Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpretation and Guidelines for Reporting

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Good Practice in Archaeological Diagnostics

Part of the book series: Natural Science in Archaeology ((ARCHAEOLOGY))

Abstract

The archaeological interpretation of geophysical data is the decisive link regarding a successful transaction of science and humanities. The required tool kit for a serious archaeological interpretation of geophysical data has to encompass a general interest in the physical expressions of human activity, an understanding of natural and anthropogenic origins of shaping landscapes and an overall view on archaeological categories and terms. Thus, a useful interpretation has to be proved by embedding it into the context of a man-made landscape. Mutual trust and transparency between geophysicists and archaeologists are the best concepts for an optimal flow of information benefiting for both disciplines. If all the mentioned requirements can be matched, the geophysical prospection in archaeological research becomes a real interdisciplinary approach. Besides the interpretation, the reporting on field measurements, data processing and interpretation are self-evident necessities. The quality of reporting and archiving the data is crucial for a long-term usability of the data and the derived knowledge. The inescapable evanescence of archaeological remains caused by intensive agriculture, mining and construction activity of man will make many datasets of today to priceless evidence of human history in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aspinall A, Gaffney CF, Schmidt A (2008) Magnetometry for archaeologists. AltaMira Press, Lanham

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin T, Mitchem J (2007) Preservation and management strategies for exceptionally large data formats: ‘big data’. archaeology data service and English heritage., http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/attach/bigData/bigdata_final_report_1.3.pdf. Accessed January 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker RD (1997) Electrical imaging and its application in engineering investigations. In: McCann DM, Fenning PJ et al (eds) Modern geophysics in engineering geology, Engineering geology special publications no 12. Geological Society, London, pp 37–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark AJ (1996) Seeing beneath the soil. Prospecting methods in archaeology. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Conyers LB (2012) Interpreting ground-penetrating radar for archaeology. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek

    Google Scholar 

  • Conyers LB, Lucius JE (1996) Velocity analysis in archaeological ground-penetrating radar studies. Archaeol Prospect 3:25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabas M, Tabbagh A, Tabbagh J (1994) 3-D inversion in subsurface electrical surveying – I. Theory. Geophys J Int 119:975–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faßbinder JWE (1994) Die magnetischen Eigenschaften und die Genese ferrimagnetischer Minerale in Böden im Hinblick auf die magnetische Prospektion archäologischer Bodendenkmäler. VML Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden

    Google Scholar 

  • Fry R, Stott D, Boddice D, Beck A (2012) What a difference a year makes: preliminary DART datasets from Cherry Copse, Cirencester. AARG News 45:42–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney C, Gater J (2003) Revealing the buried past: geophysics for archaeologists. Tempus Publishing Ltd., Stroud

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney CF, Gater JA, Linford P, Gaffney VL, White RH (2000) Large-scale systematic fluxgate gradiometry at the Roman city of Wroxeter. Archaeol Prospect 7:81–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García Sanjuán L, Wheatley DW (eds) (2002) Mapping the future of the past: managing the spatial dimension of the European archeological resource. Universidad de Sevilla, Historia y Geografia, Seville, no 78

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther T, Rücker C, Spitzer K (2006) 3-d modeling and inversion of dc resistivity data incorporating topography – Part II: Inversion. Geophys J Int 166(2):506–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jol HM (2008) Ground penetrating radar: theory and applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones DM (ed) (2008) Geophysical survey in archaeological field evaluation. English Heritage Publication. http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/geophysical-survey-in-archaeological-field-evaluation/. Accessed January 2013

  • Jones G, Maki DL (2005) Lightning-induced magnetic anomalies on archaeological sites. Archaeol Prospect 12:191–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvamme KL (2003) Geophysical surveys as landscape archaeology. Am Antiq 68(3):435–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leckebusch J (2001) Die Anwendung des Bodenradars (GPR) in der archäologischen Prospektion 3D-Visualisierung und Interpretation. VML Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden

