Combined Geophysical Approach in a Complex Arctic Archaeological Environment: A Case Study from the LdFa‐1 Site, Southern Baffin Island, Nunavut
Combined Geophysical Approach in a Complex Arctic Archaeological Environment: A Case Study from the LdFa‐1 Site, Southern Baffin Island, Nunavut
复制标题
复杂北极考古环境中的综合地球物理方法：以努勒维特南巴芬岛 LdFa-1 遗址为例
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Park
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Landry;I. Ferguson;S. Milne;R. Park
2014年，我们绘制了位于巴芬岛南部内陆深处的LdFa‐1（一个3000年历史的古爱斯基摩遗址）第5区组成部分的复杂景观，使用磁力和电磁相结合的方法来定义任何大尺度或小尺度人为异常的物理特征。测量使用GEM Systems Overhauser磁力仪-梯度仪和Geonics EM31仪器，以及设计用于高分辨率绘制下伏土壤总磁场、磁化率和电导率响应的调查配置。每次调查都使用了数据缩减方法，包括，例如，去除时间漂移，以产生与地下物理性质密切相关的最终响应。结果给出了六种地球物理响应：总磁场、垂直磁梯度、水平和垂直偶极子模式视磁化率、水平和垂直偶极子模式视电导率。小尺度（<2米）异常的空间组合，与磁性和磁化率结果相关联，并被解释为与浅层地下火成岩岩石的分组有关，确定了三个考古兴趣区域。一组是直径为4米的异常的大致圆形排列。它的空间相关性与现场的生产性挖掘单位表明了人为起源。在该地点获得的数据的互补性减少了错误识别异常的机会，例如，表观电导率结果支持在该地点观察到的更大规模异常作为岩石成因的解释。这个考古地球物理案例研究展示了地球物理调查在复杂的北极考古环境中的价值，以及它在提供地下考古特征信息方面的作用。版权所有©2015 John Wiley & Sons， Ltd
In 2014, we mapped the complex landscape of component Area 5 at LdFa‐1, a 3000‐year‐old Palaeoeskimo site located in the deep interior of southern Baffin Island, using a combined magnetic and electromagnetic approach to define the physical characteristics of any large‐ or small‐scale anthropogenic anomalies. Measurements were made using a GEM Systems Overhauser magnetometer‐gradiometer and Geonics EM31 instrument, and a survey configuration designed to map in high resolution the total magnetic field, magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity responses of the underlying soils. Data‐reduction methods were used for each survey, including, for example, removal of temporal drift, to produce final responses related closely to the subsurface physical properties. Six geophysical responses are presented in the results: total magnetic field, vertical magnetic gradient, horizontal‐ and vertical‐dipole‐mode apparent susceptibility, and horizontal‐ and vertical‐dipole‐mode apparent conductivity. Spatial assemblages of small‐scale (<2 m) anomalies, correlated between the magnetic and magnetic susceptibility results and interpreted to be associated with groupings of igneous boulders in the shallow subsurface, define three areas of archaeological interest. One grouping is a roughly circular arrangement of anomalies with a diameter of 4 m. Its spatial correlation with a productive excavation unit at the site suggests an anthropogenic origin. The complementarity of data acquired at this site reduces the chances of misidentifying anomalies, for example, the apparent conductivity results support interpretation of larger‐scale anomalies observed at the site as being of lithogenic origin. This archaeogeophyiscal case study demonstrates the value of geophysical investigation in a complex Arctic archaeological environment and its role in providing information on subsurface archaeological features. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.