4.1 Article

New evidence on the spatial organisation of the Valencina de la Concepcion Copper Age settlement: geophysical survey between La Pastora and Montelirio

期刊

TRABAJOS DE PREHISTORIA
卷 69, 期 1, 页码 65-79

出版社

CONSEJO SUPERIOR INVESTIGACIONES CIENTIFICAS-CSIC
DOI: 10.3989/tp.2012.12080

关键词

Copper Age; Iberia; Geophysics; Magnetometry; Megaliths; Negative Features; Archaelogy of management

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The major Copper Age settlement of Valencina de la Concepcion has been the subject of research interest over more than a century. The history of previous investigations at the site has resulted in a heterogeneous archaeological record that is particularly difficult and that displays significant gaps and problems. In this paper, we present the results of a geophysical survey carried out in December 2004 between the La Pastora and Montelirio sectors of this site in response to a proposed road development that was never put into practice, and which revealed several previously unknown features. These data are assessed in the light of the results obtained from the excavation carried out between 2007 and 2008 at the immediately adjacent sector of PP4-Montelirio, currently under study by us, where several dozen prehistoric features (both, non-megalithic and megalithic, funerary and non-funerary), were found. Altogether, this new evidence makes a significant contribution to the spatial interpretation of the Valencina de la Concepcion site, particularly as they convey the first-ever cartography of a large area of this settlement. From this evidence, a discussion is made concerning the density and diversity of the features identified both between La Pastora and Montelirio as well as at the PP4-Montelirio sector, their potential patterns and sequence. This raises questions regarding the traditional separation of the site into 'settlement' and 'necropolis' areas and contributes more generally to a better understanding of the spatial organisation of this large prehistoric settlement.

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

4.1
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