    Google Scholar 

  • Linford N, Linford P, Martin L, Payne A (2010) Stepped frequency ground-penetrating radar survey with a multi-element array antenna: results from field application on archaeological sites. Archaeol Prospect 17:187–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki DL (2005) Lightning strikes and prehistoric ovens: determining the source of magnetic anomalies using techniques of environmental magnetism. Geoarchaeology 20:449–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzoli D, Pardo FL, Padilla JS, Wagner CG, Mielke DP, Martín CL, Cabrero LR, Thiemeyer H, Ortiz MT (2010) Los inicios del urbanismo en las sociedades autóctonas localizadas en el entorno del estrecho de Gibraltar: investigaciones en los Castillejos de Alcorrín y su territorio (Manilva, Málaga). Menga 1:153–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer C, Plesničar R, Pilz D (2012) Extramural magnetic survey. In: Corsi C, Vermeulen F (eds) Ammaia I: the survey. A Romano-Lusitanian townscape revealed. Academia Press, Ghent, pp 105–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer C, Ullrich B, Barlieb C (2007) Archaeological questions and geophysical solutions: ground-penetrating radar and induced polarization investigations in Munigua, Spain. Archaeol Prospect 14:202–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer W (2001) Magnetische Prospektion in der Archäologie. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer W, Eder-Hinterleitner A, Seren S, Melichar P (2002) Georadar in the Roman civil town Carnuntum, Austria: an approach for archaeological interpretation of GPR Data. Archaeol Prospect 9(3):135–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson C, Campbell D, Hodgkinson A (2011) Archaeological maps from qGIS and Inkscape: a brief guide, 3rd edn. Documentation. Oxford Archaeology North. http://library.thehumanjourney.net/366. Accessed January 2013

  • Rücker C, Günther T, Spitzer K (2006) 3-d modeling and inversion of dc resistivity data incorporating topography – Part I: Modeling. Geophys J Int 166(2):495–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samouëlian A, Cousin I, Tabbagh A, Bruand A, Richard G (2005) Electrical resistivity survey in soil science: a review. Soil Tillag Res 83(2):173–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schleifer N (2004) Anwendung der Spektralen Induzierten Polarisation (SIP) in der archäologischen Prospektion. VML Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleifer N, Weller A, Schneider S, Junge A (2002) Investigation of a Bronze Age plankway by spectral induced polarization. Archaeol Prospect 9:243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt A (2002) Geophysical data in archaeology: a guide to good practice. Oxbow Books, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsokas GN, Tsourlos PI, Papadopoulos NG (2009) Electrical resistivity tomography: a flexible technique in solving problems of archaeological research. In: Campana S, Piro S (eds) Seeing the unseen: geophysics and landscape archaeology. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 83–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich B, Meyer C, Weller A (2007a) Geoelektrik und Georadar in der archäologischen Forschung: geophysikalische 3D-Untersuchungen in Munigua (Spanien). In: Wagner GA (ed) Einführung in die Archäometrie. Springer, Berlin, pp 76–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich B, Günther T, Rücker C (2008) Electrical resistivity tomography methods for archaeological prospection. In: Posluschny A, Lambers K, Herzog I (eds) Layers of perception. Proceedings of the 35th international conference on computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology (CAA, Berlin, April 2–6, 2007), 25 (Abstract). Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, vol. 10. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich B, Weller A, Günther T, Rücker C (2007b) Geophysical prospecting of ancient slag deposits in Munigua (Spain) and Ain-al Hajer (Morocco) using complex electrical resistivity tomography. In: Archaeometallurgy in Europe 2007. Selected papers of the 2nd international conference (Aquleia, 17–21 June 2007). Associazione Italiana di Metallurgia, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdonck L, Taelman D (2012) Ground penetrating radar survey at Ammaia. In: Corsi C, Vermeulen F (eds) Ammaia I: the survey. A Romano-Lusitanian townscape revealed. Academia Press, Ghent, pp 69–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller A, Bauerochse A, Nordsiek S (2006) Spectral induced polarisation: a geophysical method for archaeological prospection in peatlands. J Wetl Archaeol 6:105–125

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Eastern Atlas GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany

    Cornelius Meyer

Authors
  1. Cornelius Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cornelius Meyer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Humanities, University of Cassino, Cassino, Italy

    Cristina Corsi

  2. Department of Archaeology, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Božidar Slapšak

  3. Department of Archaeology, Universiteit Gent, Ghent, Belgium

    Frank Vermeulen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Meyer, C. (2013). Interpretation and Guidelines for Reporting. In: Corsi, C., Slapšak, B., Vermeulen, F. (eds) Good Practice in Archaeological Diagnostics. Natural Science in Archaeology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01784-6_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation