Change is good: adapting strategies for archaeological prospection in a rapidly changing technological world

Ye

The Schlumberger Array in geophysical prospection for archaeology.

The Schlumberger array, or Schlumberger, was one of the first resistance arrays to be used to detect buried archaeological features. The early work used fixed probes and widely spaced traverses. Recent simulation work, ýhowever, suggested that the array should give improved resolution and depth penetration over the Twin-Probe array. This thesis is an attempt to operationalise the Schlumberger for use in archaeological prospection. This has been achieved via a co-ordinated use of laboratory simulation and-field studies. Initial fieldwork in England suggested. that the. - use of point electrodes created response patterns that were dependent upon the relative direction of linear targets. This was verified using a simulation tank modified to represent field procedure. The recognition of this response, therefore, required each survey area to be surveyed twice. The re-survey requires the two current probes to be positioned at right angles to the original survey points. The Schlumberger was then used in a battery of methods to investigate the problem of the archaeological interpretation of- small, discrete scatters of ceramic sherds that cover the landscape in Greece. The research has indicated a variation of intra-site patterning that may be significant to the function of these sites. Overall, the results suggest that the relationship between the 'site' and its environment is a complex one, one that can be oversimplified when the ceramic evidence is viewed in isolation. The Schlumberger indicated possible structural elements within some of these sites

Preparing for the future: A reappraisal of archaeo-geophysical surveying on Irish National Road Schemes 2001-2010

yesThis document reviews Legacy Data generated from 10 years’ worth of road scheme activity in Ireland to determine how archaeological geophysical surveys could be carried out on national roads in the future. The geophysical surveys were carried out by several different contractors across a range of challenging field conditions, geologies, weather and seasons. The research is based upon the results of linear schemes but also has validity for wider approaches. The findings of this research are based upon the compilation of all terrestrial archaeological geophysical surveys carried out on behalf of the National Roads Authority (NRA), a review of the success or otherwise of those surveys in comparison with ground-observed excavations and in combination with experimental surveys that tested previously held assumptions or knowledge to determine best practice methods for the future. The use and success of geophysical surveys in Ireland differ quite significantly from those in the UK, from where many of the methods of assessment were derived or adapted. Many of these differences can be attributed to geology. Ireland has a very high percentage of Carboniferous limestone geology, overlain mostly by tills and frequent occurrences of peat. These soils can reduce, to some extent, the effectiveness of magnetometer surveys; the most frequently used geophysical technique in Ireland. However, magnetometer data can be maximised in these cases by increasing the spatial resolution to produce effective results. An increase in spatial resolution is also effective generally, for enhancing the chances of identifying archaeological features by discriminating between archaeological and geological anomalies as well as increasing anomaly definition and visualisation of small and subtle archaeological features. Seasonal tests have determined that Irish soils are generally suitable for year round earth resistance assessments although some counties in the southeast of the country may experience very dry soils at the surface during some periods of the year. A variety of sampling strategies were used in the past, however it is now apparent that detailed assessments across the full length and width of a proposed road corridor are the most appropriate form of geophysical investigation. Magnetometer surveys are generally suitable for most Irish soils and geologies, although exceptions apply in areas of near-surface igneous deposits, deep peat and alluvial soils; however magnetometer surveys are not capable of identifying all types of archaeological features and other methods will be required for a full evaluation. Analysis of the Legacy Data has determined that in general the NRA archaeological geophysical surveys were historically used in a very positive way on road schemes. The range of features assessed or identified account for most types of archaeological sites in Ireland. These have provided a significant archive of case studies that will be of benefit to future archaeological geophysical research and will help to protect the globally dwindling archaeological resource that is threatened by development-led or commercially driven projects

BradPhys to BradViz or from archaeological science to heritage science

YesArchaeology is a broad church and its role as a “two culture” discipline is frequently cited. This position at the interface of the arts and sciences remains central to archaeological activity but there have been significant changes in the structure of archaeology and its relationship to society overall. The growth of heritage science, in particular, is driving change and development within archaeology at a national and international level. This paper discusses these developments in relation to the author's own research trajectory and discusses the significance of such change

Unveiling the prehistoric landscape at Stonehenge through multi-receiver EMI

YesArchaeological research at Stonehenge (UK) is increasingly aimed at understanding the dynamic of the wider archaeological landscape. Through the application of state-of-the-art geophysical techniques, unprecedented insight is being gathered into the buried archaeological features of the area. However, applied survey techniques have rarely targeted natural soil variation, and the detailed knowledge of the palaeotopography is consequently less complete. In addition, metallic topsoil debris, scattered over different parts of the Stonehenge landscape, often impacts the interpretation of geophysical datasets. The research presented here demonstrates how a single multi-receiver electromagnetic induction (EMI) survey, conducted over a 22 ha area within the Stonehenge landscape, offers detailed insight into natural and anthropogenic soil variation at Stonehenge. The soil variations that were detected through recording the electrical and magnetic soil variability, shed light on the genesis of the landscape, and allow for a better definition of potential palaeoenvironmental and archaeological sampling locations. Based on the multi-layered dataset, a procedure was developed to remove the influence of topsoil metal from the survey data, which enabled a more straightforward identification of the detected archaeology. The results provide a robust basis for further geoarchaeological research, while potential to differentiate between modern soil disturbances and the underlying sub-surface variations can help in solving conservation and management issues. Through expanding this approach over the wider area, we aim at a fuller understanding of the human–landscape interactions that have shaped the Stonehenge landscape

Magnetic geophysical mapping of prehistoric iron production sites in central Norway

YesThe slag pit furnace of the Trøndelag tradition for iron production is a very specific cultural-historical tradition in central Norway in the Early Iron Age, but few of these iron production sites have been excavated in their entirety and there is therefore a lack of information about their size, spatial layout and organisation in the landscape. The aim of this paper is therefore to investigate how magnetic geophysical methods can be used as a way of locating, delimiting and characterising activity zones and specific archaeological features associated with this tradition of iron production. The NTNU University Museum in Trondheim performed geophysical surveys of four different iron production sites, combining topsoil volume magnetic susceptibility measurements and detailed fluxgate gradiometer surveys. Analysing and comparing the survey results with sketches and topographic survey results, as well as comparable geophysical survey data from iron production sites elsewhere in Norway, made it possible to gain new and valuable cultural-historical and methodological knowledge. The topsoil volume susceptibility measurements revealed a strong contrast between the main production areas and the natural background measurement values, often in the range of 7–27 times the median background values. The absolute highest measured values were usually in the area closest to the furnaces, and within the slag mounds. Satellites of high readings could be interpreted as roasting sites for iron ore, and even areas with known building remains related to the iron production sites had readings stronger than the median. The fluxgate gradiometer data helped to characterise individual features further, with strong geophysical contrast between features within the iron production sites and the areas surrounding them. Also, by analysing their physical placement, geophysical characteristics such as contrast, magnetic remanence and size, it was possible to gain further insight into the spatial organisation by indicating the potential location of furnaces, the spread of slag and the handling of iron ore. The latter involved both where the roasted iron ore was stored and where it was roasted. The geophysical characteristics of the furnaces were less uniform than situations reported elsewhere in Norway, which can be explained by the reuse of furnaces and slag pits. The spread of highly remanent material in and around the furnaces and elsewhere within the limits of the iron production sites also created a disturbed magnetic picture rendering it difficult to provide an unambiguous archaeological interpretation of all the geophysical anomalies identified. In conclusion, these results showed that the geophysical methods applied made it possible to indicate the physical size, layout and internal spatial organisation of iron production sites of the Trøndelag slag pit furnace tradition

Cityscapes without figures: geophysics, computing and the future of urban studies

Ye

EAC Guidelines for the use of Geophysics in Archaeology: Questions to Ask and Points to Consider.

These guidelines provide an overview of the issues to be considered when undertaking or commissioning geophysical survey in archaeology. As every project diff ers in its requirements (e.g. from fi nding sites to creating detailed maps of individual structures) and variations in geological and environmental conditions lead to diff erent geophysical responses, there is no single ‘best’ survey technique or methodology. Th is guide, in its European approach, highlights the various questions to be asked before a survey is undertaken. It does not provide recipebook advice on how to do a geophysical survey or a tick list of which technique is suitable under what conditions. Experienced archaeological geophysicists should be consulted to address the questions that are being posed. Using geophysical techniques and methods inappropriately will lead to disappointment and may, ultimately, result in archaeologists not using them at all. “If all you have is a hammer (or magnetometer), driving a screw becomes impossible”. Especially in the American literature the term ‘remote sensing’ is oft en used to describe geophysical as well as air and space based exploration of underground features (e.g. Wiseman and El-Baz 2007). By contrast, and in line with European traditions, a clear distinction is made here between ground-based geophysical techniques and remote sensing techniques. Th is is based on the imaging principles underlying the respective technologies. Ground based systems usually collect one spatially registered data sample from each sensor location (e.g. a single reading for each magnetometer, or a single trace from each GPR antenna). Remote sensing techniques, by contrast, collect spatially resolved data from a whole area of investigation from each sensor location, using either the system’s optical aperture (e.g. photography) or a scanning device (e.g. laser sampling). These guidelines are based on the experience of the authors in archaeological geophysics and infl uenced by various published sources

Methods to Assess Subcellular Compartments of Muscle in C. elegans

Skeletal muscle is essential for locomotion and is the bodies’ main protein store. Muscle health measurements within C. elegans are described. Prospective changes to muscle structure and function are assessed using localized GFP and cationic dyes

L-Edge Spectroscopy of Dilute, Radiation-Sensitive Systems Using a Transition-Edge-Sensor Array

We present X-ray absorption spectroscopy and resonant inelastic X-ray scattering (RIXS) measurements on the iron L-edge of 0.5 mM aqueous ferricyanide. These measurements demonstrate the ability of high-throughput transition-edge-sensor (TES) spectrometers to access the rich soft X-ray (100-2000eV) spectroscopy regime for dilute and radiation-sensitive samples. Our low-concentration data are in agreement with high-concentration measurements recorded by conventional grating-based spectrometers. These results show that soft X-ray RIXS spectroscopy acquired by high-throughput TES spectrometers can be used to study the local electronic structure of dilute metal-centered complexes relevant to biology, chemistry and catalysis. In particular, TES spectrometers have a unique ability to characterize frozen solutions of radiation- and temperature-sensitive samples.Comment: 19 pages, 4 figure