Situating Remote Sensing in Anthropological Archaeology

Abstract

Productive applications of geophysics to anthropological questions in American archaeology necessarily involve specific research questions or agendas.While only some anthropological questions can be addressed by shallow geophysics, these techniquesprovide an opportunity to address someimportant questionsthat are fundamental to archaeology. One such agenda is the investigation of 'persistent places' , which is rooted in anthropological inquiry and which can be investigated, at least in part, by shallow geophysical techniques.For the next stage in the use of remote sensing that goesbeyondmere prospection, research agendasmust be clearlylinkedwithbroader theoreticalconcepts of what we term inquiry-based archaeogeophysics.Specifically with regard to the application ofgeophysics to the study of persistent places, we propose four categories of research that relate to the meaning, context and changing function of such places. These categories include: construction variation, continuity and discontinuity in the use of space, studying natural and/or culturallandscape modifications over time and space, and constancies in the use of space and architecture at the regional level. In order to illustrate these points, we provide examples from sites in Mexico and the USA that represent different time periods (2500 BC to AD 1000), adaptations (hunter^gatherers to intensive agriculturists), and levels of socio-political complexity (egalitarian to stratified societies).The use of geophysics at these persistent places contributes to our understanding of changes in the use of space and architecture through time.

Prospecting for New Questions: Integrating Geophysics to Define Anthropological Research Objectives and Inform Excavation Strategies at Monumental Sites

“…At both sites, the value of geophysics for prospection went well beyond simply locating subsurface features to excavate, though this step nevertheless played a crucial role. For one thing, the initial geophysical surveys at both Washausen and Garden Creek were designed to address, and then successfully answered, specific archaeological questions related to site extent and spatial organisation (as Thompson et al, [2011] have previously demonstrated). Both case studies show the value of undertaking extensive geophysical survey at the outset of an archaeological project for understanding the function and archaeological potential of a site.…”

“…Citing examples from the U.K., he determined this resulted from poor communication between geophysicists and archaeologists. Nearly two decades on, this issue is still commonplace in many regions; however, recent calls for the use of non-invasive methods "beyond mere prospection" (Conyers and Leckebusch, 2010) and for "inquiry-based geophysics" (Thompson et al, 2011) show that collaborative interactions between the two methodologies can accomplish more than either strategy used in isolation. For example, while traditional methods like surface collections, shovel testing, and excavation can identify cultural material and provide diagnostic dating evidence from a subset of subsurface features, extensive geophysical survey can assist in identifying the presence (or absence), type, organisation, and extent of buried features across a site, taskscape, or landscape.…”

“…Just as the dating of features is impossible without ground-truthing, site-wide interpretations are impossible --or at least inefficient --without geophysical mapping (e.g. Benech, 2007;Thompson et al, 2011).…”

“…Just as the dating of features is impossible without ground-truthing, site-wide interpretations are impossible --or at least inefficient --without geophysical mapping (e.g. Benech, 2007;Thompson et al, 2011).Perhaps more significantly, geophysical results can allow archaeologists to ask new site-and landscape-specific research questions that otherwise might not be considered. The potential of geophysics for actively contributing to the construction of research design is particularly salient in the American Southeast, where anthropological archaeologists are increasingly focusing on the use of space and architecture to understand social organisation, particularly at monumental sites (e.g.…”

Archaeological remote sensing in North America: Innovative techniques for anthropological applicationsEdited by Duncan P.McKinnon & Bryan S.Haley, the University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, AL, 2017, 304 pp., $59.95, ISBN 978–0–8173‐1959‐5 (hardcover), ISBN 978–0–8173‐9141‐6 (eBook)

“…As McKinnon and Haley explain (p. 2), this involves integration with anthropological theory and interpretations that go beyond simply mapping sites and locating features. They follow Aspinall, Gaffney, and Schmidt (), Kvamme (), and Thompson, Arnold, Pluckhahn, and VanDerwarker () in encouraging use as primary data for investigating, interpreting, evaluating and explaining the past. Case studies are organized into four major themes: (1) Site Structure and Community Organization; (2) Technological Transformation and Economic Change; (3) Archaeological Landscapes; and (4) Earthen Mound Construction and Composition.…”