The activities in Uzbekistan in the 2008 season: testing the Google Earth programme as a tool for archaeological prospecting[1] [1]
Published in: Studia Hercynia XIII
should be cited as follows:
In 2008 some of the planned activities of
1. Google Earth
The software application Google Earth, essentially a virtual globe,[4] [4], was launched by Google in October
2. The area of landscape tested
Several of our institute's projects involve long-term exploration of the area of northern Bactria, now southern Uzbekistan, above all the region around the town of Sherabad - the Sherabad oasis (q.v. the season reports in Studia Hercynia VII-XI). The area consists of two types of landscape - an intensively-farmed agricultural plain to the south, and barren mountains and foothills to the north. The first part - the plain - is relatively well known to archaeologists, largely as the result of the efforts of Soviet, later Russian and Uzbek, researchers, with many sites having been explored. At many sites, basic surface collections have been made or stratigraphic sections opened. As part of long-term expeditions, mostly in the 1970s and 1980s, archaeologists who undertook "intuitive" or haphazard archaeological prospection were put to work on them.[6] [6] The problem with using today the results gained back then is the (lack of) geographical quality of the archaeological data collected.[7] [7] The localisation of the settlements is imprecise or wrong, the archaeological maps are very general, and the data published hitherto provides a very uneven and unreliable picture of land settlement and use. The area that we have chosen for this project has thus been chosen both because we have a long-term interest in this region and because, unlike some other regions of
3. Goals
Our long-term goal is to create a high-quality archaeological map of the region on the basis of GIS and the use of published data, satellite pictures and field prospection. This contribution is designed to show one of the aspects of the project - the use of newly-available satellite pictures in Google Earth for the localisation of anthropogenic features in the landscape and their verification on the ground, and the possibilities of their interpretation. The short-term aim is to examine the suitability of this tool for use in further complex work.
4.0 Procedure
The first step was to "walk over" the area in question using G.E., which happened as soon as the higher-definition picture was made available in March 2008. This work lasted a mere 7-8 days. During it we looked at a segment 22 by
4.1 Catalogue of archaeological objects
A total of 47 presumed settlements on the plain and 7 complexes of features in the foothills (presumed to be burial mounds) were included in the catalogue, as well as several dozen features that were highly likely to have arisen in connection with human activity.[11] [11] In all, almost a hundred features that may be considered archaeological sites were ascertained in the Sherabad oasis and the adjoining northern foothills, plus a further 40 unclear features (Fig. 1).
It should be added that Rtveladze, in his archaeological map from 1974, shows a total of 28 sites in the Sherabad oasis (RTVELADZE 1974, 74-78). For each site, two pictures were downloaded from Google Earth: one detailed one (the modelled height from the surface to around 500-
4.2.1 Jida Bulaq Say
Analysis of the pictures showed a very promising area in the foothills, to the north of Sherabad and in the vicinity of the
4.2.2 Presumed irrigation systems
Let us return to the features that looked like smallish hollows, which showed up very clearly on G.E. and formed long lines in the areas of the dry foothills (Fig. 9).
My working theory was that they might have formed part of irrigation systems, although the way in which they functioned was unclear. I based this on knowledge of one such system in the
We looked at a number of sites on the plain (Fig. 7, 8), most of which are already known to archaeologists.
4.2.4 Burial grounds
The localisation of burial grounds remains a specific problem. The only burial grounds that can be easily found on satellite pictures are modern-era ones, since these often make use of the only elevated surfaces in the vicinity of the villages, the above-mentioned archaeological sites of the tepa type. On the pictures many of them show up as waves of small mounds, which are the individual graves, crowned by a small chapel. From older research we know of the necropolises from the late Bronze Age, above all Jarkuta and Bustan, but the intervening period represents some two and a half thousand years with no apparent burial grounds. Here it has to be stated that detecting new burial grounds, and thus filling in one of the blank spots on the archaeological maps to date, with the help of pictures from G.E. has not proved to be possible. The reason is clear. For most of the historical periods, in the general area of
In both types of natural environment in the Sherabad district - the low plain with irrigation systems, with a settled population, and the dry, upland foothills, used by nomads who kept small livestock - there is as yet almost no evidence of protohistorical and early historical burial sites.
In conclusion, by analysing satellite pictures in G.E. we managed to detect, during a short time over an area of approximately 22 x
• On the plain a large number of settlements were discerned, and no burial sites.
• Some of them were identified as sites already known, while several were new discoveries.
• In the foothills, several previously-unknown settlements/burial sites were detected.
• The fieldwork for the project brought positive verification of some of the data gained, and also supplemented it.
