1887
Volume 13 Number 5
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In order to test the ability of geophysical technologies to detect buried structures made of mud brick and rammed earth, a geophysical survey was acquired at Qocho City site of China in 2012 using magnetic gradient and ground penetrating radar (GPR). Magnetic anomalies were interpreted as the response of house wall foundations, pits, and a temple base by reference to archaeological results from a neighbouring excavation area. The magnetic data were complemented by 2D ground penetrating radar profiles, which provided additional information on the depth of these causative structures. An archaeological survey dated 1913 reported the layout of three houses that have since been largely razed to the ground in the study area. Our geophysical survey confirmed the locations of two houses. This study shows that magnetic and ground penetrating radar methods are valuable tools to detect buried earthen archaeological remains in a dry environment.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015033
2015-06-01
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BonomoN., OsellaA. and RattoN.2013. GPR investigations at an Inca‐Spanish site in Argentina. Near Surface Geophysics11, 449–456.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BossuetG., ThivetM., TrillaudS., MarmetE., LaplaigeC., DabasM.et al.2012. City map of ancient Epomanduodurum (Mandeure‐Mathay, Franche‐Comté, Eastern France): contribution of geophysical prospecting techniques. Archaeological Prospection19(3), 261–280.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CapizziP., CosentinoP.L., FiandacaG., MartoranaR., MessinaP. and VassalloS.2007. Geophysical investigations at the Himera archaeological site northern Sicily. Near Surface Geophysics5, 417–426.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. ConyersL.B.2011. Discovery, mapping and interpretation of buried cultural resources non‐invasively with ground‐penetrating radar. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering8, S13–S22.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Di MauroD., AlfonsiL., SapiaV., NigroL. and MarchettiM.2011. First field magnetometer investigation at the Phoenician Island of Mozia (Trapani), northwestern Sicily: preliminary results. Archaeological Prospection18, 215–222.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ForteE. and PipanM.2008. Integrated seismic tomography and ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) for the high‐resolution study of burial mounds (tumuli). Journal of Archaeological Science35, 2614–2623.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. GaffneyC.F., GaffneyV., NeubauerW., BaldwinE., ChapmanH., GarwoodP.et al.2012. The Stonehenge hidden landscapes project. Archaeological Prospection19, 147–155.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. GaffneyC.F., GaterJ.A., LinfordP., GaffneyV.L. and WhiteR.2000. Large‐scale systematic fluxgate gradiometry at the Roman city of Wroxeter. Archaeological Prospection7(2), 81–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Geoscan Research
    Geoscan Research . 2012. Instruction Manual 3 (Geoplot 3.0). Geoscan Research: Bradford.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. HerbichT., HedstromD.B. and DavisS.J.2007. A geophysical survey of ancient Pherme: magnetic prospection at an early Christian monastic site in the Egyptian Delta. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt44, 129–138.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. KadiogluS.2010. Definition of buried archaeological remains with a new 3D visualization technique of a ground‐penetrating radar data set in Temple Augustus in Ankara, Turkey. Near Surface Geophysics8, 397–406.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. LasaponaraR., MasiniN., RizzoE. and OreficiG.2011. New discoveries in the Piramide Naranjada in Cahuachi (Peru) using satellite, ground probing radar and magnetic investigations. Journal of Archaeological Science38, 2031–2039.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LecoqA.1913. Chotscho.Tafel: Berlin.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. LiuJ.G.1995. Remote sensor investigation in Qocho city site and Beiting site in Xinjiang Province, China. Chinese Journal of Archaeology36(8), 747–753.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. MasiniN., PersicoR. and RizzoR.2010. Some examples of GPR prospecting for monitoring of the monumental heritage. Journal of Geophysical Engineering7, 190–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. MasiniN., RizzoE., LasaponaraR. and OreficiG.2008. Integrated remote sensing techniques for the detection of buried archaeological adobe structures: preliminary results in Cahuachi (Peru). Advances in Geosciences19, 75–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MengF.R.2000. Preliminary study on shape and structure of Qocho City. Chinese Journal of Central Asia18(5), 35–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. NuzzoL. and QuartaT.2012. GPR prospecting of cylindrical structures in cultural heritage applications: a review of geometric issues. Near Surface Geophysics10, 17–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. PapadopoulosN.G., SarrisA., MariaC., DederixS., SoupiosP. and DikmenU.2012. Rediscovering the small theatre and amphitheatre of ancient Ierapytna (SE Crete) by integrated geophysical methods. Journal of Archaeological Science39, 1960–1973.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. PorsaniJ., JangelmeG.M. and KipnisR.2010. GPR survey at Lapa do Santo archaeological site, Lagoa Santa Karstic region, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Journal of Archaeological Science37, 1141–1148.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. RizzoE., MasiniN., LasaponaraR. and OreficiG.2010. Archaeogeophysical methods in the Templo del Escalonado (Cahuachi, Nasca, Perù). Near Surface Geophysics8(5), 433–439.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. SarrisA., PapadopoulosN., AgapiouA., SalviM.C., HadjimitsisD.G., ParkinsonW.A.et al.2013. Integration of geophysical surveys, ground hyperspectral measurements, aerial and satellite imagery for archaeological prospection of prehistoric sites: the case study of Vészto‐Mágor Tell, Hungary. Journal of Archaeological Science40, 1454–1470.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. ScardozziG., GieseS. and HübnerC.2013. Integrated geophysical investigations in Hierapolis of Phrygia (Turkey). Near Surface Geophysics11, 101–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SerenS., Eder‐HinterleitnerA., NeubauerW. and GrohS.2004. Combined high‐resolution magnetics and GPR surveys of the Roman town of Flavia Solva. Near Surface Geophysics2(2), 63–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. SteinA.1928. Innermost Asia: Detailed Report of Explorations in Central Asia, Kan‐su and Eastern Iran.Clarendon Press: Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. ThompsonV.D. and PluckhahnT.J.2012. Monumentalization and ritual landscapes at Fort center in the Lake Okeechobee basin of south Florida. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology31, 49–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. UtsiE.2010. The use of ground‐penetrating radar to extend the results of archaeological excavation. Near Surface Geophysics8, 415–422.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. VerdonckL., VermeulenF., CorsiC. and DocterR.2012. Ground‐penetrating radar survey at the Roman town of Mariana (Corsica), complemented with fluxgate gradiometer data and old and recent excavation results. Near Surface Geophysics10, 35–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. WuY., TianX.H., WangY.Q. and TongW.K.2012. Report on the excavations on the site of the Qocho city near Turpan, China. Chinese Journal of Xinjiang Province Cultural Relics17(5), 4–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. YanW.R.1962. Qocho city site in Turpan. Chinese Journal of Cultural Relics12(7), 28–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. ZananiriI., HademenosV. and PiterosC.2010. Geophysical investigations near the ancient Agora at the city of Argos, Greece. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering 7, 174–182.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015033
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015033
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error