Counting with the invisible record? The role of LiDAR in the interpretation of megalithic landscapes in south‐western Iberia (Extremadura, Alentejo and Beira Baixa)

Abstract

The megalithic sites from southwest Iberia represent one of the largest clusters of prehistoric monuments in Europe from the Neolithic and Copper Age (fifth and third millennia cal BC). Unlike other regions from western Europe, there has not been a recent effort to map the distribution of these kinds of burials across this vast territory. Therefore, this article aims to collect geographic information from three regions of southwest Iberia (Alentejo and Beira Baixa from Portugal and Extremadura from Spain) and to compare the archaeological evidence between different landscape units. We have mapped already known megaliths (ca 2000) and settlements (ca 1500) in this area. Moreover, through the interpretation of light detection and ranging (LiDAR) datasets, we have identified new walled enclosures and megaliths in the Extremadura region (Spain), the only one of the three where LiDAR data are available.The new data reveals new connections between settlements, burials and other archaeological evidence. Finally, we discuss the impact that these new data have on a new overall interpretation of megalithic landscapes from the Iberian Peninsula, stressing also the potential risks that the massive application of remote sensing can have in the production of archaeological knowledge.

The Integration of Lidar and Legacy Datasets Provides Improved Explanations for the Spatial Patterning of Shell Rings in the American Southeast

“…With the growth of remote sensing as a tool for generating information about the archaeological record, we are now able to iteratively evaluate the degree to which earlier ground-based approaches generated representative samples of settlement pattern data and the efficacy of remotely identified features (Bennett et al 2013; Opitz and Herrmann 2018; Vining 2018). Such efforts are crucial for larger analyses, as the integration of remotely sensed observations with legacy datasets yields significantly greater sample sizes that offer more complete data on the processes responsible for the distribution and patterning of past settlements (e.g., Cerrillo-Cuenca and Bueno-Ramírez 2019; Ullah 2015). Here, we demonstrate one way these goals might be achieved through point-process modeling of data derived from semiautomated analysis of airborne lidar and legacy datasets.…”

Geographic Disparity in Machine Intelligence Approaches for Archaeological Remote Sensing Research

“…MI can provide a means of acquiring and deriving data from the archaeological record in systematic and reproducible ways, and by doing so can reveal substantial information that was previously overlooked. For example, the use of computer automation techniques to analyze remote sensing data has permitted researchers to map out cultural practices to their geographic extents [7,8], and fill important gaps in the archaeological record in other regions, thereby permitting for cross-regional comparisons and more robust analyses of past human activities [7,21]. These systematically acquired data provide key insights into sociopolitical organization, cultural boundaries, human-environmental relationships, and demographic changes.…”

“…The development of predictive models for archaeological site detection, which started in the 1980s with explosions in satellite and aerial image availability [52], were invaluable for expediting surveys and protecting these locations [53][54][55][56][57]. For example, in Spain and Portugal, the use of automated remote sensing analyses to record Iron Age settlement structures resulted in the detection and subsequent confirmation of over 300 new archaeological sites throughout the Iberian Peninsula over the past several years [7]. Additionally, recent work in Madagascar-which is critically understudied archaeologically-surveyed and identified over 70 new archaeological sites (and hundreds of potential sites) across an area of over 1000 km 2 over the past year [55].…”

“…Likewise, most automated archaeological studies focus on regions within well-funded nations (e.g., Europe [6]). For example, researchers in Spain used data collected from MI procedures to conduct an analysis of settlement distribution within Spain and Portugal and its environmental context using an unprecedented sample size and geographic extent [7]. This provided new insight into the similarities of habitations in the Iberian Peninsula that were previously unknown.…”

“…provides powerful mechanisms for collecting more complete and systematic information from remote sensing instruments to inform researchers about the archaeological record. MI, in turn, can permit for more comprehensive-and reproducible-research into important anthropological questions [4][5][6][7][8].…”