Using Geophysics to Characterize a Prehistoric Burial Mound in Romania

Abstract

A geophysical investigation was carried across the M3 burial mound from Silvașu de Jos —Dealu Țapului, a tumuli necropolis in western Romania, where the presence of the Yamnaya people was certified archaeologically. For characterizing the inner structure of the mound, two conventional geophysical methods have been used: a geomagnetic survey and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT). The results allowed the mapping of the central features of the mound and the establishment of the relative stratigraphy of the mantle, which indicated at least two chronological phases of the usage of the mound. Archaeological excavations performed in the central part of the mound accurately validated the non-invasive geophysical survey and offered a valuable chronological record of the long-forgotten archaeological monument. Geophysical approaches proved to be an invaluable instrument for the exploration of the monument and suggest a fast constructive tool for the investigation of the entire necropolis which currently has a number of distinct mounds.

Results of geophysical methods in the study of the ancient settlement Dalvarzintepa (Uzbekistan)

“…An efficient solution has been demonstrated to be an integrated area of geophysical research that uses magnetic prospecting, ERT, and GPR to explore ancient sites. Archaeological investigations in numerous locations have led to the confirmation of such a complex of geophysical techniques (Zakirov et al 2022, Novikov et al 2020, Hegyi et al 2021.…”

Extended Tromograph Surveys for a Full Experimental Characterisation of the San Giorgio Cathedral in Ragusa (Italy)

“…Indeed, the importance of the analysis of the soil behaviour to the assessment of the whole built heritage system should not be neglected [ 3 ]. Nowadays, geophysical survey techniques are widely used as a strategic tool to characterise the soil and identify and investigate underground evidence, as for instance archaeological remains or even structural elements of the building [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. The widespread use of these methods of investigation is linked to their non-invasive character, their aptitude to be applied to different contexts, especially in urban areas and, in some applications, and the possibility of exploiting the ambient noise originated by natural (e.g., micro tremors, marine waves, wind, meteorological conditions) or anthropic (e.g., human activities, traffic, industrial machinery) sources of vibration [ 11 ].…”

Multi-Scale Geophysical Methodologies Applied to Image Archaeological Ruins at Various Depths in Highly Terraneous Sites

“…In a In such challenging cases, the role of geophysical surveys over large areas could be decisive to fill the knowledge gap and explore the buried targets at different depths with sufficient resolution. In addition, information about the location, depth, and dimensions of buried archaeological remains may be determined by means of geophysical investigation, which is carried out easily and quickly on the surface without disturbing or damaging the buried archaeological structures [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. However, the manifestation of buried archaeological features in geophysical surveys is complex.…”

“…The recent development of the multi-electrode acquisition system has increased the ability of the DCR method for 2D/3D imaging and mapping complex geological and archaeological buried structures with a good spatial resolution [15,[41][42][43][44]. The basic procedures and application of both methods in archaeological surveys, either individually or in combination, have been clearly described by several authors [7,16,28,35,[45][46][47][48].…”