Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geomagnetometry for Archaeology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sensing the Past

Part of the book series: Geotechnologies and the Environment ((GEOTECH,volume 16))

Abstract

In past decades, magnetic surveying had become popular as one of the most effective techniques supporting archaeological prospecting. This is possible because the existence of susceptibility contrasts between the cover soil and several buried finds often causes detectable anomalies. More recently, great advances were made in signal enhancement and boundary analysis of potential field anomalies, thanks to methods allowing a suitable differentiation of the field without making the process unstable. New three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques provided an estimate of the magnetization distribution within the subsoil by means of high-resolution images of the source distribution. Most of these methods are fast and reliable in the presence of shallow and compact sources, just as in the case of the sources usually occurring in archaeological prospecting. Nevertheless, great effort was spent by the scientific community to overcome serious problems causing low signal-to-noise ratio in the measurements. This chapter provides a step-by-step description of technical solutions adopted to improve the quality of data and to perform a better interpretation of the magnetic anomalies usually associated to the presence of archaeological finds. To this end, a summary of case histories is illustrated giving a general framework of the latest progress in archaeo-magnetism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aitken MJ (1958) Magnetic prospecting. I. The Water Newton survey. Archaeometry 1:24–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold JB III (1996) Magnetometer survey of La Salle’s ship the Belle. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 25:243–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asandulesei A (2011) Geophysical Prospecting Techniques Used in archaeology magnetometry. In: Studia antiqua et archaeologica, XVII, Editura Universității Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Iaşi, 5–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Baniamerian J, Fedi M, Oskooi B (2016) Compact depth from extreme points: a tool for fastpotential field imaging. Geophys Prospect 64:1386–1398. doi:0.1111/1365-2478.12365

    Google Scholar 

  • Baranov W (1975) Potential fields and their transformation in applied geophysics, pp 1–72. Geoexploration monograph series, vol 6, 121 pp, Gebruder Borntraeger, Stuttgart, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakely JR, Simpson RW (1986) Approximating edges of source bodies from magnetic or gravity anomalies. Geophysics 51(7)

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakely RJ (1995) Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce JI, Reinhardt EG, Raban A, Pozza MR (2004) Marine magnetic survey of a submerged Roman Harbour, Caesarea Maritima, Israel. Int J Nautic Archaeol 33:122–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cella F, Fedi M, Florio G (2009) Toward a full multiscale approach to interpret potential fields. Geophysical Prospecting 57:543–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cella F, Paoletti V, Florio G, Fedi M (2015) Characterizing elements of urban planning in Magna Graecia using geophysical techniques: the case of Tirena (Southern Italy). Archaeol Prospect 22:207–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cella F, Fedi M (2015) High-resolution geophysical 3D imaging for archaeology by magnetic and EM data: the case of the iron age settlement of Torre Galli, Southern Italy. Surv Geophys 36:831–850. doi:10.1007/s10712-015-9341-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicala L, Grifa C, Franciosi L, Langella A, Germinario C, Morra V, (2013) Pottery production from Pian della Tirena, NoceraTerinese (Cz). Archaeometry: comparing experiences, Naus Editoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciminale M, Loddo M (2001) Aspects of magnetic data processing. Archaeol Prospect 8:239–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark A (1990) Seeing beneath the soil. Batsford, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper GRJ, Cowan DR (2006) Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Comput Geosci 32:1585–1591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordell L., Grauch V.J.S., 1985. Mapping basement magnetization zones from aeromagnetic data in the San Juan basin, New Mexico. In: Hinze WJ (ed) The utility of regional gravity and magnetic anomaly maps. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, pp 181–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Eder-Hinterleitner A, Neubauer W, Melichar P (1996) Restoring magnetic Anomalies. Archaeol Prospect 3:185–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassbinder JWE, Stanjek H (1993) Occurrence of bacterial magnetite in soils from archaeological sites. Archaeologia Polona 31:117–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedi M, Florio G (2001) Detection of potential fields source boundaries by enhanced horizontal derivative method. Geophys Prospect 49:40–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fedi M (2002) Multiscale derivative analysis: a new tool to enhance detection of gravity source boundaries at various scales. Geophys Res Lett 29(2):1029, 16–1/16–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedi M, Florio G (2003) Decorrugation and removal of directional trends of magnetic fields by the wavelet transform: application to archeological areas. Geophys Prospect 51(4):261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fedi M (2007) DEXP: a fast method to determine the depth and the structural index of potential field sources. Geophysics 72(1):I1–I11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedi M, Pilkington M (2012) Understanding imaging methods for potential field data. Geophysics 77(1):G13–G24

