Encyclopedia of Geoarchaeology

2017 Edition
| Editors: Allan S. Gilbert

Remote Sensing in Archaeology

  • Stefano Campana
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4409-0_122

Synonyms

Nondestructive archaeology

Definition

Remote Sensing – or Télédétection (French), Fernerkundung (German), Percepcion Remota (Spanish), 遙感 (Chinese) – can be defined as the science of identifying, observing, interpreting, and measuring objects or surfaces without coming into direct contact with them.

In the archaeological process, the scientific community has taken at least two different approaches to the definition of remote sensing. Some archaeologists define it as the technique of obtaining information about objects through the analysis of data collected by sensors (cameras, scanners, imaging radar systems, etc.) that are not in physical contact with the objects under investigation, mostly using spaceborne and airborne instruments. From this point of view, remote sensing differs from ground-based sensing, in which the instruments physically touch the ground surface. A common example of a ground-based instrument is ground-penetrating radar (Doneus et al., 2011).

Other...

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

Bibliography

  1. Adams, R. E. W., 1980. Swamps, canals, and the location of ancient Maya cities. Antiquity, 54(212), 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aqdus, S. A., Drummond, J., and Hanson, W. S., 2008. Discovering archaeological cropmarks: a hyperspectral approach. In Chen, J., Jiang, J., and Maas, H.-G. (eds.), XXIst Congress of the International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Technical Commission V, July 3–11, 2008, Beijing, China. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVII B5, pp. 361–365.Google Scholar
  3. Avery, T. E., and Lyons, T. R., 1981. Remote Sensing: Aerial and Terrestrial Photography for Archaeologists. Washington, DC: Cultural Resources Management Division, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior.Google Scholar
  4. Barber, M., 2011. A History of Aerial Photography and Archaeology: Mata Hari’s Glass Eye and Other Stories. Swindon: English Heritage.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, A. R., 2011. Archaeological applications of multi/hyper-spectral data – challenges and potential. In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management: Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. EAC Occasional Paper 5. Brussel: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, pp. 87–97.Google Scholar
  6. Bewley, R. H., 2002. Aerial survey: learning from a hundred years of experience? In Bewley, R. H., and Rączkowski, W. (eds.), Aerial Archaeology: Developing Future Practice. Amsterdam: IOS Press. NATO Science Series I, Life and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 337, pp. 11–18.Google Scholar
  7. Bewley, R. H., 2005. Aerial archaeology. The first century. In Bourgeois, J., and Meganck, M. (eds.), Aerial Photography and Archaeology 2003: A Century of Information. Ghent: Academia Press. Archaeological Reports Ghent University, Vol. 4, pp. 15–30.Google Scholar
  8. Bewley, R. H., Crutchley, S. P., and Shell, C. A., 2005. New light on an ancient landscape: LiDAR survey in the Stonehenge World Heritage Site. Antiquity, 79(305), 636–647.Google Scholar
  9. Bloom, R. G., 1992. Space technology and the discovery of Ubar. Point of Beginning, 17(2), 11–20.Google Scholar
  10. Boni, G., 1900. Fotografie e pianta altimetrica del Foro Romano. Rome: Reale Accademia dei Lincei.Google Scholar
  11. Bradford, J., 1957. Ancient Landscapes: Studies in Field Archaeology. London: Bell.Google Scholar
  12. Campana, S., 2009. Archaeological site detection and mapping: some thoughts on differing scales of detail and archaeological ‘non-visibility’. In Campana, S., and Piro, S. (eds.), Seeing the Unseen: Geophysics and Landscape Archaeology. London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 5–26.Google Scholar
  13. Campana, S., 2011. ‘Total archaeology’ to reduce the need for rescue archaeology: the BREBEMI project (Italy). In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management: Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. EAC Occasional Paper 5. Brussel: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, pp. 33–41.Google Scholar
