Spatial Analysis In Archaeology Research Articles

Predictive spatial analysis for a critical assessment of the preservation potential of Palaeolithic record in the Leiria region (central Portugal)

Predictive spatial analysis in archaeology refers to the use of geostatistical and computational techniques to assess the relationships between the distribution of archaeological sites and the environmental context. It is increasingly becoming an essential tool in scientific-academic research and rescue archaeology. In the interconnection between these two working contexts, this study aims to explore the advantages of applying an inductive approach, combining Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and geostatistical methods, to identify areas with different degrees of probability for the preservation of the Palaeolithic record in the lower valley of the Lis River (Leiria region, central Portugal). Topographic, hydrographic, geological, and geomorphological data were collected, processed, and integrated into a spatial database, using a GIS, to define the environmental conditioning factors. After applying a spatial multicollinearity procedure, slope, topographical position index, cost-weighted distance to access the watercourses, heat load index and lithology were chosen as input variables for the predictive modelling. Archaeological data, corresponding to the location of known Palaeolithic sites, were also retrieved from the official records. Three models were implemented using regression and multi-criteria methods; for Model 1 a Generalised Additive Model (GAM) was applied, while for Model 2 and Model 3 two distinct combinations of Probabilistic Frequency Ratio (PFR) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) were used. The spatial cross-tabulation between the obtained predictive maps and the location of the known Palaeolithic sites shows that all the models are acceptable. However, the combinations of PFR + AHP seem to evidence greater efficacy compared to the GAM. Model 3 offers the best performance (90%), followed by Model 2 (87%) and Model 1 (68%). Possible sources of inaccuracies in the input data and the spatial modelling results were critically discussed. Model 3 generated the most robust and reliable predictive prototype map. The maps produced can serve local and regional agencies as a complement and aid decision-making in public policies for spatial planning, and in the conservation/management of cultural heritage. These cartographic representations can provide quicker identification of areas of interest, for example, in the context of rescue archaeology, along with a substantial reduction in time and costs for project promoters, as well as helping in the environmental impact assessments.

The Use of 3D Photogrammetry in the Analysis, Visualization, and Dissemination of the Indigenous Archaeological Heritage of the Greater Antilles

Abstract The development of digital technologies and the use of advanced photogrammetry programs for modeling archaeological excavations and sites have opened new possibilities for spatial analysis in archaeology and the reconstruction of archaeological contexts. In addition, these tools allow us to visually preserve the features of archaeological sites for future use and facilitate the dissemination of archaeological heritage to local communities and the general public. This paper summarizes 3D photographic visualization of three cave art sites (Los Cayucos and Cueva No. 1 in Punta del Este, Cuba, and José María Cave in the Dominican Republic) and two burial spaces (Canímar Abajo and Playa del Mango, Cuba) using photogrammetry software. The application of these novel methods at the cave art sites allowed us to visualize faint pictographs that were invisible to the naked eye, to better define the shapes of petroglyphs and to reconstruct the position of lost/removed panels. At the burial sites, 3D modeling allowed us to register the archaeological context with greater precision. The use of 3D modeling will improve spatial analysis and data safeguarding in Cuban archaeology. Moreover, 3D movies are an effective way to disseminate knowledge and connect local communities with their cultural heritage, while reducing the impact of public visits to remote or endangered sites.

Unbinding Diversity Measures in Archaeology Using GIS

Thirty years ago, a seminal volume drew together leaders in the field who were working on quantifying diversity in archaeological assemblages, Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology (Leonard and Jones, eds. 1989). While several papers identified space as a critical factor in structuring diversity, this concept was largely unaddressed and the analyses presented remained intrasite in scope. This was certainly due, in part, to the analytic and conceptual limitations of spatial analysis in archaeology in the late 1980s. Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology came out just before the geospatial revolution hit full swing in the field and the capabilities of today’s geospatial technologies were unimaginable at the time. Now, thirty years later, the desire to analyze diversity across multiple sites from entire regions is easy to realize computationally. Nevertheless, key challenges identified in the original volume about quantifying diversity persist. While one can measure variation to identify diversity, we still need to understand what that means and how the categories we use to compute diversity are related to actual variation in past behavior(s) of interest. We explore various geospatial approaches that can help untether diversity analyses from traditional site-based frameworks. We argue that centering the experiences of the people producing and, importantly, perceiving the variation extant in their landscape is essential, as these personal experiences structured the past diversity we aim to study.