  • Fedi M, Quarta T (1998) Wavelet analysis for the regional-residual and local separation of potential field anomalies. Geophys Prospect 46(5):507–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florio G, Fedi M, Pasteka R (2014) On the estimation of the structural index from low-pass filtered magnetic data. Geophysics 79(6):J67–J80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney C (2008) Detecting trends in the prediction of the buried past: a review of geophysical techniques in archaeology. Archaeometry 50:313–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson T (1986) Magnetic prospection on prehistoric sites in western Canada. Geophysics 51:553–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeng Y, Lee YL, Chen CY, Lin MJ (2003) Integrated signal enhancements in magnetic investigation in archaeology. J Appl Geophys 53:31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu S, Coppens D, Shyu C (1998) Depth to magnetic source using the generalized analytic signal. Geophysics 63:1947–1957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iglewicz B, Hoaglin DC (1993) How to detect and handle outliers. ASQ Press, Milwaukee

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson DO, Lipo CP, Ambos EL (2003) Application of advanced geophysical methods and engineering principles in an emerging scientific archaeology. First Break 21:51–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Linford NT (2006) The application of geophysical methods to archaeological prospection. Rep Prog Phys 69:2205–2257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher BA, Taylor RM (1988) Formation of ultrafine-grained magnetite in soils. Nature 336(6197):368–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maniscalco F, Severino N (2002) Recenti ipotesi sulla conformazione del Lacus Baianus, Ostraka. Rivista di Antichità 11(1):167–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan P, Rajagopalan S (1995) Image enhancement of aeromagnetic data using automatic gain control. Explorat Geophys 25(4):173–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Nabighian MN (1984) Toward a three-dimensional automatic interpretation of potential field data via generalized Hilbert transforms: fundamental relations. Geophysics 49:780–786

    Google Scholar 

  • Nabighian MN, Grauch VJS, Hansen RO, LaFehr TR, Li Y, Peirce JW, Phillips JD, Ruder ME, (2005) The historical development of the magnetic method in exploration. Geophysics 70:33ND–61ND

    Google Scholar 

  • Orsi P (2004) Le necropoli preelleniche calabresi. Torre Galli, Canale, Ianchina, Patariti. FPE-Franco Pancallo Ed., ISBN 8864561323, 9788864561325 (in Italian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacciarelli M (1999) Torre Galli. La necropoli della prima età del ferro (scavi di Paolo Orsi 1922–23). Rubbettino Ed., Iraceb., ISBN 8872847257 (in Italian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paoletti V, Secomandi M, Piromallo M, Giordano F, Fedi M, Rapolla A (2005) Magnetic survey at the submerged archaeological site of Baia, Naples, Southern Italy. Archaeol Prospect 12(1):51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paoletti V, Fedi M, Florio G, Rapolla A (2007) Localized cultural de-noising of high-resolution aeromagnetic data. Geophys Prospect 55:412–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pappalardo U, Russo F (2001) Il bradisismo dei Campi Flegrei (Campania): dati geomorfologicied evidenze archeologiche. In Forma Maris, eds. Gianfrotta P.A., Maniscalco F. Forum Internazionale di Archeologia Subacquea, Pozzuoli(Naples), September 22–24, 1998. Massa Editore, Napoli, 107–129 (in Italian).

