new light on old sites


Leave a comment

Geophysical Survey Results

Data from the geophysical survey was downloaded onto a computer during our lunch break and at the end of the day. This allowed us to begin to ‘see’ the site as it unfolded very quickly, as well as allowing us to identify any problems with our survey technique, and in the case of any technical difficulties would could limit the amount of data loss. I for one, couldn’t wait to download the data! This blog post will briefly describe the process we undertook after the data was downloaded.

Raw Data

fieldbscrnshot

Field B showing grid (raw data)

Survey data downloaded from the magnetometers is considered ‘raw’. The data for each grid is stored separately and has to be compiled using software. Computer programmes do not know how to put each grid together, so you have to keep accurate notes when surveying!

We used GEOPLOT 3.0 to work with our data. Because we ended up grid-ing out each of the fields separately, we created compiled images for each individual field. That way, we could take the fences into account.

Data Processing

Once the grids for each field were compiled, we then had to ‘process’ the data. Processing corrects for the slight (but unavoidable) inaccuracies caused by the field slope, different gaits from different surveyors, and even very slight inaccuracies in the grid layout. It also helps to smooth out some of the data. Then the files are exported from GEOPLOT 3.0 and imported into GIS software (I used QGIS for this project). You can see a comparison of the raw data and the processed data below.

SWALL14 raw data

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Raw Data)

 

SWALL14 processed data

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Processed Data)

Interpretation

Based on the fully processed data and our understanding of the site from visits and the 1920s excavation report, we then began to interpret the survey.

Field A

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Field Names)

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Field Names)

Despite the visible earthwork in Field A, which is only faintly visible in the geophysical survey results (marked in blue), no other features of archaeological interest were visible. Dr Clay described this ring earthwork as an amphitheatre or ‘circus’ and considered it to be part of the settlement enclosure visible in Field B. It is unfortunate that the road that separates the two sites cuts through anything that may have indicated the relationship between the two features. However, given the other known dated evidence for both prehistoric and historic features in the immediate vicinity, there is no reason for this earthwork to be directly related to the Iron Age activity.

Field B, C, Ca

The linear features forming the ditch enclosure (marked in green) is particularly strong to the west (were it is visible on the surface), but also on the eastern side. The eastern portion of the ditch visible in field Ca may continue into the south-eastern corner of field C. It is possible that originally both ditches were connected along the southern side, but the road later cut through the site. Another, disconnected, linear feature far to the west of the enclosure ditch is also faintly visible on the survey results.

A number of roughly circular negative features (marked in red) are visible in the area that appears to be the inside of the enclosure. Many of these are likely to be the pits that Clay previously excavated, but it is not possible to exactly identify each pit.

There also seem to be several possible curvilinear features that may indicate round-structures (marked in purple). Clay was unaware that Iron Age people lived in roundhouses at the time of his excavations and instead believed that they lived in pits, so he didn’t know to look for evidence of roundhouses.

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Interpretation)

2014 Swallowcliffe Down, Wiltshire Geophysical Survey (Interpretation: Green=Visible Ditches, Blue=Visible Banks, Red=Negative Features, Purple=Ring?)

A full report with technical details about the survey is available here. 

Advertisements


1 Comment

Finds while geophysing – a flint blade from Swallowcliffe Down

While we were only conducting geophysical survey during the 2014 field season at Swallowcliffe Down, we did manage to find a single artefact; a small flint blade lying on the ground surface of Field B. While this particular kind of stone tool is not considered to be diagnostic of a specific period, it does indicate the potential for earlier occupations of the site to have taken place.

Small blade

The small blade recovered from Field B (photo by Frederick Foulds).

The presence of flint is ubiquitous within the chalk downloads of Wiltshire, occurring as nodules within the chalk bedrock. As a result, worked flint is commonly found throughout the area and Wiltshire has produced a wide range of flint artefacts, encompassing much of human and early hominin prehistory. Everything from Lower Palaeolithic Acheulian handaxes (750,000-300,000 years ago), to Neolithic (4, 000-2,500 BCE) and Bronze Age (2,500-800 BCE) flint blades have been discovered in this archaeologically rich region.

The site at Swallowcliffe Down is no different. The presence of flint in the area is provided by the abundant natural debris on the ground surface where it has eroded out or been cast up by agricultural processes. Therefore, it was no great surprise to find some evidence of prehistoric flintwork. However, given the amount of natural debris, we had to be certain that this was an actual humanly worked artefact. Fortunately, we have a number of different characteristics to look for when trying to determine if human hands created it.

Swallfinal

Some of the characteristics that indicate worked flint (illustration by Frederick Foulds).

In the picture above, you can see some of these characteristics. Many of these are the result of the way that flint fractures, as well as the method of manufacture employed by the flintknapper who produced the tool. On one side we see scars, which is evidence of previous flakes or blades that were removed from the original flint nodule, or core, prior to this one. The other side is relatively smooth and would originally have been inside the core. However, it also displays evidence that this was worked by human hands. We can clearly see a striking platform, where the nodule was struck to remove this blade. There is also a bulb of percussion – a raised area caused by the application of force when the flint was struck. In this case, the bulb is small and diffuse, which shows that the blade was produced using a ‘soft hammer’ technique; possibly using an antler hammer, or a punch. We can also see ripple marks – undulcations in the surface of the flint that expand from the point of percussion and show the direction that the flaking energy took when the flake was removed.

Finally, we can tell that this flake is archaeologically meaningful due to its patination. This is the colouration of the flint surface. Flint is usually a black or grey colour when freshly knapped. However, chemical changes to the flint surface can occur in the ground that can change its colour. In this case, much of the flint in the Swallowcliffe area displays a white patina. As the blade retains this patina, and does not show the black or grey expected of a fresh break, we can be confident that the tool is a product of the past.

The blade itself is rather small and slightly wider than expected. The typical classification of a flint blade is a flake that is “twice as long as it is wide”. However, its shape and the characteristic crest that runs down its centre, coupled with the evidence that it was humanly worked, make us confident in classifying it as this particular tool type. Its small size may also allow us to narrow this definition to what is commonly referred to as a ‘bladelet’.

As already mentioned, this particular tool type is relatively undiagnostic and it is hard to place this artefact within a specific period. Despite this, there have been finds from the area around Swallowcliffe village that have been dated to the Mesolithic (10,000-5,500 years ago) and later periods. In addition, evidence of lithic materials from the earlier Upper Palaeolithic , when blades first appeared in increased frequencies, are generally sparse within Wiltshire. Therefore, we can limit our understanding of when this tool may have been created, although we are still left with a rather extensive period of time. Nevertheless, the fact that human occupation and use of the landscape around Swallowcliffe Down may extend beyond the Bronze and Iron Age is a very exciting prospect and one that we hope to be able to explore in further detail as the New Lights on Old Sites project continues.

If you are interested in lithic analysis and want to find out more, we can recommend the following basic texts:

Flintknapping: making and understanding stone tools by John C. Whittaker

The nature and subsequent uses of flint by John Lord

Prehistoric flint work by Chris Butler

 Creative Commons License
The pictures within this post are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.


Leave a comment

Encounters On Swallowcliffe Down

Looking back at last summer’s photographs of the landscape at Swallowcliffe Down, it appears to be an area with few passers-by, and initially looks rather remote.  However, after spending the week there, we did meet quite a few people; the project created a variety of (all positive!) reactions from people passing by – there were those who knew we were coming, such as the very kind landowners who allowed us on their land, but we also seemed to surprise a few people.  The area is actually quite popular with dog walkers, cyclists and people who are just generally enjoying the scenery.  We met some very energetic people who were parascending and also runners for the local marathon (I’m sure also as energetic!).  Probably at least once or twice a day we got rather curious looks, followed by the question ‘are you doing what they do on time team?’

101_5630

 One question we also got asked regularly was if we were going to ‘dig holes’? to which the answer was ‘no’, but many of the people who we talked to knew a bit about what ‘Geophysics’ or ‘Geofizz’ was and I think a lot of this knowledge is thanks to the effect of programmes such as ‘Time Team’.  Programmes like this have led to an increase in the thirst for knowledge about archaeology, and public access to a plethora of projects demanded by the curiosity has arisen.  This, coupled with the dissemination of updates, results and future plans for archaeological projects through the internet (especially social media such as this blog!) has made such investigations accessible to many people who may have been previously excluded.

101_5628

This New Light on Old Sites Project still has many questions we wish to answer, but as we travel along our investigative journey, we would like to thank all of those who read our blog, stopped and had a chat with us, and asked questions about what we were doing on site.  Watch this space for answers and updates on Swallowcliffe Down and future projects, we look forward to meeting more people, answering your questions, and thanking you for your interest in the archaeology and our work.

 


Leave a comment

Geophysics Methodology 101 – Part Two

Geophysics Methodology 101 – Part Two    

Welcome back! Part One of this section discussed how we picked the areas to survey. The following sections discuss how you actually do geophysics fieldwork. It will be divided into the following primers:

  1. Drawing squares and making grids
  2. What’s that doohickey? Or, getting acquainted with your gradiometer
  3. Walk, walk, fieldwork baby
  4. Murphy’s Law

Ready? Let’s go!

