Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Integrated Archaeological Prospection and Excavation Approach at a Middle Neolithic Circular Ditch Enclosure in Austria

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Digital Methods and Remote Sensing in Archaeology

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present an approach combining archaeological excavation with geophysical prospection. This is achieved by a combination of magnetometry, magnetic susceptibility, ground penetrating radar (GPR) and pXRF measurements, on archaeological features before and during excavation. Soil properties, such as soil colour, organic content, pH, magnetic susceptibility, chemistry and composition are influenced by natural and human activities and these changes can be identified by various prospection methods. The data was collected at the Middle Neolithic circular ditched enclosure (Kreisgrabenanlage, KGA) at Hornsburg, Austria in the Kreuttal area, which is a case study area of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Archaeological Prospection and Virtual Archaeology (LBI Arch Pro, http://archpro.lbg.ac.at/). Archaeological prospection in the majority of cases is carried out prior to excavation, in order to map the archaeology for the excavation or for planning procedures. The full archaeological potential of the various prospection methods therefore is not attained; as these measurements can help corroborate excavation results as well as providing further archaeological data that cannot be seen by the excavator’s eye. Furthermore, excavations provide an opportunity to investigate specific anomalies allowing for an examination of the processes, whether human or natural, influencing the prospectability or non-prospectability of these features. This can provide a link between past human actions and specific anomaly signatures, adding further archaeological interpretation to the prospection data as well as providing a greater archaeological insight during and after the excavation. Data analysis is still ongoing, so the paper will mainly focus on preliminary results obtained from the magnetometry and magnetic susceptibility measurements. Additionally smaller contributions from GPR, aerial photographs and orthophotos are presented here whilst future publications will integrate these alongside ultraviolet and infrared photographs and pXRF measurements.

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 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
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

  • Aitken, M.J., 1958. Magnetic prospecting I. Archaeometry 1, 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker H, et al. 1996. Archäologische Prospektion. Luftbildarchäologie und Geophysik. Arbeitshefte Bayerischen Landesamtes Denkmalpflege 59:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. 1996. Kultplätze, Sonnentempel und Kalenderbauten aus dem 5 Jahrtausend vor Chr. – die mittelneolithischen Kreisanlagen in Niederbayern. Arbeitshefte Bayerischen Landesamtes Denkmalpflege 59:101–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A.J. 1996. Seeing Beneath the Soil: Prospecting Methods in Archaeology. B.T. Batsford: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, R.B. 2001. Complementary geophysical survey techniques: why two ways are always better than one. Southeastern Archaeology 20: 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conyers, L., 2004, Ground-Penetrating Radar for Archaeology, AltaMira Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowther, J. 2003. Potential magnetic susceptibility and fractional conversion studies of archaeological soils and sediments. Archaeometry 45, 685–701

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalan, R.A. 2006. A Geophysical Approach to Buried Site Detection using Down-hole Susceptibility and Soil Magnetic Techniques. Archaeological Prospection 13 182–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalan, R.A. 2008. A review of the role of magnetic susceptibility in archaeogeophysical studies in the USA: recent developments and prospects. Archaeological Prospection 15: 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalan, R.A., Banerjee, S.K. 1998. Solving archaeological problems using techniques of soil magnetism. Geoarchaeology 13: 3–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalan, R. A., Bevan, B. 2002. Geophysical Indicators of Culturally Emplaced Soils and Sediments. Geoarchaeology 17, 779–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dearing, J.A. 1999. Environmental Magnetic Susceptibility: Using the Bartington MS2 System. Bartington Instruments Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doneus, M. 1996. Photogrammetrical applications to aerial archaeology at the Institute for Prehistory of the University of Vienna, Austria. Int Arch Photogrammetry Remote Sensing XXXI, part B5, commission V. Vienna, pp 124–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlop, D.J., Özedemir, Ö. 1997. Rock Magnetism. Fundamentals and Frontiers. Cambridge Studies in magnetism series. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans ME, Heller F. 2003. Environmental Magnetism: Principles and Applications of Environmagnetics. Academic Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbinder, J, 1994. Die magnetischen Eigenschaften und die Genese ferrimagnetischer Minerale in Böden im Hinblick auf die magnetische Prospektion archäologischer Bodendenkmäler, Buch am Erlbach