    Google Scholar 

  • Piro S, Sambuelli L, Godio A, Taormina R (2007) Beyond image analysis in processing archaeomagnetic geophysical data: case studies of chamber tombs with dromos. Near Surface Geophys 5(6):405–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn R, Bull JM, Dix JK, Adams JR (1997) The Mary Rose site – geophysical evidence for palaeo-scour marks. Int J Naut Archaeol 26:3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn R, Breen C, Forsythe W, Barton K, Rooney S, O’Hara D (2002) Integrated geophysical surveys of the French Frigate La Surveillante (1797), Bantry Bay, Co. Cork, Ireland. J Archaeol Sci 29:413–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Roest WR, Verhoef J, Pilkington M, (1992) Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D analytic signal. Geophysics 57:116–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosner B (1983) Percentage points for a generalised ESD many-outlier procedure. Technometrics 25:165–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scognamiglio E (1993) Il rilievo di Baia sommersa. Note tecniche e osservazioni. Archeologia Subacquea. Studi, ricerche e documenti I:65–70 (in Italian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Smekalova T, Abrahamsen N, Voss O (1996) Magnetic investigation of a Roman/Early Germanic Iron Age iron-smelting center at Snorup, Denmark. In: Proceedings of the sixth Nordic conference on the application of scientific methods in archaeology 1993. ArkæologiskeRapporter No. 1, Esbjerg Museum, pp 227–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Stampolidis A, Tsokas GN (2012) Use of edge delineating methods in interpreting magnetic archaeological prospection data. Archaeol Prospect. 19(2):123–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg RS (1987) Archaeomagnetism and magnetic anomalies in the American Southwest. Geophysics 52:368–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scollar I, Tabbagh A, Hesse A, Herzog I (1990) Archaeological prospecting and remote sensing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavrev P, Gerovska D (2000) Magnetic field transforms with low sensitivity to the direction of source magnetization and high. Geophys Prospect 48:317–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabbagh J (1999) Filtrage numérique des donnes géophysiques. In: Pasquinucci M, Trément F (eds) Non-destructive techniques applied to landscape archaeology. Oxbow Books, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocco Sciarelli G (1983) Baia, inquadramento storico e topografico. In: Baia—il Ninfeo Imperiale sommerso di Punta Epitaffio. Edizione Banca Sannitica, Naples, pp 17–24 (in Italian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Verduzco B, Fairhead JD, Green CM, Mackenzie C (2004) New insights into magnetic derivatives. The Leading Edge 22:116–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weymouth JW (1986) Archaeological site surveying program at the University of Nebraska. Geophysics 51:538–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynn JC (1986) Archaeological prospection: an introduction to the special issue. Geophysics 51:533–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijns C, Perez C, Kowalczyk P (2005) Theta map: edge detection in magnetic data. Geophysics 70:39–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, dell’Ambiente e delle Risorse, Università di Napoli Federico II, Largo san Marcellino 10, 80138, Naples, Italy

    M. Fedi, G. Florio & V. Paoletti

  2. Dipartimento di Biologia, Ecologia e Scienze della Terra, Università della Calabria, 87036, Rende, CS, Italy

    F. Cella

  3. INNOVA SCARL, Via Campi Flegrei 34, 80078, Pozzuoli, NA, Italy

    M. La Manna

Authors
  1. M. Fedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Cella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Florio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. La Manna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. V. Paoletti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Fedi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CNR-IBAM Institute of Archaeological and Monumental Heritage, Tito Scalo, Potenza, Italy

    Nicola Masini

  2. Institute for Electromagnetic Sensing of the Environment (CNR-IREA), Napoli, Italy

    Francesco Soldovieri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fedi, M., Cella, F., Florio, G., Manna, M.L., Paoletti, V. (2017). Geomagnetometry for Archaeology. In: Masini, N., Soldovieri, F. (eds) Sensing the Past. Geotechnologies and the Environment, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50518-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation