It’s been a busy week at AAL so this weeks blog is a little round-up of what we’ve been up to.
Warning: Images of human remains feature in this post
It’s been a busy week at AAL so this weeks blog is a little round-up of what we’ve been up to.
Warning: Images of human remains feature in this post
In February 2016 AAL opened internal applications for a Project Archaeologist to undertake a three month secondment with the Geophysics Project Officer, Rob Evershed. The secondment would give someone experience in basic geophysical survey including; undertaking the surveys, setting up surveys (gridding out and the use of GPS), data analysis and interpretations, the post-fieldwork reporting process and preparations of illustrations and preparing the archive.
I applied as I have always enjoyed taking part in geophysics projects; being able to create my own interpretations of the sites as my understanding of them develops, and the physical nature of the role which allows me to loose myself in the task at hand.
Prior to working with AAL I had experience of working on archaeological geophysics projects at another company. I hoped this role would allow me to develop my skills and put me in a position to specialise in archaeological geophysics.
Rob has been a great (and patient!) tutor allowing me to get involved with all elements of the work. It has been challenging physically (Rob works at a very fast pace, sometimes completing 20-30 grids a day, almost twice as many as normal people), and mentally, as I have very limited experience with writing and producing reports.
Like everyone I have really enjoyed the sunny days on site, but I have also found I like seeing the project through to completion. Being able to put together background research with any topographic clues and finally seeing the processed results is a really engaging task. Equally the sites which provide us with complete surprises are great, as we are the first people to discover them; one site we uncovered evidence for a medieval settlement which had not been picked up in the background research.
I have come away feeling I know a lot more about what happens after the geophysical survey and a lot more confident in my abilities. I hope that following the completion of my secondment I might be able to start running my own, small, projects and processing my own data for producing reports.
Archaeological excavation is by its very nature a destructive activity. In order to properly understand and record the archaeology it may necessary to actually remove any physical traces of the archaeology leaving behind only written records, drawn plans and photographs. Commercial archaeology is in a lot of cases an attempt to rescue or record archaeology before it’s destroyed by future building work. Part of the problem is that while historic records can often give an idea of what might be found within a development area, the actual nature of potential archaeological remains actually require some intrusive investigation…… or do they?
This is where the science (or some might argue the art) of geophysical surveying can allow a non-intrusive view into the past. If the location of archaeological remains can be identified without sticking random holes in the ground it can allow a much more targeted, and potentially less destructive, approach to be taken. This can also save a lot of time and money within the construction process. A geophysical survey can also allow the bigger picture of a site to be revealed.
There are a number of different geophysical techniques used within the archaeological world, unfortunately none are perfect for all conditions and locations. There are a few main techniques that are widely used
• Resistivity. Resistivity involves an electrical current being fed into the ground and the resistance to this current being recorded. The usual approach being a two pronged machine placed into the ground at regular intervals across the required area with readings taken at each location. High resistance readings may suggest walls or rubble fills, whilst low resistance readings can indicate ditches or drains.
• GPR (Ground Penetrating Radar). GPR uses radio pulses transmitted vertically downwards and the reflection of these pulses from buried layers and structures to build up a picture of ground below. GPR has the ability to provide a three-dimensional view of a buried site.
• Magnetometry. Magnetometry relies on the ability of the magnetometer to measure very small magnetic fields associated with archaeological remains. These magnetic fields are either the result of thermoremanence or magnetic susceptibility. Thermorenanence occurs when weakly magnetic material is heated up and then cools. The material can then gain a permanent magnetisation associated with the direction of the earth’s magnetic field while it cools. The magnetic susceptibility of a material is related to the magnetism induced when the material is placed within a magnetic field. Since the earth’s magnetic field is always present, the magnetic susceptibility of buried material can be measured using the magnetometer.
There are other geophysical techniques used in the search for buried archaeology, seismic, microgravity, induced polarisation and metal detecting to name a few. However the three main techniques are resistivity, GPR and magnetometry.
Within commercial archaeology the most widely used method is magnetometry. This is mainly due to the speed at which large areas can be covered and the impressive results that can be obtained. As with all methods however the site conditions will dictate how suitable the technique is. Within built-up urban locations magnetometry will be next to useless due to the interference of external magnetic fields from buildings, cars, modern services or modern rubbish. All these and more can mask the small magnetic fields generated by buried archaeology. In this situation GPR may well be a far better choice.
I’ve now been working for Allen Archaeology for 5 and half years and whilst these days I am allowed out to occasionally dig, my main duties are as a Geophysical Project Officer. This involves both the physical part- actual surveying, and the office based part- processing data and writing reports. I look upon the latter as a necessary evil which allows me to spend time on the much more enjoyable (mostly) former. Fortunately the majority of the sites we survey are not completely waterlogged, and despite the reputation the British weather has for rain, I do seem to manage to stay fairly dry. Except for my feet when I don’t realise my (non-metallic) boots have holes in them.
The practical side of the geophysical survey is that it can be done fairly swiftly, covering 2-3 hectares a day (all depending on site conditions of course). Then specific areas can be targeted for excavation if necessary. This can potentially allow a ‘key-hole surgery’ approach to the archaeological remains, limiting the destruction whilst maximising the information gathered through digging. Plus it can be very satisfying when an excavation reveals my geophysics results to be completely accurate.