Traditionally, ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) measurements for near‐surface geophysical archaeological prospection are conducted with single‐channel systems using GPR antennae mounted in a cart similar to a pushchair, or towed like a sledge behind the operator. The spatial data sampling of such GPR devices for the non‐invasive detection and investigation of buried cultural heritage was, with very few exceptions, at best 25 cm in cross‐line direction of the measurement. With two or three persons participating in the fieldwork, coverage rates between a quarter hectare and half a hectare per day are common, while frequently considerably smaller survey areas at often coarse measurement spacing have been reported. Over the past years, the advent of novel multi‐channel GPR antenna array systems has permitted an enormous increase in survey efficiency and spatial sampling resolution. Using GPR antenna arrays with up to 16 channels operating in parallel, in combination with automatic positioning solutions based on real‐time kinematic global navigation satellite systems or robotic total‐stations, it has become possible to map several hectares per day with as little as 8 cm cross‐line and 4 cm in‐line GPR trace spacing. While this dramatic increase in coverage rate has a positive effect on the reduction of costs of GPR surveys, and thus its more widespread use in archaeology, the increased spatial sampling for the first time allows for the high‐resolution imaging of relatively small archaeological structures, such as for example 25 cm wide post‐holes of Iron Age buildings or the brick pillars of Roman floor heating systems, permitting much improved archaeological interpretations of the collected data. We present the state‐of‐the‐art in large‐scale high‐resolution archaeological GPR prospection, covering hardware and software technology and fieldwork methodology as well as the closely related issues of processing and interpretation of the huge data sets. Application examples from selected European archaeological sites illustrate the progress made.

Since 2010 the Stonehenge Hidden Landscapes Project (SHLP) has undertaken extensive archaeological prospection across much of the landscape surrounding Stonehenge. These remote sensing and geophysical surveys have revealed a significant number of new sites and landscape features whilst providing new information on many previously known monuments. The project goal to integrate multimethod mapping over large areas of the landscape has also provided opportunities to re‐interpret the landscape context of individual monuments and, in the case of the major henge at Durrington Walls, to generate novel insights into the structure and sequence of a monument which has attracted considerable research attention over many decades. This article outlines the recent work of the SHLP and the results of the survey at Durrington Walls that shed new light on this enigmatic monument including a site ‘hidden’ within the monument.

Abstract

The complementary use of various archaeological prospection data sets offers a series of new possibilities for the investigation of prehistoric settlements. In addition to the separate interpretations of the single methods, the implementation of image fusion provides an additional tool to obtain an even higher degree of data integration during the interpretation process. To investigate some possibilities and risks of image fusion, a procedure frequently used in the medical field but rarely applied in archaeology, various algorithms inside a dedicated MATLAB toolbox TAIFU (Toolbox for Archaeological Image FUsion) were tested on the geophysical prospection data from an Iron Age settlement near Vesterager in West Jutland, Denmark. The Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Archaeological Prospection and Virtual Archaeology had conducted large-scale, high-resolution ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and magnetometry surveys at the site in 2014, based on its discovery by the Ringkøbing Museum through aerial photos and the results of a follow-up excavation in 2009. The aim was to determine if, and to what extent, geophysical prospection together with a novel integrative interpretational approach was able to add more detailed information to an