1887
Volume 13 Number 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

In this paper, an integrated geophysical investigation of a sacred area in the archaeological site of Šapinuwa is presented. Šapinuwa was one of the important cities in the Hittite Empire. The archaeological site of Šapinuwa is located in the Çorum region of Central Anatolia, Turkey. The goal of the here presented integrative archaeological prospection investigation was to explore buried structures inside the so‐called sacred Taşdöşem area (Taşdöşem means “the by employing a number of different near‐surface geophysical prospection methods. To this purpose, magnetic gradiometry, ground‐penetrating radar, electrical resistivity tomography, seismic refraction tomography, and multi‐channel analysis of surface wave tomography were applied in this specific area. Overall, the results of the individual geophysical investigations were superimposed in order to obtain more detailed and comprehensive integrative interpretations on the burials contained inside this sacred area. Electrical tomography depth slices revealed the presence of an important structure buried inside the Taşdöşem area. Surprisingly, the velocity variations observed in the depth slices of the multi‐channel analysis of surface wave tomography provided important information on the character of the burial structure. Additionally, seismic refraction tomography sections and depth slices confirmed the presence of the structures in the same locations. The result of the ground‐penetrating radar investigation did not present sufficient certainty regarding the possible deeper burials, whereas the magnetic gradiometry survey gave some insight into near‐surface structures. The combination of the employed geophysical prospection techniques was successfully able to characterize the structures that are assumed to have been buried within the Taşdöşem area. It is concluded that the integrated non‐invasive geophysical archaeological prospection study conducted at Šapinuwa provides a good example on how to approach the investigation and documentation of sites similar to the Taşdöşem.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015037
2015-04-01
2020-07-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BergeM.A. and DrahorM.G.2011. Electrical resistivity tomography investigations of multilayered archaeological settlements: part I – modelling. Archaeological Prospection18, 159–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CardarelliE. and Di FilippoG.2009. Integrated geophysical methods for the characterisation of an archaeological site (Massenzio Basilica–Roman forum, Rome, Italy). Journal of Applied Geophysics68, 508–521.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. ClarkA.1990. Seeing Beneath the Soil.Batsford, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. ConyersL.B.2004. Ground‐penetrating Radar for Archaeology.AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. ConyersL.B. and GoodmanD.1997. Ground‐Penetrating Radar: An Introduction for Archaeologists.AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. DahlinT. and ZhouB.2004. A numerical comparison of 2D resistivity imaging with 10 electrode arrays. Geophysical Prospecting52, 379–398.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DavisJ.L. and AnnanA.P.1989. Ground‐penetrating radar for high‐resolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy. Geophysical Prospecting37, 531–551.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DiamantiN., TsokasG., TsourlosP. and VafidisA.2005. Integrated interpretation of geophysical data in the archaeological site of Europos (northern Greece). Archaeological Prospection12, 79–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. DrahorM.G.2006. Integrated geophysical studies in the upper part of Sardis archaeological site, Turkey. Journal of Applied Geophysics59, 205–223.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. DrahorM.G.2011. A review of integrated geophysical investigations from archaeological and cultural sites under encroaching urbanisation in Izmir, Turkey. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth36, 1294–1309.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. DrahorM.G., BergeM.A., Kurtulmuş, T.Ö., HartmannM. and SpeidelM.A.2008a. Magnetic and electrical resistivity tomography investigations in a Roman Legionary camp site (Legio IV Scythica) in Zeugma, southeastern Anatolia, Turkey. Archaeological Prospection15, 159–186.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. DrahorM.G., BergeM.A. and ÖztürkC.2011. Integrated geophysical surveys in the Agios Voukolos church, Izmir, Turkey. Journal of Archaeological Science38, 2231–2242.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. DrahorM.G., KurtulmusT.O., BergeM.A., HartmannM. and SpeidelM.A.2008b. Magnetic imaging and electrical resistivity tomography studies in a Roman Military installation found in Satala archaeological site from northeastern of Anatolia, Turkey. Journal of Archaeological Science35, 259–271.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. EmreÖ., DumanT.Y., ÖzalpS., ElmaciH. and OlgunŞ.2011. 1/250,000 Scale active fault map series of Turkey, Çorum (NK 36‐16) quadrangle. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, Ankara, Turkey.