  14. Cavalli, R. M., Marino, C. M., and Pignatti, S., 2003. Hyperspectral airborne remote sensing as an aid to a better understanding and characterization of buried elements in different archaeological sites. In Forte, M., and Williams, P. R. (eds.), The Reconstruction of Archaeological Landscapes through Digital Technologies: Proceedings of the 1st Italy-United States Workshop, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, November 13, 2001. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1151. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 29–32.Google Scholar
  15. Comer, D. C., and Blom, G. R., 2007. Detection and identification of archaeological sites and features using synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data collected from airborne platforms. In Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F. (eds.), Remote Sensing in Archaeology. New York: Springer, pp. 103–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crawford, O. G. S., and Keiller, A., 1928. Wessex from the Air. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Deuel, L., 1969. Flights into Yesterday. The Story of Aerial Archaeology. London: Macdonald.Google Scholar
  18. Devereux, B. J., Amable, G. S., Crow, P., and Cliff, A. D., 2005. The potential of airborne lidar for detection of archaeological features under woodland canopies. Antiquity, 79(305), 648–660.Google Scholar
  19. Doneus, M., 2001. The impact of vertical photographs on analysis of archaeological landscapes. In Doneus, M., Eder-Hinterleitner, A., and Neubauer, N. (eds.), Archaeological Prospection: 4th International Conference on Archaeological Prospection, Vienna, 1923 September 2001. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, pp. 94–96.Google Scholar
  20. Doneus, M., and Briese, C., 2006. Full-waveform airborne laser scanning as a tool for archaeological reconnaissance. In Campana S., and Forte, M. (eds.), From Space to Place. 2nd International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology : Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop, CNR, Rome, Italy, December 47, 2006. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1568. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 99–105.Google Scholar
  21. Doneus, M., and Briese, C., 2011. Airborne laser scanning in forested areas – Potential and limitations of an archaeological prospection technique. In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management: Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. EAC Occasional Paper 5. Brussel: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, pp. 59–76.Google Scholar
  22. Doneus, M., Neubauer, W., Verhoeven, G., and Briese, C., 2011. Advancing archaeological airborne remote sensing: core concepts of the LBI-ArchPro initiative. In Drahor, M. G., and Berge, M. A. (eds.), Archaeological Prospection: 9th International Conference on Archaeological Prospection, September 1924, Izmir, Turkey. Istanbul: Archaeology and Art Publications, pp. 12–15.Google Scholar
  23. Donoghue, D. N. M., 2001. Multispectral remote sensing for archaeology. In Campana, S., and Forte, M. (eds.), Remote Sensing in Archaeology: XI Ciclo di lezioni sulla ricerca applicata in archeologia, Certosa di Pontignano (Siena), 6–11 dicembre 1999. Florence: All’Insegna del Giglio, pp. 181–192.Google Scholar
  24. Donoghue, D. N. M., Beck, A., Galiatzatos, N., McManus, K., and Philip, G., 2006. The use of remote sensing data for visualising and interpreting archaeological landscapes. In Baltsavias, E., Gruen, A., Van Gool, L., and Pateraki, M. (eds.), Recording, Modeling and Visualization of Cultural Heritage. Leiden: Taylor and Francis, pp. 317–326.Google Scholar
  25. Eisenbeiss, H., 2009. UAV photogrammetry. D.Sc. dissertation, University of Zürich. Zürich IGP Mitteilungen Nr.105. http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:498/eth-498-02.pdf#search=%22(author:henri eisenbeiss)%22.Google Scholar
  26. Galiatsatos, N., 2014. Exploring archaeological landscapes with satellite imagery. In Remondino, F., and Campana, S. (eds.), 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Theory and Best Practices. Oxford: Archaeopress. British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Vol. 2598, pp. 89–100.Google Scholar
  27. Going, J. C., 2002. A neglected asset. German aerial photography of the Second World War period. In Bewley, R. H., and Rączkowski, W. (eds.), Aerial Archaeology: Developing Future Practice. Amsterdam: IOS Press. NATO Science Series I, Life and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 337, pp. 23–30.Google Scholar
  28. Guaitoli, M. (ed.), 2003. Lo sguardo di Icaro: Le collezioni dell’Aerofototeca nazionale per la conoscenza del territorio. Roma: Campisano.Google Scholar
  29. Hargrave, M. L., 2006. Ground truthing the results of geophysical survey. In Johnson, J. K. (ed.), Remote Sensing in Archaeology: An Explicitly North American Perspective. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, pp. 269–304.Google Scholar
  30. Holcomb, D. W., and Shingiray, I. L., 2007. Imaging radar in archaeological investigations: an image processing perspective. In Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F. (eds.), Remote Sensing in Archaeology. New York: Springer, pp. 11–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holden, N., Horne, P., and Bewley, R. H., 2002. High-resolution digital airborne mapping and archaeology. In Bewley, R. H., and Rączkowski, W. (eds.), Aerial Archaeology: Developing Future Practice. Amsterdam: IOS Press. NATO Science Series I, Life and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 337, pp. 173–180.Google Scholar
  32. Horne, P., 2011. The english heritage national mapping programme. In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management: Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. EAC Occasional Paper 5. Brussel: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, pp. 143–151.Google Scholar
  33. Jones, R. J. A., and Evans, R., 1975. Soil and crop marks in the recognition of archaeological sites by air photography. In Wilson, D. R. (ed.), Aerial Reconnaissance for Archaeology. London: Council for British Archaeology. Research reports, Council for British Archaeology, Vol. 12, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  34. Khawaga, M., 1979. A contribution to fractal pattern of the Abu Tartar plateau, Western Desert, Egypt. Annals of the Geological Survey of Egypt, 9, 163–171.Google Scholar
  35. Lasaponara, R., and Masini, N., 2012. Satellite Remote Sensing. A New Tool for Archaeology. Dordrecht: Springer. Remote Sensing and Digital Image Processing, Vol. 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lillesand, T. M., and Kiefer, R. W., 1994. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation, 3rd edn. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  37. Lyons, T. R., and Avery, T. E., 1977. Remote Sensing: A Handbook for Archaeologists and Cultural Resources Managers. Washington, DC: Cultural Resources Management Division, National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior. Contribution of the Chaco Center, Vol. 4.Google Scholar
  38. Lyons, T. R., and Mathien, F. J., 1980. Cultural Resources Remote Sensing. Washington, DC: Cultural Resources Management Division, National Park Service.Google Scholar
  39. McCauley, J. F., Schaber, G. G., Breed, C. S., Grolier, M. J., Haynes, C. V., Issawi, B., Elachi, C., and Blom, R., 1982. Subsurface valleys and geoarcheology of the eastern Sahara revealed by shuttle radar. Science, 218(4576), 1004–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McHugh, W. P., Schaber, G. G., Breed, C. S., and McCauley, J. F., 1989. Neolithic adaptation and the Holocene functioning of the Tertiary palaeodrainages in southern Egypt and northern Sudan. Antiquity, 63(239), 320–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moore, E., Freeman, T., and Hensley, S., 2007. Spaceborne and airborne radar at Angkor: introducing new technology to the ancient site. In Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F. (eds.), Remote Sensing in Archaeology. New York: Springer, pp. 185–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Musá, A. H., Dolphin, L. T., and Mukhtar, M. J., 1977. Applications of Modern Sensing Techniques to Egyptology. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.Google Scholar
  43. Musson, C., 1994. Wales from the Air: Patterns of Past and Present. Aberystwyth: Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales.Google Scholar
  44. Opitz, R. S., and Cowley, D. C., 2013. Interpreting Archaeological Topography. Airborne Laser Scanning, 3D Data and Ground Observation. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  45. Palmer, R., 2000. A view from above: can computers help aerial survey? In Lock, G. R., and Brown, K. (eds.), On the Theory and Practice of Archaeological Computing. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Monograph, Vol. 51, pp. 107–131.Google Scholar
  46. Palmer, R., 2007. Seventy-five years v. ninety minutes: implications of the 1996 Bedfordshire vertical aerial survey on our perceptions of clayland archaeology. In Mills, J., and Palmer, R. (eds.), Populating Clay Landscapes. Tempus: Stroud, pp. 88–103.Google Scholar
