Surface Survey: Method and Strategies

  • Simon J. HoldawayEmail author
  • Joshua Emmitt
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_1500-2

Introduction

Archaeologists developed surface survey methods in regions with abundant surface artifacts where these artifacts are visible today because of the action of a variety of geomorphic processes often leading to deflation (see Deflation Archaeology) or due to the concentration of artifacts near the surface. In regions of the Mediterranean, for example, cultivation means that fragmentary ceramics are often abundant and highly visible. Surface survey in the form of “plow zone” archaeology developed accordingly, allowing mapping of the distribution of ceramics as well as other artifact types and features like house mounds. In some regions of Central and North America, good surface visibility led to the development of similar approaches. In other regions, stone artifacts are abundant, and at times hyper-abundant, in surface deposits (Foley and Lahr 2015). In these cases, surface survey strategies have developed to analyze stone artifact distributions. More recently, the advent of...

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

References

  1. Bettinger, R. 1993. Archaeology: Distributional archaeology. James I. Ebert. American Anthropologist 95 (3): 749–750.  https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1993.95.3.02a00400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bevan, A., and J. Conolly. 2009. Modelling spatial heterogeneity and nonstationarity in artifact-rich landscapes. Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (4): 956–964.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2008.11.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bintliff, J.L. 2000. The concepts of ‘site’ and ‘offsite’ archaeology in surface artefact survey. In Non-destructive techniques applied to landscape archaeology, ed. M. Pasquinucci and F. Trement, 200–215. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  4. Bintliff, J., E. Farinetti, K. Sarri, and R. Sebastiani. 2006. Landscape and early farming settlement dynamics in central Greece. Geoarchaeology 21 (7): 665–674.  https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.20132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanton, R.E. 2001. Mediterranean myopia. Antiquity 75 (289): 627–629.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00088918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caraher, W.R., D. Nakassis, and D.K. Pettigrew. 2006. Siteless survey and intensive data collection in an artifact-rich environment: Case studies from the Eastern Corinthia, Greece. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 19 (1): 7–43.  https://doi.org/10.1558/jmea.2006.19.1.7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caton-Thompson, G., and E.W. Gardner. 1934. The desert Fayum. London: The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britian and Ireland.Google Scholar
  8. Charman, P.E.V., and B.W. Murphy, eds. 2000. Soils: Their properties and management. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Chase, A.F., D.Z. Chase, C.T. Fisher, S.J. Leisz, and J.F. Weishampel. 2012. Geospatial revolution and remote sensing LiDAR in Mesoamerican archaeology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (32): 12916–12921.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1205198109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cherry, J.F. 2003. Archaeology beyond the site: Regional survey and its future. In Theory and practice in Mediterranean archaeology, ed. J.K. Papadopoulos and R.M. Leventhal, 137–160. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.Google Scholar
  11. Davies, B., S.J. Holdaway, and P.C. Fanning. 2016. Modelling the palimpsest: An exploratory agent-based model of surface archaeological deposit formation in a fluvial landscape. The Holocene 26 (3): 450–463.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683615609754
  12. Dincauze, D.F. 2000. Environmental archaeology: Principles and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Douglass, M.J., S.J. Holdaway, P.C. Fanning, and J.I. Shiner. 2008. An assessment and archaeological application of cortex measurement in lithic assemblages. American Antiquity 73 (3): 513–526.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0002731600046849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Douglass, M.J., S.J. Holdaway, and P.C. Fanning. 2017. Selected samples: The nature of silcrete adzes in the formation of Australian stone artefact assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 15: 578.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.04.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duffy, P.R. 2015. Site size hierarchy in middle-range societies. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 37 (Suppl C): 85–99.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2014.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ebert, J.I. 1992. Distributional archaeology. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fanning, P.C., and S.J. Holdaway. 2004. Artifact visibility at open sites in Western New South Wales, Australia. Journal of Field Archaeology 29 (3–4): 255–271.  https://doi.org/10.1179/jfa.2004.29.3-4.255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fanning, P.C., S.J. Holdaway, E.J. Rhodes, and T.G. Bryant. 2009. The surface archaeological record in arid Australia: Geomorphic controls on preservation, exposure, and visibility. Geoarchaeology 24 (2): 121–146.  https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.20259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Feinman, G.M., and L.M. Nicholas. 2013. Settlement patterns of the Ejutla Valley, Oaxaca, Mexico: A diachronic macroscale perspective. Fieldiana Anthropology 43: 1–330.  https://doi.org/10.3158/0071-4739-43.00.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fisher, C.T., J.C. Fernández-Diaz, A.S. Cohen, O. Neil Cruz, A.M. Gonzáles, S.J. Leisz, F. Pezzutti, R. Shrestha, and W. Carter. 2016. Identifying ancient settlement patterns through LiDAR in the Mosquitia region of Honduras. PLoS One 11 (8): e0159890.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foley, R.A. 1981. Off-site archaeology: An alternative approach for the short-sited. In Pattern of the past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke, ed. Ian Hodder, Glynn L. Isaac, and Norman Hammond, 157–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Foley, R.A., and M.M. Lahr. 2015. Lithic landscapes: Early human impact from stone tool production on the central Saharan environment. PLoS One 10 (3): e0116482.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Given, M. 2013. Commotion, collaboration, conviviality: Mediterranean survey and the interpretation of landscape. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 26 (1): 3–26.  https://doi.org/10.1558/jmea.v26i1.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gregory, T.E. 2004. Less is better: The quality of ceramic evidence from archaeological survey and practical proposals for low impact survey in a Mediterranean context. In Mediterranean archaeological landscapes: Current issues, ed. E. Athanassopoulos and L. Wandsnider, 15–36. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.Google Scholar
  25. Holdaway, S.J., and W. Wendrich, eds. 2017. The desert Fayum reinvestigated: The early to mid-Holocene landscape archaeology of the Fayum North Shore, Egypt, Monumenta archaeologica. Vol. 39. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.Google Scholar
  26. Holdaway, S.J., M.J. Douglass, and P.C. Fanning. 2012. Landscape scale and human mobility: Geoarchaeological evidence from Rutherfords Creek, New South Wales, Australia. In Landscape archaeology between art and science from a multi- to an interdisciplinary approach, ed. S.J. Kluiving and E.B. Guttmann-Bond, 279–294. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Holdaway, S.J., M.J. Douglass, and P.C. Fanning. 2013. A new ecological framework for understanding human-environment interactions in arid Australia. In Archaeology in environment and technology intersections and transformations, ed. D. Frankel, S. Lawrence, and J. Webb, 51–68. Melbourne: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Holdaway, S.J., G. King, M. Douglass, and P.C. Fanning. 2015. Human–environment interactions at regional scales: The complex topography hypothesis applied to surface archaeological records in Australia and North America. Archaeology in Oceania 50: 57–68.  https://doi.org/10.1002/arco.5054
  29. Kowalewski, S. 2008. Regional Settlement Pattern Studies. Journal of Archaeological Research 16 (3): 225–285.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-008-9020-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ladefoged, T.N., M.D. McCoy, G.P. Asner, P.V. Kirch, C.O. Puleston, O.A. Chadwick, and P.M. Vitousek. 2011. Agricultural potential and actualized development in Hawai’i: An airborne LiDAR survey of the leeward Kohala field system (Hawai’i Island). Journal of Archaeological Science 38 (12): 3605–3619.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.08.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Markofsky, S., and A. Bevan. 2012. Directional analysis of artefact distributions: A case study from the Murghab Delta, Turkmenistan. Journal of Archaeological Science 39: 428–439.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.09.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McCoy, M.D., and T.N. Ladefoged. 2009. New developments in the use of spatial technology in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 17: 263–296.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-009-9030-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Menze, B.H., and J.A. Ur. 2012. Mapping patterns of long-term settlement in Northern Mesopotamia at a large scale. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (14): E778–E787.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115472109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meyer, N., and T.E. Gregory. 2003. Pottery collection, pottery analysis, and GIS mapping. In The Sydney Cyprus survey project: Social approaches to regional archaeological survey, ed. M. Given and A.B.. Knapp, 48–52. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.Google Scholar
  35. Morton, S.R., D.M. Stafford Smith, C.R. Dickman, D.L. Dunkerley, M.H. Friedel, R.R.J. McAllister, J.R.W. Reid, D.A. Roshier, M.A. Smith, F.J. Walsh, G.M. Wardle, I.W. Watson, and M. Westoby. 2011. A fresh framework for the ecology of arid Australia. Journal of Arid Environments 75 (4): 313–329.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2010.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Phillipps, R., S.J. Holdaway, R. Ramsey, J. Emmitt, W. Wendrich, and V. Linseele. 2016. Lake level changes, lake edge basins and the paleoenvironment of the Fayum north shore, Egypt, during the early to mid-Holocene. Open Quaternary 2 (2): 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.5334/oq.19.Google Scholar
  37. Rogers, A.R. 2000. On equifinality in faunal analysis. American Antiquity 65: 709–723.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2694423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rosenswig, R.M., R. López-Torrijos, C.E. Antonelli, and R.R. Mendelsohn. 2013. Lidar mapping and surface survey of the Izapa state on the tropical piedmont of Chiapas, Mexico. Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (3): 1493–1507.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.10.034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sherratt, A. 1980. Water, soil and seasonality in early cereal cultivation. World Archaeology 11 (3): 313–330.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1980.9979770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stafford Smith, D.M., and S.R. Morton. 1990. A framework for the ecology of arid Australia. Journal of Arid Environments 18: 255–278.Google Scholar
  41. Stark, B.L., and C.P. Garraty. 2008. Parallel archaeological and visibility survey in the western lower Papaloapan Basin, Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 33 (2): 177–196.  https://doi.org/10.1179/009346908791071286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tartaron, T.F., T.E. Gregory, D.J. Pullen, J.S. Noller, R.M. Rothaus, J.L. Rife, L. Tzortzopoulou-Gregory, R. Schon, W.R. Caraher, D.K. Pettegrew, and D. Nakassis. 2006. The eastern Korinthia archaeological survey: Integrated methods for a dynamic landscape. Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 75 (4): 453–523. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25068001
  43. Terrenato, N. 2004. Sample size matters! The paradox of global trends and local surveys. In Side-by-side survey: Comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean, ed. S.E. Alcock and J.F. Cherry, 36–48. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  44. Wengrow, D. 2006. The archaeology of early Egypt: Social transformations in North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Anthropology, School of Social SciencesUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Section editors and affiliations

  • Sandra Monton Subias
    • 1
  • Bisserka Gaydarska
    • 2
  1. 1.Departament d'HumanitatsICREA/Universitat Pompeu Fabra.BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of ArchaeologyDurham UniversityDurhamUK