1. REMOTE SENSING
IN
ARCHAEOLOGY
Presented by,
M.Anurupa
1

2. Contents
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Case studies
• Summary
• Reference
2

3. INTRODUCTION
Archaeology
• The study of human history and
prehistory through the excavation
of sites and the analysis of
artifacts and other physical
remains.
• These can range from small
artifacts, such as arrowheads, to
large buildings, such as pyramids.
• Often, these objects are buried and
have to be carefully uncovered or
excavated before they can be
studied.
3

4. • Archaeologists must take notes, take photographs, and make
maps so that can recreate how objects are associated or in
relation to one another
• The visual mappings relating to the archaeological area will
provide easy-comprehensible additional information to the
decision makes, so it will ensure to keep on the archaeological
studies in a systematic manner
• Traditional survey tools used in finding and recording sites are
taken from land survey
• Archaeological surveyors use compasses, tape measures,
stadium rods, and various other survey tools. Today, most
archaeologists also employ electronic devices, such as Total
Stations and Global Positioning System (GPS) units, to map an
area or site.
4

5. Conventional vs Remote sensing
Conventional method
• Using conventional method
small area can be mapped
• Cannot be used in all
weather conditions
• Permissions are required in
order to dig that particular
site
• Artifacts can be destroyed
• Destructive method
Remote sensing method
• Large area can be mapped
• Can be used in all weather
conditions
• No permissions are required
• Cannot be destroyed
• Non-destructive method
5

6. Remote sensing in Archaeology
• Remote Sensing refers to a wide variety of high-tech methods for
collecting data pertaining to the physical or chemical properties of
an archaeological site.
• Generally, these methods are split into two categories.
1. Aerial collection of data.
• Data is collected from sensors installed on airplanes, helicopters, or
satellites.
• As the sensors are flown over the ground surface they record the
way in which electromagnetic radiation interacts with targets on the
ground.
• In the case of archaeology, the target of interest is the
archaeological site
6

7. 2. All near-ground surface technologies.
There are a wide variety of these techniques that are
used in archaeology. These techniques are employed through
the use of hand-held instruments that measure the magnetic or
electrical properties of the soil at an archaeological site.
• Remote Sensing techniques have proven to be very useful for
archaeologists by providing a means for collecting unique
information that can inform the archaeologist on the locations
and types of archaeological features present at a site.
7

8. Satellites and Sensors used:
• IRS-P6, also known as ResourceSat-1, is an Earth observation mission within the
IRS (Indian Remote-Sensing Satellite) series of ISRO (Indian Space Research
Organization). IRS-P6 is the continuation of the IRS-1C/1D missions with
considerably enhanced capabilities.
8
Name Sensors Type Spectral range
(µm)
Resolution
(m)
Swath
(km)
Revisit
(days)
IRS P6 AWifs
LISS III
LISS IV
MS
MS
MS
0.52-1.7µm
0.52-1.7 µm
0.52-0.86µm
56
23.5
5.8
740
141
23MS
5
24
5

9. Airborne Thematic Mapper (ATM)
• The eleven spectral channels of these instruments cover the visible(1-6) and near-
infrared , shortwave infrared and thermal infrared
9
ATM Band Spectral range (µm)
1 0.42-0.45
2 0.45-0.52
3 0.52-0.60
4 0.605-0.625
5 0.63-0.69
6 0.695-0.75

10. Literature review
• Sandy Winterbottom & Tom Dawson (2003) used Airborne Remote Sensing to
detect buried archaeology. From NDVI images and Principal Component Analysis
they got fruitful results.
• Rejas. J et.al (2005) used remote sensing data for cultural heritage and human
habitats protection. Satellite images (Landsat ETM+, ASTER, ALI and Hyperion)
have been used to make a preliminary sites cartography, to extract current land
cover/use and to test models for detecting and/or confirming possible buried
archaeological structures.
• Farjas, M et.al (2008) have used Landsat ETM+, ASTER, ALI and Hyperion to
make a preliminary sites cartography, to extract land cover/use and to test models
for detecting and/or confirming possible buried archaeological structures
10

11. • Sarah Parcak(2009) presented avarieties of techniques for the detection of
archaeological features in Egypt, in order to understand greater anthropological
issues, including population densities, ancient settlement locations, and modeling
past human-environment interactions. Used Quickbird high resolution satellite
imagery in the detection of subsurface architectural features, and advanced
interpolation techniques.
• M.B.Rajani and S.Settar et.al (2010) studied that the sub-surface composition of
ruined ancient sites over time effect surface cover and traces of this phenomenon
can be identified on remote sensing images. Used Multispectral remote sensing data
to detect moats of archaeological sites.
11

12. Case study 1
(M.B.Rajani and S.Settar ,2010)
• Objective of the study:
Detection of enclosure walls
of ancient settlements in
South India using
multispectral remote sensing
imagery.
• Study area : Three
archaeological sites Beluru,
Halebidu and Somanathapura
in Karnataka, South India
• Satellite : IRS P6 LISS 4
12