Drawing squares and making grids

Remember this photograph?

Swallowcliffebiggrid

In geophysics, you want your data to be recorded within very specific areas. In our case, it was 30 by 30 meter grid squares. Ideally, you want your grids to be ready before you go out in the field, with all of the grid points input in your GPS unit. Theoretically, the crewmember with the GPS unit will turn it on and the machine will tell them exactly where the points are. The crewmember can then put down bamboo canes to mark the points of the grids. The rest of the team can then begin surveying almost immediately.

You can create these maps in software like ArcGIS (Geographic Information System). Essentially, you take a map of the area you want to survey and make sure that it is properly georeferenced – meaning, that it contains information relating to longitude and latitude. This is important because you want your data to line up properly with your maps when you’re analyzing it later. Creating grids is easy: all you need to do is draw the appropriate grids over the georeferenced map and by appropriate I mean lining portions of the grid along something straight like a fence line, field boundary, or road. Once that’s finished, the data can be stored in your GPS unit and you’re ready to go!

Of course, maps and GPS units can be tricky – just ask anyone with a SatNav! We went out into the field and found that even though I programmed the points into the GPS unit, the map I’d used for georeferencing used the British National Grid, but the GPS unit itself used Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) points. Oops.

Don’t panic! Not all is lost! This is where our good old friend Pythagoras comes in handy. Do you need to lay out 30 by 30 meter squares out by hand? Use A2 + B2 = C2 , three crewmembers, three very long tape measures, and lots of bamboo canes. Once you get the hang of it, you can lay out grid squares very quickly, and your friend with the GPS can come back along and record those new grid points to export back into ArcGIS with your data for later georeferencing and analysis.

DSCF7889

The takeaway message here is to be aware of your georeferencing systems. The other is to brush up on the Pythagorean theorem because even if your GPS is working perfectly, you’re probably going to end up laying out a few grid squares by hand anyway, because fields are never perfectly square and you’re going to survey sections that are irregularly shaped.

What’s that doohickey? Or, getting acquainted with your gradiometer

Congratulations, you’re ready to do geophysical survey! The only question is, what is geophysical survey? To put it simply: a non-destructive way of looking at what’s below the ground surface. There are many different tools that you can use to get these kind of results, and you’ve probably even heard of some of them: resistivity meters and magnetometers. There are different types of instruments within both of these categories, and each of them has a specialized function. For example, some are better at detecting solid stone structures while others are better at looking at shallow pits and ditches. On our project, we used a Bartington fluxgate gradiometer, which depends on magnetometry. Magnetometers, as the name suggests, measure differences in the natural magnetic field of a particular area. They measure variations caused by human activity, such as the digging of ditches.

101_5632

Here is a Bartington fluxgate gradiometer. These machines are ideal for geophysical survey because they do not need to probe the ground and take continuous readings (note that the machine is strapped to the surveyor). The long poles on either end are the sensors, and are programmed to take readings at certain intervals. The gradiometer takes those readings, puts them together, and voila! Raw data for later processing and perusal.

In the above photo, I’m doing something called balancing. Remember how I said that magnetometers record the differences in an area’s natural magnetic field? Well, the first thing you need to do once you’re out in the field is find out the baseline magnetic field for that particular area. Once that’s calibrated, all of the readings the machine takes will be measured against that baseline. And remember how we have three field, Fields A, B, and C? Each field has a different baseline, so the machine has to be balanced each time it’s used in a different field, as well as when you switch surveyors. This is because each person is a different: they’ll carry the machine differently, walk differently, and may have an entirely different magnetic signature than the previous person.

Essentially, these machines are delicate (and expensive) creatures and must be treated like the divas they are. Change fields? Balance the machine. Change surveyors? Balance the machine. Take a tea break? Balance the machine. Go and upload your data? Balance the machine. Do the macarena? Balance the machine.

Now, because magnetometers measure magnetic fields, that means surveyors and their teams must not have any magnetic metals on them while surveying, or it will screw with the data. That’s why geophysical surveyors are usually found in trackie bottoms with elastic waists, plain shirts, cheap trainers or wellies, etc. You’d be amazed how many clothing items have metal in them.

Now you know what your machine does. You’ve put on the appropriate clothing, and you’ve balanced your machine. Time to survey!

Walk, walk fieldwork baby

Remember those 30 by 30 meter grids you put in your GPS, and then laid out by hand? It’s time to start walking them.

DSCF7917

Within each 30 by 30 meter grid square, the surveyor has to start in one corner and walk up and down evenly spaced lines until they reach the other end of the grid. By the time they’ve reached the end of the grid, they’ve walked up and down thirty times, walking roughly 900 meters! Geophysical survey is very good exercise, no? And while they’re walking, the machine is taking constant readings. Most Bartingtons can store data for up to 12 grid squares before they need to be uploaded.

Surveying isn’t just a matter of walking. Surveyors have to walk at a constant pace, ensuring that the machine is taking the right readings at the appropriate intervals. Intervals and other considerations vary from machine to machine and crew to crew, but we programmed our Bartingtons to take multiple reading per meter, at two-meter intervals, in order to create a very detailed picture.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Walking properly takes practice. The surveyor can set his or her pace in the Bartington, which will beep at a constant rate, just like a metronome. Some people like a faster pace, some like a slower pace. While the surveyor is walking, the other two members of the team are responsible for switching out the lines the surveyor is following, moving them down the grid every two meters. This is so that all the surveyor needs to worry about is walking up and down, up and down, up and down. The other members should also be wearing as little metal on them as possible – if they are, they need to take a few steps away from the surveyor as they approach.

Murphy’s Law

Sometimes, things go wrong. Georeference systems don’t match up, fieldwork is delayed because teams have to lay out grids, and Mother Nature decides to dump a thunderstorm on your head. We faced major delays our first day out in the field because of the mix-up with the coordinate systems. While half the team went out to manually lay out grids, the rest of us tried to figure out what was wrong with the GPS and the points (we didn’t find out about the British National Grid/UTM problem until later). At that moment, an enormous storm rolled in and the entire crew ran for the van. Swallowcliffe Down in on top of a high chalk ridge with little tree cover. The GPS unit sits atop a long iron pole, which would like carrying around a giant lightning rod.

Rain can cause major delays in in geophysical survey. Bartington machines are not waterproof, though they can survive in light rain when the main body of the machine is covered with plastic sandwich bags, and the sensors are covered with bin liners. Luckily, after the one thunderstorm, the weather cleared and even became unseasonably hot and sunny.

101_5647

Oh hey there random helicopter, flying low over Field B and scaring the bejeezus out of us. Other memorable distractions included hill-walkers, marathon runners (several of whom correctly identified our fieldwork as geophysics – thank you, Time Team), and the deposition of several very large stacks of hay right in the middle of Field C. Despite a few hiccups, we managed to get there in the end!


Leave a comment

Geophysics Methodology 101 – Part One

There were two major questions we needed to consider when it came to tackling geophysics for Swallowcliffe:

  1. How do you pick a place to do geophysics?
  2. How do you actually do geophysics?

We’ll walk through each of these questions and really break them down.

Question #1 – How do you pick a place to do geophysics?

As you can see from our previous post on the site’s location, the area we’re looking at is pretty large. English Heritage scheduled an area covering three separate fields:

Swallowcliffe_Down_1945_Field names

Dr. Clay’s 1920s excavation of Swallowcliffe Down took place in an area that overlaps Fields B and C, and parts of Field A were also mapped and possibly explored (the original excavation can be quite unclear sometimes!). When Elizabeth and I made our initial site visit in Spring 2014, we found visual evidence of the site in the lower right-hand corner of Field B:

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

It’s difficult to see, but there’s a slight, semi-circular ridge a few meters beyond the fenceline. English Heritage also recorded a series of undated dyke systems at the opposite end of Field B. We also found a raised earthwork in the upper right-hand corner of Field A:

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

For these reasons, we decided to prioritize the lower right-hand corner of Field B, all of Field C, and as much of Field A as possible (focusing on the upper right-hand corner). We wanted to survey the dyke systems on the left-hand side of Field B as well, but there were several issues with that:

Swallowcliffebiggrid

We’ll come back to this grid in Question #2, but for now, I would like to point out that each yellow square in the photo above corresponds to a 30 by 30 meter grid square. Therefore, Field B covers an area of about 93,600 square meters. Our team would only consist of six members working two machines in teams of three, and we would only have a week to complete the geophysical survey.

This is why we had to prioritize the specific areas that were mapped in Dr. Clay’s original report (the areas marked in red). We promised ourselves we would survey as much of the center and left side of Field B as possible, depending on how quickly we would get through the area of the site itself and how the data looked. While it would be great to find new things outside the site, we wanted to find the things Dr. Clay missed within the site – specifically, Iron Age roundhouses and four-post structures.

So, now you know how we picked the site. Coming up next: how to do geophysics!