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbinder, J, 2015. Seeing beneath the farmland, steppe and desert soil: magnetic prospecting and soil magnetism. Journal of Archaeological Science 56:85–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbinder, J, Stanjek, H, 1993. Occurrence of bacterial magnetite in soils from archaeological sites. Archaeol Pol 31:117–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbinder, J, Stanjek H, Vali, H, 1990. Occurrence of magnetic bacteria in soil. Nature 343:161–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, C., 2008. Detecting Trends in the Prediction of the Buried Past: a Review of Geophysical Techniques in Arcaheology. Arcaheometry, 50 (2), 313–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, C., Gater, J.A., Linford, P., Gaffney, V., and White, R., 2000, Large-Scale Systematic Fluxgate Gradiometry at The Roman City of Wroxeter. Archaeological Prospection 7, 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, C., Gaffney, V., Neubauer, W., Baldwin, E., Chapman, H., Garwood, P., Moulden, H., Sparrow, T., Bates, R., Löcker, K., Hinterleitner, A., Trinks, I., Nau, E., Zitz, T., Floery, S., Verhoeven, G., and Doneus, M., 2012, The Stonehenge Hidden Landscapes Project, Archaeological Prospection 19, 147–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, C, Gater, J, 2003. Revealing the Buried Past: Geophysics for Archaeologists. Tempus Publishing: Stroud.

    Google Scholar 

  • Google Earth 2012 7.1.2.2041. Kreuttal. 48°25’58.73” N 16°26’14.92” E 48°25’58.73”, elevation 282 m. Borders and Labels, Places Layer. Viewed 1 May 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F., Zitzelsberger, A., Fabian, K. 1996. Magnetic susceptibility and remanent coercive force in grown magnetite crystals from 0.1 μm to 6 mm. Physics of the Earth and Planetary interiors 93, 239–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hejcman, M., Karlik, P., Ondracek, J., Klir, T. 2013. Short-Term medieval Settlement Activities irreversibly changed Forest soils and Vegetation in Central Europe. Ecosystems 16, 652–663

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrouda, F., Pokorny, J., Jezek, J., chadima, M. 2013. Out-of-phase magneitic susceptibility of rocks and soils: a rapid tool for magnetic granulometry. Geophysical Journal International 194, 170–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Kainz, J., Cotter, J., Forthcoming. Magnetic spectroscopy of a middle Neolithic Circular Ditch Enclosure.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keay, S., Earl, G., Hay, S., Kay, S., Ogden, J., & Strutt, K.D. (2009). The Role of Integrated Geophysical Survey Methods in the Assessment of Archaeological Landscapes: the Case of Portus. Archaeological Prospection 16, 154–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvamme, K.L., 2006. Integrating multidimensional geophysical data. Archaeological Prospection 13: 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvamme K.L., (2007) Integrating Multiple Geophysical Datasets, 345–374 In: Remote Sensing in Archaeology, (Eds) Wiseman, J. And El-Baz, F., Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Borgne, E, 1955. Susceptibilité magnétique anomale du sol superficiel. Ann Géophys 11, 399–419

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Borgne, E, 1965. Les propriétés magnétique du sol: application à la prospection des sites archéologiques. Archaeo-Physika 1 (Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher 15):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Linford, N., 2005. The application of geophysical methods to archaeological prospection. Reports on Progress in physics 69, 2205–2257