  47. Parcak, S. H., 2009. Satellite Remote Sensing for Archaeology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Piccarreta, F., and Ceraudo, G., 2000. Manuale di aerofotografia archeologica. Metodologia, tecniche e applicazioni. Bari: Edipuglia.Google Scholar
  49. Poidebard, A., 1927. Les routes anciennes en Haute-Djézireh. Syria, 8, 55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pope, K. O., and Dahlin, B. H., 1989. Ancient Maya wetland agriculture: new insights from ecological and remote sensing research. Journal of Field Archaeology, 16(1), 87–106.Google Scholar
  51. Powlesland, D., 2006. Redefining past landscapes: 30 years of remote sensing in the Vale of Pickering. In Campana S., and Forte, M. (eds.), From Space to Place. 2nd International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology : Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop, CNR, Rome, Italy, December 47, 2006. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1568. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 197–201.Google Scholar
  52. Powlesland, D., 2010. Identifying mapping and managing the unmanageable: the implication of long term multi-sensor research into the archaeology of the Vale of Pickering. Yorkshire, England. In Forte, M., Campana, S., and Liuzza, C. (eds.), Space, Time, Place: Third International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology, 17th21st August 2009, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil, Nadu, India. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 2118. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 9–16.Google Scholar
  53. Powlesland, D., and Donoghue, D. N. M., 1993. A multi-sensory approach to mapping the prehistoric landscape. In Proceedings of the 9th Natural Environment Research Council Airborne Symposium. Swindon, UK: NERC, pp. 88–96.Google Scholar
  54. Rączkowski, W., 2001. Science and/or art: aerial photographs in archaeological discourse. Archaeologia Polona, 39, 127–146.Google Scholar
  55. Rączkowski, W., 2005. To overcome infirmity. Current approaches to aerial archaeology in Poland. In Bourgeois, J., and Meganck, M. (eds.), Aerial Photography and Archaeology 2003: A Century of Information. Ghent: Academia Press. Archaeological Reports Ghent University, Vol. 4, pp. 121–135.Google Scholar
  56. Remondino, F., 2011. 3D recording for cultural heritage. In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management. Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. Europae Archaeologia Consilium Occasional Paper No. 5. Brussels: EAC, pp.107–115.Google Scholar
  57. Remondino, F., 2014a. Photogrammetry: theory. In Remondino, F., and Campana, S. (eds.), 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Theory and Best Practices. Oxford: Archaeopress. British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Vol. 2598, pp. 65–73.Google Scholar
  58. Remondino, F., 2014b. UAV: Platforms, regulations, data acquisition and processing. In Remondino, F., and Campana, S. (eds.), 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Theory and Best Practices. Oxford: BAR International Series, Vol. 2598, pp. 74–87.Google Scholar
  59. Remondino, F., and Campana, S. (eds.), 2014. 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Theory and Best Practices. Oxford: Archaeopress. British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Vol. 2598.Google Scholar
  60. Risbøl, O., Gjertsen, A. K., and Skare, K., 2006. Airborne laser scanner of cultural remains in forest: some preliminary results from Norwegian project. In Campana S., and Forte, M. (eds.), From Space to Place. 2nd International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology : Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop, CNR, Rome, Italy, December 47, 2006. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1568. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 107–112.Google Scholar
  61. Schaber, G. G., and Gumerman, G. J., 1969. Infrared scanning images: an archaeological application. Science, 164(3880), 712–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sever, T. L., 1998. Validating prehistoric and current social phenomena upon the landscape of the Peten, Guatemala. In Liverman, D. M., Moran, E. F., Rindfuss, R. R., and Stern, P. C. (eds.), People and Pixels: Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, pp. 145–163.Google Scholar
  63. Shaw, R., and Corns, A., 2011. High resolution LiDAR specifically for archaeology: are we fully exploiting this valuable resource? In Cowley, D. C. (ed.), Remote Sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management: Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27 March 2010. EAC Occasional Paper 5. Brussel: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, pp. 77–86.Google Scholar
  64. Sheets, P., and Sever, T. L., 1991. Prehistoric footpaths in Costa Rica: transportation and communication in a tropical rainforest. In Trombold, C. D. (ed.), Ancient Road Networks and Settlement Hierarchies in the New World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 53–65.Google Scholar
  65. Shell, C. A., 2002. Airborne high-resolution digital, visible, infrared and thermal sensing for archaeology. In Bewley, R. H., and Rączkowski, W. (eds.), Aerial Archaeology: Developing Future Practice. Amsterdam: IOS Press. NATO Science Series I, Life and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 337, pp. 181–195.Google Scholar
  66. Shell, C. A., 2005. Digital airborne remote sensing: high-resolution digital airborne survey for archaeological research and cultural landscape management. In Musson, C., Palmer, R., and Campana, S. (eds.), Volo nel Passato: Aerofotografia e cartografia archeologica. Florence: All’Insegna del Giglio, pp. 271–283.Google Scholar
  67. Shennan, I., and Donoghue, D. N. M., 1992. Remote sensing in archaeological research. In Pollard, A. M. (ed.), New Development in Archaeological Science: A Joint Symposium of the Royal Society and the British Academy February 1991. Proceedings of the British Academy 77. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 223–232.Google Scholar
  68. Sittler, B., and Schellberg, S., 2006. The potential of LIDAR in assessing elements of cultural heritage hidden under forest or overgrown by vegetation: possibilities and limits in detecting microrelief structures for archaeological surveys. In Campana S., and Forte, M. (eds.), From Space to Place. 2nd International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology : Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop, CNR, Rome, Italy, December 47, 2006. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1568. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 117–122.Google Scholar
  69. Stolze, F., 1882. Persepolis; Die achaemenidischen und sasanidischen Denkmäler und Inschriften von Persepolis, Istakhr, Pasargadae, Shâkpûr. Berlin: Ahser.Google Scholar
  70. Traviglia, A., 2007. MIVIS hyperspectral sensors for the detection and GIS supported interpretation of subsoil archaeological sites: An Italian case study. In Clark, J. T., and Hagemeister, E. M. (eds.), Digital Discovery: Exploring New Frontiers in Human Heritage. CAA 2006. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. Proceedings of the 34th Conference, Fargo, United States, April 2006. Budapest: Archaeolingua, pp. 287–299.Google Scholar
  71. Verhoeven, G. J. J., Loenders, J., Vermeulen, F., and Docter, R., 2009. Helikite aerial photography – a versatile means of unmanned, radio controlled, low-altitude aerial archaeology. Archaeological Prospection, 16(2), 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weishampel, J. F., Chase, A. F., Chase, D. Z., Drake, J. B., Shrestha, R. L., Slatton, K. C., Awe, J. J., Hightower, J., and Angelo, J., 2010. Remote sensing of ancient Maya land use features at Caracol, Belize related to tropical rainforest structure. In Forte, M., Campana, S., and Liuzza, C. (eds.), Space, Time, Place: Third International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology, 17th21st August 2009, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil, Nadu, India. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 2118. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 45–52.Google Scholar
  73. Wilson, D. R., 2000. Air Photo Interpretation for Archaeologists, 2nd edn. Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar
  74. Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F., 2007. Remote Sensing in Archaeology. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

WEB References

  1. Aerial Archaeology Research Group. http://www.univie.ac.at/aarg.
  2. International Society for Archaeological Prospection. http://www.brad.ac.uk/archsci/archprospection/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Classics and McDonald Institute for Archaeological ResearchUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Laboratory of Landscape Archaeology and Remote Sensing, Department of History and Cultural HeritageUniversity of SienaSienaItaly