Comparative and introspective GIS : an analysis of cell-based GIS methods and their applications within landscape archaeology
This thesis presents an assessment of cell-based GIS techniques and their applications within landscape archaeology. It highlights and addresses four main limitations within previous archaeological GIS research. Firstly, studies have traditionally been restricted to areas of high topographic variability. Secondly, there have been few truly comparative GIS studies within archaeology and so the value of methods remains uncertain. Thirdly, issues of resolution and its effects on the process and results of analyses require further assessment. Finally, the DEM is rarely considered as representing an archaeological feature itself, but rather as a surface over which archaeology is draped. In response to these identified limitations two contrasting landscapes were studied, each using input-data obtained at both low and high resolutions from Ordnance Survey contours and high resolution GPS survey respectively. The first landscape was chosen for its topographic variability. It was centred on the Neolithic cursuses around the village of Rudston on the Yorkshire Wolds, East Yorkshire. For the second landscape a flatter, wetland area was chosen. This was focused upon the pair of Iron Age lowland enclosures on Sutton Common
Chapman, Henry
Geography
Comparative and introspective GIS : an analysis of cell-based GIS methods and their applications within landscape archaeology. This thesis presents an assessment of cell-based GIS techniques and their applications within landscape archaeology. It highlights and addresses four main limitations within previous archaeological GIS research. Firstly, studies have traditionally been restricted to areas of high topographic variability. Secondly, there have been few truly comparative GIS studies within archaeology and so the value of methods remains uncertain. Thirdly, issues of resolution and its effects on the process and results of analyses require further assessment. Finally, the DEM is rarely considered as representing an archaeological feature itself, but rather as a surface over which archaeology is draped. In response to these identified limitations two contrasting landscapes were studied, each using input-data obtained at both low and high resolutions from Ordnance Survey contours and high resolution GPS survey respectively. The first landscape was chosen for its topographic variability. It was centred on the Neolithic cursuses around the village of Rudston on the Yorkshire Wolds, East Yorkshire. For the second landscape a flatter, wetland area was chosen. This was focused upon the pair of Iron Age lowland enclosures on Sutton Common
comparative introspective gis_analysis cell based gis method application within_landscape archaeology present assessment cell based gis technique application within_landscape archaeology highlight address four_main limitation within previous archaeological gis research firstly study traditionally restrict area high topographic variability secondly truly comparative gis study within_archaeology value method remain uncertain thirdly issue resolution effect process analyse require assessment finally dem rarely_consider represent archaeological_feature rather surface archaeology response identify limitation two_contrast landscape study use input data_obtain low_high resolution ordnance survey contour high_resolution survey respectively first landscape choose topographic variability centred neolithic around village yorkshire_wolds east_yorkshire second landscape wetland area chosen focus_upon pair iron age lowland enclosures common