Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 548–563 | Cite as

The Outside Inside: Combining Aerial Photographs, Cropmarks and Landscape Experience

  • Kirsty Millican


This paper seeks to make a contribution to current debates concerning the dislocation in landscape research between experiential approaches and quantitative techniques of landscape analysis. It focuses upon a group of archaeological sites that are caught in the centre of this divide: plough-levelled sites recorded as cropmarks on aerial photographs. The application of experiential landscape analysis to plough-levelled sites is explored, along with the value of incorporating information derived from the study of the aerial photograph. It is contended that richer, more rounded, interpretations of landscape are possible when combining aspects of quantitative and qualitative landscape research.


Cropmarks Landscape Experience Archaeology 



Elements of the paper are drawn from doctoral research funded by an AHRC collaborative doctoral award between Glasgow University and RCAHMS. I would like to thank Dorothy Graves, my co-organiser of the conference from which this special issue arises and from whom the initial inspiration arose. Thank you, too, to Jeff Oliver for his help, support and advice in setting up and running the conference at Aberdeen, to Aberdeen University Archaeology Department for hosting it and all the contributors who helped to make the conference a success. I am grateful to Kenny Brophy and Dave Cowley for their comments and criticisms, all of which helped refine the content of this paper. Any inaccuracies remain my own.


  1. Barclay, G. J. (2005). The ‘henge’ and ‘hengiform’ in Scotland. In V. Cummings & A. Pannett (Eds.), Set in stone: new approaches to Neolithic monuments in Scotland (pp. 81–94). Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett, J. C., & Ko, I. (2009). A phenomenology of landscape: a crisis in British landscape archaeology. Journal of Social Archaeology, 9(3), 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bender, B. (1993). Introduction: landscape, meaning and action. In B. Bender (Ed.), Landscapes, politics and perception (pp. 1–18). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  4. Bewley, R. H. (1994). Prehistoric and Romano-British settlement on the Solway Plain. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  5. Brophy, K. (1999). The cursus monuments of Scotland. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  6. Brophy, K. (2005). Subjectivity, bias and perception in aerial archaeology. In K. Brophy & D. Cowley (Eds.), From the air: understanding aerial archaeology (pp. 33–49). Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar
  7. Brophy, K. (2007a). The cursus monuments of south-west Scotland. In J. Thomas (Ed.), Place and memory: excavations at Pict’s Knowe, Holywood and Holm Farm, Dumfries and Galloway, 1994–8 (pp. 158–165). Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  8. Brophy, K. (2007b). From big houses to cult houses: early Neolithic timber halls in Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 73, 75–96.Google Scholar
  9. Brück, J. (2005). Experiencing the past? The development of a phenomenological archaeology in British prehistory. Archaeological Dialogues, 12(1), 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chadwick, A. (2004). Geographies of sentience—an introduction to space, place and time. In Chadwick, A. (Ed.), Stories from the landscape. Archaeologies of inhabitation (pp. 1–31). Oxford: BAR International Series 1238.Google Scholar
  11. Chapman, H. P. (2003). Rudston ‘cursus A’—engaging with a Neolithic monument in its landscape setting using GIS. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 22(4), 345–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman, H., & Gearey, B. (2000). Palaeoecology and the perception of prehistoric landscapes. Some comments on visual approaches to phenomenology. Antiquity, 74, 316–319.Google Scholar
  13. Cowley, D. C. (2009). The Traprain environs in a regional perspective. In C. Haselgrove (Ed.), The Traprain Law Environs Project. Fieldwork and excavations 2000–2004 (pp. 205–224). Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.Google Scholar
  14. Cowley, D. C., & Gilmour, S. M. D. (2003). Aerial survey in Scotland 2003. Discovery from the air. A pit-defined cursus monument in Fife. Scottish Archaeological Journal, 25, 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crawford, O. G. S. (1955). Said and done: the autobiography of an archaeologist. London: Trinity Press.Google Scholar
  16. Crawford, O. G. S., & Keiller, A. (1928). Wessex from the air. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  17. Cummings, V. (2002). Between mountains and sea: a reconsideration of the Neolithic monuments of south-west Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 68, 125–146.Google Scholar
  18. Cummings, V., & Pannett, A. (2005). Island views: the setting of the chambered cairns of southern Orkney. In V. Cummings & A. Pannett (Eds.), Set in stone: new approaches to the Neolithic monuments in Scotland (pp. 14–24). Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  19. Cummings, C., & Whittle, A. (2003). Tombs with a view: landscapes, monuments and trees. Antiquity, 77, 225–266.Google Scholar
  20. Cummings, V., Jones, A., & Watson, A. (2002). Divided places: phenomenology and asymmetry in the monuments of the Black Mountains, Southeast Wales. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 121, 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edmonds, M. and McElearney (1999). Inhabitation and access. Landscapes and the Internet at Gardom’s Edge. Internet Archaeology, 6. Retrieved Accessed 26 June 2009.
  22. Fleming, A. (1999). Phenomenology and the megaliths of Wales: a dreaming too far? Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 18, 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fleming, A. (2005). Megaliths and post-modernism: the case of Wales. Antiquity, 79, 921–932.Google Scholar
  24. Fleming, A. (2006). Post-processual landscape archaeology: a critique. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 16, 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Foster, S., & Smout, T. C. (Eds.). (1994). The history of soils and field systems. Aberdeen: Scottish Cultural Press.Google Scholar
  26. Fraser, S. M. (2004). Metaphorical journeys: landscape, monuments and the body in a Scottish Neolithic. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 70, 129–159.Google Scholar
  27. Gillings, M. (2009). Visual affordance, landscape, and the megaliths of Alderney. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 28(4), 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gillings, M. (2011). Chorography, phenomenology and the antiquarian tradition. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 21(1), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gillings, M. (2012). Landscape phenomenology, GIS and the role of affordance. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 19(4).Google Scholar
  30. Goodrick, G., & Gillings, G. (2000). Constructs, simulations and hyperreal worlds. The role of virtual reality (VR) in archaeological research. In G. Lock & K. Brown (Eds.), On the theory and practice of archaeological computing (pp. 41–48). Oxford: OUCA.Google Scholar
  31. Gow, P. (1995). Land, people and paper in Western Amazonia. In E. Hirsch & M. O’Hanlon (Eds.), The anthropology of landscape: perspectives on space and place (pp. 43–62). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hamilton, S., Whitehouse, R., Brown, K., Combes, P., Herring, E., & Seager-Thomas, M. (2006). Phenomenology in practice: towards a methodology for a ‘subjective’ approach. European Journal of Archaeology, 9(1), 31–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hanson, W. S., & Macinnes, L. (1991). The archaeology of the Scottish lowlands: problems and potential. In W. S. Hanson & E. A. Slater (Eds.), Scottish archaeology: New perceptions (pp. 153–166). Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Huggett, R. J. (2007). Fundamentals of geomorphology (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnson, M. (2007). Ideas of landscape. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Llobera, M. (1996). Exploring the topography of mind: GIS, social space and archaeology. Antiquity, 70, 612–622.Google Scholar
  38. Llobera, M. (2000). Understanding movement: a pilot model towards the sociology of movement. In G. Lock (Ed.), Beyond the map: archaeology and spatial technologies (pp. 65–84). Oxford: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  39. Llobera, M. (2010). Archaeological visualisation: towards an archaeological information science (AISc). Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 18, 193–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Llobera, M. (2012). Tools in ‘interpretative’ landscape archaeology. Reflections of the challenges of methodology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 19(4).Google Scholar
  41. Lock, G. (Ed.). (2000). Beyond the map: archaeology and spatial technologies. Oxford: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  42. Maxwell, G. S. (Ed.). (1983). The impact of aerial reconnaissance on archaeology. London: Council for British Archaeology.Google Scholar
  43. Millican, K. M. (2009). Contextualising the cropmark record: the timber monuments of the Neolithic of Scotland. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  44. Millican, K. (2012). Timber monuments, landscape and the environment in the Nith Valley, Dumfries and Galloway. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 31(1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Murray, H. K., Murray, J. C., & Fraser, S. M. (2009). A tale of the unknown unknowns: a Mesolithic pit-alignment and a Neolithic timber hall at Warren Field, Crathes, Aberdeenshire. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  46. Noble, G. (2006). Tree architecture: building monuments from the forest. Journal of Iberian Archaeology, 8, 53–72.Google Scholar
  47. Palmer, R. (1984). Danebury, an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire: an aerial photographic interpretation of its environs. London: Council for British Archaeology.Google Scholar
  48. Palmer, R. (2011). Knowledge-based aerial image interpretation. In Cowley, D. (Ed.), Remote sensing for archaeological heritage management. Brussels: EAC Occasional Paper No. 5/Occasional publication of the Aerial Archaeology Research Group No. 3.Google Scholar
  49. Palmer, R. & Cowley, C. (2010). Interpreting aerial images—developing best practice. In Forte, M., Campana, S. & Luizza, C. (Eds.), Space, time, place. Third International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology (pp. 129–35). Oxford: BAR International Series 2118.Google Scholar
  50. Pollard, J., & Gillings, M. (1998). Romancing the stones. Towards a virtual and elemental Avebury. Archaeological Dialogues, 5, 143–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Poller, T. I. (2005). Interpreting Iron Age settlement landscapes of Wigtownshire. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  52. Smout, T. C. (Ed.). (2003). People and woods in Scotland: a history. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Stephens, N. (1990). Natural landscapes of Britain from the air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Stoertz, C. (1997). Ancient landscapes of the Yorkshire Wolds. Swindon: RCHME.Google Scholar
  55. Sturt, F. (2006). Local knowledge is required: a rhythmanalytical approach to the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the East Anglian Fenland, UK. Journal of Maritime Archaeology, 1, 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thomas, J. (1995). The politics of vision and the archaeologies of landscape. In B. Bender (Ed.), Landscape, politics and perspectives (pp. 19–48). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  57. Thomas, J. (2004). Archaeology and modernity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Thomas, J. (2008). Archaeology, landscape and dwelling. In B. David & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of landscape archaeology (pp. 300–306). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  59. Tilley, C. (1994). A phenomenology of landscape. Places, paths and monuments. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  60. Tilley, C. (1996). The powers of rocks: topography and monument construction on Bodmin Moor. World Archaeology, 28, 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tilley, C. (2004). The materiality of stone: explorations in landscape phenomenology. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  62. Tilley, C. (2008). Phenomenological approaches to landscape archaeology. In B. David & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of landscape archaeology (pp. 271–276). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  63. Tipping, R. (1994). The form and fate of Scotland’s woodlands. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 124, 1–54.Google Scholar
  64. Westcott, J., & Brandon, R. (2000). Practical applications of GIS for archaeologists: a predictive modeling kit. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  65. Wickstead, H. (2009). The uber archaeologist: GIS and the male gaze revisited. Journal of Social Archaeology, 9(2), 249–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wilson, D. R. (2000). Air photo interpretation for archaeologists. Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of ScotlandEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations