4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Aerial survey for archaeology

期刊

PHOTOGRAMMETRIC RECORD
卷 18, 期 104, 页码 273-290

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.0031-868X.2003.00023.x

关键词

aerial photography; archaeology; interpretation; mapping; National Mapping Programme (NMP); photogrammetry; reconnaissance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aerial photography for archaeology has been developing its approaches and techniques over the past 100 years so that it now integrates the results of reconnaissance with extensive interpretative and analytical surveys. This paper introduces the philosophy and approach of the English Heritage (EH) Aerial Survey team, covering aerial reconnaissance and the National Mapping Programme (NMP), as well as the potential developments and opportunities in Europe. In the 1980s there was a debate over the nature of the evidence derived from aerial photographs, especially how to describe archaeological features. As part of NMP a classification and recording system has been devised which meets most of the users' needs, be they national organisations, county archaeologists, commercial contractors or university-based researchers. The maps and records produced by NMP are used to further our understanding of the past human settlement in England, not only at the individual site level, but also in regional or landscape contexts. This paper provides an overview of the current progress of NMP and acts as an entree for explaining the current research and recording of archaeological landscapes throughout Europe. Recent developments in Britain and Europe have provided the opportunity for a greater priority to be given to aerial survey and accelerating programmes of mapping. In Europe the ending of the cold war has allowed greater access to aerial photographs and the possibility of beginning new reconnaissance, as well as introducing new forms of remote sensing. All these developments have led to a transformation of our understanding of prehistoric, Roman and medieval archaeology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据