  15. ForteE. and PipanM.2008. Integrated seismic tomography and ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) for the high‐resolution study of burial mounds (tumuli). Journal of Archaeological Science35, 2614–2623.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. GaffneyC.F., GaterJ.A., LinfordP., GaffneyV.L. and WhiteR.2000. Large‐scale systematic fluxgate gradiometry at the Roman city of Wroxeter. Archaeological Prospection7, 81–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. GoodmanF., PiroS., NishimuraY., PattersonH. and GaffneyV.2004. Discovery of a 1stt Century AD Roman Amphitheater and Other Structures at the Forum Novum by GPR. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics9, 35–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. KvammeK.L.2006. Integrating multidimensional archaeological data. Archaeological Prospection13, 57–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. LeckebuschJ.2003. Ground‐penetrating radar: a modern three‐dimensional prospection method. Archaeological Prospection10, 213–240.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. LeucciG., GrecoF., GiorgiL.D. and MauceriR.2007. Three‐dimensional of seismic refraction tomography and electrical resistivity tomography survey in the castle of Occhiola (Sicily, Italy). Journal of Archaeological Science34, 233–242.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. MillerR.D., XiaJ., ParkC.B. and IvanovJ.M.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves to map bedrock. The Leading Edge18, 1392–1396.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. MTA
    MTA . 2002. 1/500.000 Scale Geological Maps of Turkey, 7, General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA), Ankara, Turkey.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. PapadopoulosN.G., SarrisA., SalviM.C., DederixS., SoupiosP. and DikmenU.2012. Rediscovering the small theatre and amphitheatre of ancient Ierapytna (SE Crete) by integrated geophysical methods. Journal of Archaeological Science39, 1960–1973.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. PapadopoulosN.G., TsourlosP., TsokasG.N. and SarrisA.2006. Two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional resistivity imaging in archaeological site investigation. Archaeological Prospection13, 163–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. PiroS., MaurielloP. and CammaranoF.2000. Quantitative integration of geophysical methods for archaeological prospection. Archaeological Prospection7, 203–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. PiroS., GoodmanD. and NishimuraY.2003. The study and characterization of Emperor Traiano’s Villa (Altopiani di Arcinazzo, Roma) using high‐resolution integrated geophysical surveys. Archaeological Prospection10, 1–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. PolymenakosL. and PapamarinopoulosS.P.2005. Exploring a prehistoric site for remains of human structures by three dimensional seismic tomography. Archaeological Prospection12, 221–233.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. PolymenakosL., PapamarinopoulosS., LiossisA. and Koukouli‐ChryssanthakiC.2004. Investigation of a monumental Macedonian tumulus by three‐dimensional seismic tomography. Archaeology Prospection11, 145–158.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. SarrisA., PapadopoulosN.G., AgapiouA., SalviM.C., HadjimitsisD.G., ParkinsonW.A.et al.2013. Integration of geophysical surveys, ground hyperspectral measurements, aerial and satellite imagery for archaeological prospection of prehistoric sites: the case study of Vésztő‐Mágor Tell, Hungary. Journal of Archaeological Science40, 1454–1470.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. SeisImager/SW manual
    SeisImager/SW manual . 2009. Windows Software for Analysis of Surface Waves Manual v. 3.0, Geometrics, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. SüelA.1995. Ortaköy’ün Hitit çağindaki adi. Belleten225, 271–283 (in Turkish).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. SüelM.2012. Şapinuva 2011 kazi çalişmalarindan bir kesit. 2. Çorum Kazi ve Araştirmalar Sempozyumu, 71–82 (in Turkish).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. TsokasG.N., PapazachosC.B., VafidisA., LoukoyiannakisM.Z., VargemezisG. and TzimeasK.1995. The detection of monumental tombs buried in tumuli by seismic refraction. Geophysics60, 1735–1742.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. TsokasG.N., TsourlosP.I., StampolidisA., KatsonopoulouD. and SoterS.2009. Tracing a major Roman road in the area of Ancient Helike by resistivity tomography. Archaeological Prospection16, 251–266.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. VafidisA., EconomouN., GaniatsosY., ManakouM., PoulioudisG., SourlasG.et al.2005. Integrated geophysical studies at ancient Itanos (Greece). Journal of Archaeological Science32, 1023–1036.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. VafidisA., TsokasG.N., LoukoyiannakisM.Z., VasiliadisK., VariemezisG. and PapazachosC.B.1995. Feasibility study on the use of seismic methods in detecting monumental tombs buried in tumuli. Archaeological Prospection2, 119–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. WesselP. and SmithW.H.F.1995. New version of the generic mapping tools released. Eos, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union76, 329.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. WoelzS. and RabbelW.2005. Seismic prospecting in archaeology: a 3D shear‐wave study of the ancient harbour of Miletus (Turkey). Near Surface Geophysics3, 245–257.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015037
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015037
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error