Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Contributions of Multi‐Method Geophysical Survey to Archaeological Research at the Battlefield of Waterloo

Bibliographic Data

ID12430264
AuthorsDuncan Williams (0000-0003-4793-8330, Department of Archaeology & Anthropology Bournemouth University Bournemouth UK, corresponding author), Dominique Bosquet (Operational Coordination Directorate Wallonia Heritage Agency Namur Belgium), Tony Pollard (Scottish Centre for War Studies and Conflict Archaeology, School of Humanities University of Glasgow Glasgow UK), Kate Welham (0000-0002-2057-7101, Department of Archaeology & Anthropology Bournemouth University Bournemouth UK), Stuart James Eve (0000-0003-0677-9812, Bournemouth University), Stuart Eve (Department of Archaeology & Anthropology Bournemouth University Bournemouth UK), Philippe De Smedt (0000-0002-7230-4965, Department of Environment, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering Ghent University Ghent Belgium)
Year2024
Volume31
Issue3
Pages267-287
Publication date2024-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueArchaeological Prospection (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1075-2196 • E-ISSN: 1099-0763
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/arp.1952
OpenAlexW4401436992
LanguageEN
References cited40

Archaeological prospection is continually expanding into new frontiers, examining increasingly large areas, diverse environmental contexts and varying site types. One area that has received only limited focus is historic battlefields. This paper presents results from large‐scale geophysical surveys (> 100 ha) at the Napoleonic battlefield of Waterloo (1815) in Belgium, using fluxgate magnetometry and frequency‐domain electromagnetic induction. Despite its international historical significance, professional archaeological research at the battlefield is still in its infancy. We demonstrate how important insights can be gained by using geophysical methods for identifying features and artefacts related to the battle and for developing an understanding of the various influences acting on the present landscape. The largest survey of its kind undertaken on a single battlefield site, this approach holds particular potential for battlefield archaeology, given the subtle and low‐density nature of the sought‐after targets and the extensive area of the site. Such an approach can mitigate (though not entirely resolve) challenges of resolution and scale associated with other methods of investigation. Using a representative range of examples from Waterloo, we consider successes and challenges in undertaking geophysical surveys on battlefield sites. An integrated approach that incorporates targeted sampling and other forms of ancillary data is emphasized for a more robust interpretation of noninvasive sensor data

Archaeology · Battle · Battlefield · Cartography · Data science · Geography · Geophysical survey · Magnetic anomaly · Magnetic survey · Remote sensing · Scale (ratio · Unexploded ordnance · Computer Science · Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping · Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods · Geophysical Methods and Applications · History · Geology · Geophysics

  • Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon

    Gunther E Rothenberg, Rory Muir•The Journal of Military History•1999

  • Geophysical approaches to the archaeological prospection of early modern battlefield landscapes

    Open Access•Duncan Williams, Kate Welham et al.•Journal of Conflict Archaeology•2024

  • Undisturbed iron industry sites in the Sonian Forest, Belgium

    Open Access•Florias Mees, Roger Langohr•Journal of Archaeological Science…•2019

  • Potential and Challenges of UAV-Borne Magnetic Measurements for Archaeological Prospection

    Open Access•Volkmar Schmidt, Joris Coolen•ArchéoSciences•2021

  • These spots of excavation tell

    Open Access•Tony Pollard•Journal of Conflict Archaeology•2021

  • A long walk in the Italian countryside

    Open Access•Ken Saito•Archaeological Prospection•2023

  • UAV magnetometer survey in low‐level flight for archaeology

    Open Access•Andreas Stele, Roland Linck et al.•Archaeological Prospection•2022

  • Green Waste and Archaeological Geophysics

    Open Access•James Gerrard, Liz Caldwell et al.•Archaeological Prospection•2015

  • From nanotesla to picotesla — A new window for magnetic prospecting in archaeology

    Open Access•Helmut Becker•Archaeological Prospection•1995

  • The Archaeology of Historic Battlefields

    Open Access•Douglas D Scott, Andrew P McFeaters•Journal of Archaeological Research•2010

  • Reconstruction of late-Holocene slope and dry valley sediment dynamics in a Belgian loess environment

    Open Access•Tom Rommens, Gert Verstraeten et al.•The Holocene•2007

  • Evaluation of fluxgate magnetometry and electromagnetic induction surveys for subsurface characterization of archaeological features in World War 1 battlefields

    Open Access•N Note, Timothy Saey et al.•Geoarchaeology•2018

  • Drone-based magnetometer prospection for archaeology

    Open Access•Andreas Stele, Leon Kaub et al.•Journal of Archaeological Science•2023

  • Identifying archaeological wood stack charcoal production sites using geophysical prospection

    Open Access•Alan J Powell, Jane C Wheeler et al.•Journal of Archaeological Science•2011

  • Novel insights into prehistoric land use at Stonehenge by combining electromagnetic and invasive methods with a semi-automated interpretation scheme

    Open Access•Philippe De Smedt, Paul Garwood et al.•Journal of Archaeological Science•2022

  • From the Killing Ground

    Open Access•Stuart James Eve, Stuart Eve et al.•Digital War•2020

  • What Is the Best Coil Orientation in the Slingram Electromagnetic Prospecting Method

    Open Access•Alain Tabbagh•Archaeometry•1986

  • The battle of Vossenack Ridge

    Open Access•Andreas Stele, Malte Schwickert et al.•Antiquity•2021

  • Stonehenge, Wiltshire, UK

    Open Access•Timothy Darvill, Friedrich Lüth et al.•European Journal of Archaeology•2013

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae