of initial ripening of tephra-bearing lake deposits on top of shallowly buried Pleistocene ridges allowed for an estimation of original tephra deposition altitudes and associated lake levels. For the inland lake, a wide lake edge zone between 0.5 and 2 m above current sea level (m asl) was reconstructed, where EBA habitation or land use was possible. At the near-coastal lake, a water level of −1.5 to −1.3 m asl at the time of AV-tephra deposition was constrained. Because tephra deposition occurred here just after marine influence ceased, this altitude range is proposed to be a Relative Sea Level (RSL) index point at the time of AV-tephra deposition. The altitude range is in agreement with RSL models for tectonically stable areas in this region. The importance of subsidence in palaeogeographical, water level and RSL reconstructions in the region is stressed