13. • Mainly focused on detection of enclosure walls
• Olden days-Defensive walls or fortification ,many times surrounded by
moats
• Later got destroyed due to natural disasters, expansion of urban,
agricultural activities
• Subsurface composition of ruined ancient site over time effects surface
cover. To identify those they used remote sensing images.
• They have used Multispectral imagery in identifying dried and buried
moats and also fortifications
• 3 sites in south india
1.Beluru
2.Halebidu
3.somanathapura
13

14. • Beluru: Temples within enclosure walls
• RS image shows a circular signature of positive vegetation
marks Surrounding the temple
• Indicating existence of moats surrounding enclosure walls
• Buried structures affects the surface vegetation by causing
variations in their growth
• Techniques like rationing, intensity hue saturation and
principal component analysis are used to enhance the image in
order to improve the vegetation signatures
• Moats can be easily identified
14

15. 15

16. • Halebidu: came to know multispectral imagery is better than PAN imagery
• Once moats are detected using multi spectral imagery, PAN ( spectral
range0.5-0.85 microns, spatial resolution 2.5 m)image is used to know the
boundaries
• With this exact shape of moats can be identified
16

17. • Somanathapura: Remotely
sensed image taken from space
reveals the temple and its alignments
with the surrounding land cover
features displaying a pattern that
befits a bounding wall.
• Images shows an overall perspective
of the landscape including the main
temple, the river course, canal, roads
and the subtle signature of the buried
defensive wall.
• The features that are almost black are
water bodies, with river Kaveri on the
left and a lake on the right.
17

18. Case study 2
(Sandy Winterbottom & Tom Dawson , 2003)
• Objective of the study:
Detecting buried
Archaeology using
Airborne Remote Sensing
• Study area : Islands of
Coll and Tiree in Scotland
• Sensor: Airborne
Thematic Mapper( ATM)
18

19. • The uncovering of archaeological sites as a result of coastal erosion is very
common.
• Once revealed however, these important sites are then under serious threat
from damage by further coastal erosion.
• A method is required which can be used to target unstable coastlines and
determine the nature of the archaeological remains underneath.
• So the use of airborne multi-spectral remote sensing for detecting buried
archaeological sites. The study was carried out on the islands of Coll and
Tiree in Scotland.
• In the past those islands were visited by Beveridge and published a report
in which detailed information of archeological sites are given
• Number of chapel sites and associated burial grounds
19

20. • These sites were
subsequently revisited by
the Ordnance Survey and
by the Royal Commission
on the Ancient and Historic
Monuments of Scotland
• The visits revealed that
many sites, particularly
those in the dune fields,
were no longer visible
20

21. • Techniques:
Visible, infra-red and thermal infra-
red images were acquired by the
NERC( Natural Environment
Research Council is a British
research council) aircraft using the
onboard Airborne Thematic
Mapper(ATM) sensor .
• The images were processed and
enhanced for visual interpretation
• Processing methods included
creating false colour composites,
NDVI images and Principal
Component Analysis.
21

22. • Results of the case study:
Daytime thermal images
revealed small-scale
topographic variations,
which were useful for
picking out abandoned
enclosures and ruined
buildings
• Thermal image revealing
abandoned enclosures and
ruined buildings.
22

23. • Subtle differences in agricultural
soils were revealed from multi-
spectral imagery, and in particular
infra-red images.
• These differences in the images
resulted from older cultivation
patterns
• Infra-red image revealing older
cultivation patterns.
23

24. • Daytime thermal images have revealed a possible chapel site
24

25. Summary:
• Satellite data in combination of cultural information and associated
geometrical patterns can be used for detecting archaeological and historical
sites.
• Various features such as buried walls, enclosures, abandoned farmsteads,
buried structures (possibly chapels) and boundaries of structures can be
detected.
• Infrared and NDVI images were good for detecting a wide range of
features.
• Thermal images were good for picking up small scale topographic
variations.
• Hence, remote sensing in archaeology is economical
25

26. References
• Rajani.M.B andSettar.S (2010), Application of multispectral remote sensing
imagery in detection of enclosure walls of ancient settlements in South India, BAR
International Series 2118, 3rd International Conference on Remote Sensing in
Archaeology, Aug 17-19,2010.
• Sandy Winterbottom& Tom Dawson, (2003).Detecting buried Archaeology using
Airborne Remote Sensing, e-journal, IEEE.
• Sarah Parcak(2009) .Pushing the envelope for satellite archaeology in Egypt:
Quickbird feature detection, predictive site modeling, and thermal site signatures.3rd
International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology
• Farjas, M (2008). Archaeological remote sensing approach in Honduras. A project
for cultural heritage and human habitats protection.3rd International Conference on
Remote Sensing in Archaeology
• Rejas. J (2005). Used satellite data for cultural heritage and human habitats
protection. 3rd International Conference on Remote Sensing in Archaeology
26

27. 27
THANKYOU