Geophysical Survey and Changes in the Use of the Cultural Landscape

The results of detailed and large-scale geophysical measurements in archaeology have been steadily increasing for years. The growth in measured data has also increased the need for processing and interpretation; in archaeology, this primarily means the archaeological interpretation of the measured data. However, the information contained in geophysical data includes a substantial volume or area of data of varying size or thickness of some different natural or modern anthropogenic origin (beyond archaeological interest). Like the archaeological situations themselves, these must also be identified and demarcated. The presented article consists of a wide range of case studies in which the result of a specific applied geophysical method includes both the desired interpretations of archaeological features and the differentiation and warning of other anomalies, the origin of which may or may not be unambiguous or related to the post-deposition processes of archaeological features. The purpose of selecting several different examples of results in our paper is to point out that there are many more consequences of anthropogenic activity hidden beneath the surface of the terrain of the contemporary cultural landscape than just those that archaeologists have in their viewfinder. Other anomalies in specific environments may be of natural origin or related to various geological, pedological or hydrological changes in a site’s natural environment. This should be dealt with by the alternative differentiation of anomalies of various probable origins; the interpretive descriptions, diagrams or maps should not just focus strictly on the anticipated subsurface relics of the archaeological features and situations, as these are not there alone.