• In a number of cases we had to correct our original interpretations - what we thought were burial sites turned out in some cases to be the remnants of temporary settlements (shacks, yurts).
In any event, the use of Google Earth to detect anthropogenic features was shown to be a very useful tool for archaeological prospecting. Certainly, the results may vary significantly, but for the landscape that predominates in
Bibliography:
ANNAEV, Tokhtash (1988): Rannesrednevekovije poselenija severnogo Tokharistana. Tashkent.
BOUSMAN, C. Britt, (2006): Satellite archaeology for everyone. SAA archaeological record, 6 (3), pp. 32-34. Retrieved March 21, 2009 from <http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/Publications/thesaaarchrec/may06.pdf [14]>
JURKEVICH, E.A. (1965): Gorodishche kushanskovo vremeni na teritorii Severnoy Baktrii. Sovetskaya Archeologija 4.
MADRY, Scott (2006): An Evaluation of Google Earth for Archaeological Exploration and Survey,Digital Discovery Exploring New Frontiers in Human Heritage. CAA 2006 - Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. Proceedings of the 34th Conference, Fargo, United States, April 2006, pp. 329-337. in: Clark, Jeffrey T., Hagemeister, Emily M., eds.,
MANTELLINI, Simone (2003): The Dargom Canal and the Early Settlement of the Middle Zeravshan Valley. In: Pagani, S., ed., Italo-Uzbek Scientific Cooperation in Archaeology and Islamic Studies: An Overview. Papers from the International Conference (Roma), pp. 42-47.
MANTELLINI, Simone – RONDELLI, Bernardo (2004): Methods and Perspectives for Ancient Settlement Studies in the Middle Zeravshan Valley. The Silk Road Newsletter 2(2). Retrieved March 20, 2009 from <http://www.silk-road.com/newsletter/vol2num2/Zeravshan.html [15] >
PIDAEV, Shakir (1978): Poseleniya kushanskovo vremeni severnoy Baktrii. Tashkent.
PILIPKO, Viktor Nikolayevich (1985): Poseleniya severo-zapadnoy Baktrii. Ashkhabad.
RTVELADZE, Edvard Vasilyevich (1974): Razvyedochnoe izuchenie Baktriyskych pamyatnikov na yuge Uzbekistana, in: Masson, Vadim Michailovich, ed., Drevnyaya Baktriya, pp. 74-85. Leningrad: Nauka.
RTVELADZE, Edvard Vasiljevič (1976): Novyje drevnyebaktriyskie pamyatniki na yuge Uzbekistana. In: Masson, Vadim Michailovich, ed., Baktriyskiye drevnosti, pp. 93-103. Leningrad: Nauka.
RTVELADZE, Edvard Vasiljevich – Chakimov, Z.E. (1973): Marshrutnye issledovaniya pamjatnikov severnoj Baktrii, in: Pugachenkova, Galina Anatolyevna, ed., Iz istorii antichnoy kul´tury Uzbekistana, pp. 10-34. Tashkent: Izdatelstvo literatury i isskustva im. Gafura Gulyama.
SEDOV, Alexandr Vsovolodovich (1987): Kobadian na paroge rannego srednevekov´ya. Moskva: Nauka.
STAVISKIJ, Boris (1986): Les sites archéologiques de
STRIDE, Sebastian (2005):
STRIDE, Sebastian (2007): Regions and Territories in Southern Central Asia: What the Surkhan Darya Province tells us about Bactria, in: Herrmann, Georgina, Cribb, Joe, eds., After Alexander: Central Asia before Islam. Themes in the history and Archaeology of Western Central Asia. The British Academy,23-25 June 2004. Proceedings of the British Academy 133, pp. 99-117.
THOMAS, David, ZIPFEL, Claudia (2009): A new look at Bust: Google Earth™ and archaeological sites in Afghanistan. WAC poster. Retrieved February 20, 2009 from: <http://www.wac6.org/livesite/posters/poster_files/WAC_065_Thomas_Zipfel.pdf [19]>
UR, Jason, (2006): Google Earth and Archaeology. SAA archaeological record, 6 (3): 35-38. Retrieved March 21, 2009 from <http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/Publications/thesaaarchrec/may06.pdf>
Fig. 1 General satellite image of the Sherabad oasis taken from Google Earth with marked anthropogenic features (eye altitude
Fig. 2 Jida Bulaq Say valley north of Sherabad and newly detected archaeological sites.
Fig. 3 Site “BG Sh001” as seen on the satellite image (eye altitude
Fig. 4 Jida Bulaq Say with the site “BG Sh001”.
Fig. 6 The site “BG Sh002” (eye altitude
Fig. 7 The site “Tepa Sh013” (eye altitude
Fig. 8 The site “Tepa Sh013”.
Fig. 9 Supposed irrigation system in the foothills of Kugitang, turned to be recent trenches from military exercises.
[1] [20]Institute for Classical Archeology, Charles University, Prague, email: ladislav.stanco@ff.cuni.cz; the article has been prepared within the grant project GA UK 41407, supported by the Charles University, Prague. English translation by V. Talacko.
[2] [21]Examples of the types used are IKONOS (max. resolution
[3] [23]Google Earth does, after all, use pictures from the satellites Landsat 7, QuickBird and SPOT, and since September 2008 has used the slightly lowered resolution of the best commercial satellite to date, GeoEye-1 (max.
[4] [24]Google Earth is not the only product of this type. NASA offers the rival World Wind, but this does not reach either G.E.'s resolution or its other parameters. For a comparison see BOUSMAN, C. Britt, 2006.
[5] [25] KML = Keyhole Markup Language, GPX=GPS eXchange Format.
[6] [26] From the literature and the personal reminiscences of those who participated it is clear that most of the prospecting activities were based on the traditional walking up and down the land and asking questions of local inhabitants. Nevertheless, it brought a number of fundamental discoveries. See chiefly JURKEVIČ 1965; RTVELADZE 1974; idem, 1976; RTVELADZE – CHAKIMOV 1973.
[7] [27] An example of "navigation" to a site found is a short text relating to the Mazarbabatepe locality. It is apparently located "on the land of the V.I. Lenin collective farm,
[8] [28] In Surkhan Darya itself the smallish region in the basin of the river of the same name has been dealt with in detail by S. Stride. He has also worked the whole area (including our region) into the basic GIS. See STRIDE 2004; idem, 2005.
[9] [29] The basin of the river Zerafshan, now the Samarqand region, was once the centre of Sogdiana. In recent years it has been the subject of intensive work by an international team (Italy, France, Japan, Uzbekistan etc.) trying to create detailed archaeological maps with the use of satellite pictures, all the available maps and land prospecting. See e.g. MANTELLINI 2003; MANTELLINI – RONDELLI 2004; MANTELLINI – RONDELLI – STRIDE 2008; MANTELLINI – RONDELLI – STRIDE 2009.
[10] [30] The current geopolitical situation in the region does not favour aerial prospecting. Sherabad is within flying range of the Turkmen, Tajik and above all Afghan borders, even with a small plane. It is a very sensitive area, which only a few years ago was very hard for foreigners to access. Our attempt in 2005 to arrange a largish crop-spraying type of plane from which to take test photos ended in failure. German colleagues had managed the same thing ten years earlier, but it later caused a huge scandal.
[11] [31] For example, the objects that I had originally thought were irrigation channels. In addition to those 47 settlements, there are a further 30 similar, although uncertain, features in the lowlands. They all need to be verified individually. Even taking into account the assumed channels and other doubtful cases, 140 different features were indicated.
[12] [32] They are not mountains in the proper sense of the word. We were mostly between 500 and
[13] [33] This issue is also dealt with by S. Stride in his article, q.v. STRIDE 2007.
Pictures not included in the printed version (in Studia Hercynia):
Odkazy
[1] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn1
[2] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn2
[3] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn3
[4] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn4
[5] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn5
[6] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn6
[7] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn7
[8] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn8
[9] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn9
[10] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn10
[11] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn11
[12] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn12
[13] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftn13
[14] http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/ Publications/thesaaarchrec/may06.pdf
[15] http://www.silk-road.com/newsletter/vol2num2/Zeravshan.html
[16] http://www.scribd.com/doc/7364675/ Mantellini-Rondelli-Stride-CAA2008
[17] http://www.silk-road.com/newsletter/vol2num2/Surkhan.htm
[18] http://www.silkrode.org/SilkRoDE/space/WikiPage.Thesis..Phd_ Thesis
[19] http://www.wac6.org/livesite/posters/poster_files/WAC_065_Thomas_Zipfel.pdf
[20] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref1
[21] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref2
[22] http://www.satimagingcorp.com/
[23] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref3
[24] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref4
[25] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref5
[26] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref6
[27] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref7
[28] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref8
[29] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref9
[30] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref10
[31] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref11
[32] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref12
[33] http://arcis.ff.cuni.cz/activities-uzbekistan-2008-season-testing-google-earth-programme-tool-archaeological-prospecting#_ftnref13