Spatial analysis in archaeology. A study of case: Hagia Triada, Crete

Este trabalho exemplifica o emprego da análise espacial em um sítio arqueológico do Mediterrâneo e estará centrado em uma análise de Hagia Triada, assentamento localizado na ilha de Creta, durante o Período Minóico Recente III (1430-1100 a.C.), conhecido como também como Período Micênico por conta da forte presença de traços da cultura micênica na região. Observa-se neste sítio, a partir 1370 a.C (MRIII A 2) uma série de reconstruções e novas construções. Pretende- -se, com este estudo, investigar as estruturas construídas no sítio e explicar o possível aparecimento, na área norte, de evidências arquitetônicas similares às presentes nos assentamentos micênicos continentais: mégaron, stoa e um espaço público aberto (identificado como uma espécie de ágora). As novas construções em Hagia Triada seriam imediatamente posteriores à destruição do palácio de Cnossos e assim o novo arranjo espacial do sítio poderia configurar, segundo os escavadores do sítio, uma tentativa da elite micênica em instituir uma capital administrativa no sul vinculada a um reino micênico centrado em Cnossos. Neste sentido o estudo dos edifícios de Hagia Triada não pode ser realizado sem se levar em consideração as relações políticas entre a Planície de Messara - área em que o sítio de insere juntamente com o palácio de Festos e o porto de Commos - e o centro-norte da ilha, i.e., a região do palácio de Cnossos

Book reviews

AbstractSpace and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. Elizabeth C. Robertson, Jeffrey D. Seibert, Deepika C. Fernandez, Marc U. Zender (Editors), 2006. University of Calgary Press, Calgary, Alberta, and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico. xxiv + 406 pp., $49.95 Canadian from Calgary, $60.00 U.S. from New Mexico (softcover).

Space and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. By Elizabeth C. Robertson, Jeffrey D. Seibert, Deepika C. Fernandez, and Marc U. Zender.

<i>Space and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology</i>. By Elizabeth C. Robertson, Jeffrey D. Seibert, Deepika C. Fernandez, and Marc U. Zender.

Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

Most people recognise that their patterns of personal behaviour are defined and restricted by their living space. It is, therefore, highly likely that, as the human race evolved from its earliest form as hunters and gatherers, living together in groups in caves or open-air sites, to the urban, industrialised communities of today, changes in human space have had a profound effect on human behaviour patterns. This volume is devoted to a study of archaeological and statistical methods for discovering patterned behaviour as it relates to intrasite data. The individual contributions cover a broad spectrum of theoretical and methodological perspectives and present a range of applications from investigations of early hominid activity at Olduvai Gorge, simple and complex village societies, and the Mesoamerican metropolis of Teotihucan to a medieval Turkish fortress and modern Aboriginal sites in Australia

Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. By Harold Hietala.

<i>Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology</i>. By Harold Hietala.

Integrating pattern and context in spatial archaeology

Traditional approaches to intrasite spatial analysis in archaeology have concentrated on identifying associations among classes of artifacts over a site surface. This focus has tended to ignore the possible effects of contextual constraints on inter-class relationships, for example the “gravity effects” of hearth features on object deposition. Consequently, sets of co-occurring artifact classes defined in space are usually ascribed behavioural significance as “tool kits”, even though they may represent unrelated objects simply discarded into the same spatial location. This paper attempts to illustrate this problem through contextual integration of artifact and feature distributions. Quantitative methods are employed to carry out contextual spatial analysis of artifact distributions from the Upper Palaeolithic rockshelter site Le Flageolet I (Dordogne, France). Results indicate that associations among artifact classes in space might be constrained by feature locations at Le Flageolet I and that contextual interpretations are warranted for the observed inter-class relations.

Heuristic Approaches to Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

This article discusses an approach to spatial analysis which is more closely tailored to archaeological objectives and archaeological data than are more "traditional" quantitative techniques such as nearest neighbor analysis. Heuristic methods, methods which make use of the problem context and which are guided in part by intuitively derived "rules," are discussed in general and with reference to the problem of spatial analysis in archaeology. A preliminary implementation of such a method is described and applied to artificial settlement data and artifact distributions from the Magdalenian camp of Pincevent. Finally, the prospects for further development of heuristic methods are elaborated.

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology

Preface 1. Introduction 2. Archaeological distribution maps: a quantified approach and associated problems 3. Point pattern analysis 4. Some models for settlement patterns 5. The distribution of single artefact types 6. The association between distributions 7. The relationship between sites and other features 8. Conclusion Appendix Index.

Review: On the Use of Input—Output Models for Regional Planning, Forecasting Transportation Impacts upon Land Use, Estimation of Stochastic Input—Output Models, the Changing Spatial Structure of American Cities, Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, Environmental Impact Assessment, Growth Management and the Comprehensive Plan, Water Politics and Public Involvement, Main Street: Windsor to Quebec City, Guide to Official Statistics, Future Land Use: Energy,

Review: On the Use of Input—Output Models for Regional Planning, Forecasting Transportation Impacts upon Land Use, Estimation of Stochastic Input—Output Models, the Changing Spatial Structure of American Cities, Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, Environmental Impact Assessment, Growth Management and the Comprehensive Plan, Water Politics and Public Involvement, Main Street: Windsor to Quebec City, Guide to Official Statistics, Future Land Use: Energy,

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology.

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology.

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. By IanHodderand CliveOrton

(1977). Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. By Ian Hodder and Clive Orton. Archaeological Journal: Vol. 134, No. 1, pp. 448-449.