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, B.A. 1986. Characterisation of soils by mineral magnetic measurements. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 42, 76–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, B.A, Taylor, R.M. 1988. Formation of ultrafine grained magnetite in soils. Nature 336, 368–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melichar, P., Neubauer, W., (Eds.) 2010. Mittelneolithische Kreisgrabenanlagen in Niederösterreich. Geophysikalisch-archäologische Prospektion – ein interdisziplinäres Forschunsprojekt. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, C.E. 1977. Magnetic Susceptibility of the Soil and Its Significance in Soil Science Review. Journal of Soil Science 28, 223–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer, W, 1990. Geophysikalische Prospektion in der Archäologie. Mitt Anthropol Ges Wien 120:1–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer, W., 2001a. Images of the invisible-prospection methods for the documentation of threatened archaeological sites, Naturwissenschaften 88:13–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer, W., 2001b. Magnetische Prospektion in der Archäologie, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer, W. 2012. Kreisgrabenanlagen – Middle Neolithic Ritual Enclosures in Austria 4800 – 4500 BC. In Gibson A. (Ed.)Ö Enclosing the Neolithic. Recent studies in Britain and Europe. Oxford: Archaeopress (BAR International Series, 2440) 147–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubauer, W., Eder-Hinterleitner, A. 1997. Resistivity and Magnetics of the Roman Town Carnuntum, Austria: An Example of Combined Interpretation of Prospection Data, Archaeological Prospection, 4: 179–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrasch, J, 1990. Mittelneolithische Kreisgrabenanlagen in Mitteleuropa. Ber Römisch-germanischen Kom 71

    Google Scholar 

  • Podborský, V, et al (ed), 1999. Primeval socio-ritual architecture in Moravia. Brno

    Google Scholar 

  • Powlesland, D., Lyall, J., Hopkinson, G., Donoghue, D., Beck, M., Harte, A., Stott, D., 2006. Beneath the Sand Remote Sensing - Archaeology, Aggregates and Sustainability: a Case Study from Heslerton, the Vale of Pickering, North Yorkshire, UK 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridky, J., Koncelova, M., Sumberova, R., Limbursky, P., Kvetina, P. 2014. How were Neolithic Ditches filled in? Deposition study of two Enclosures from bohemia. European Journal of Archaeology 17, 579–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, A. 2001. Visualisation of multi-source archaeological geophysics data. In M. Cucarzi and P. Conti (eds) Filtering, Optimisation and Modelling of Geophysical Data in Archaeological Prospecting: 149–160. Rome: Fondazione Ing. Carlo M. Lerici.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scollar, I, Tabbagh, A, Hesse, A, Herzog, I, 1990. Archaeological prospecting and remote sensing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, F-X., Koziol, A., Thiesson, J. 2012. Investigating Magnetic Ghosts on an Early Middle Age Settlement: Comparison of Data from Stripped and Non-stripped Areas. Arcaheological Prospection 19, 191–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Tite, M.S. 1972. The influence of geology on the magnetic susceptibility of soils on archaeological sites. Archaeometry 14, 229–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trinks, I., Kucera, M., Hinterleitner A., Löcker K., Nau E., Neubauer W., and Zitz T., Large-scale, high-definition Ground Penetrating Radar prospection in archaeology, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 14, EGU General Assembly 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Trnka, G, 1991. Studien zu mittelneolithischen Kreisgrabenanlagen. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven, G, 2009. Providing an archaeological bird’s-eye view: An overall picture of ground-based means to execute low-altitude aerial photography (LAAP) in Archaeology. Archaeological Prospection 16 (4), 233–249. DOI:10.1002/arp.354

    Google Scholar 

  • West, G., Holladay, S. 2014. UTEMIS II Operating Manual. University of Toronto Department of Physics.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the University of Vienna and the LBI Arch Pro for the resources provided during the excavation. Further gratitude goes to the help provided by Gugliemo Strappazon for helping with the magnetic susceptibility and GPR measurements as well as producing the depth slices and isosurfaces for the GPR, Matthias Kucera for the taking the photograph of the ditch profile as well as the help during the excavation and measurements, Geert Verhoeven for the aerial photograph and Roderick Salisbury for the XRF measurements as well as the help and exchanges during the excavation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Initiative College for Archaeological Prospection, Vienna Institute for Archaeological Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Jakob Kainz

  2. Vienna Insitute for Archaeological Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Jakob Kainz

Authors
  1. Jakob Kainz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jakob Kainz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Duke University Dept of Classical Studies, Durham, North Carolina, USA

    Maurizio Forte

  2. Dept. of Archaeology & Art History, University of Siena, Siena, Italy

    Stefano Campana

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kainz, J. (2016). An Integrated Archaeological Prospection and Excavation Approach at a Middle Neolithic Circular Ditch Enclosure in Austria. In: Forte, M., Campana, S. (eds) Digital Methods and Remote Sensing in Archaeology. Quantitative Methods in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40658-9_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation