Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-6kn8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T03:08:32.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantifying the threat to archaeological sites from the erosion of cultivated soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Keith Wilkinson ,
Andrew Tyler ,
Donald Davidson  and
Ian Grieve
Keith Wilkinson
Affiliation:
1Department of Archaeology, University of Winchester, West Hill, Winchester SO22 4NR, UK (Email: Keith.Wilkinson@winchester.ac.uk)
Andrew Tyler
Affiliation:
2School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
Donald Davidson
Affiliation:
2School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
Ian Grieve
Affiliation:
2School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ploughing is probably the greatest agent of attrition to archaeological sites world-wide. In every country, every year, a bit more is shaved off buried strata and a bit more of the past becomes unreadable. On the other hand, people must eat and crops must be planted. How can the fields be best managed to get the best of both worlds? Perhaps the most pressing need for resource managers is to know how quickly a particular field is eroding: negotiation and protection is then possible. Up to now that has been difficult to measure.

The new procedure presented here, which draws on the unexpected benefits of nuclear weapons testing, shows how variation in the concentration of the radioisotope 137Cs can be used to monitor soil movements over the last 40 years. The measurements allow a site's ‘life expectancy’ to be calculated, and there are some promising dividends for tracking site formation processes.

Keywords

CRMsite formation processes137Cs inventorysoil redistributiontillageerosionQuantock Hills

Information

Type
Method
Information
Antiquity , Volume 80 , Issue 309 , 1 September 2006 , pp. 658 - 670
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bonnett, P.J.P. & Cambray, R.S.. 1991. The record of deposition of radionuclides in the sediments of Ponsonby Tarn, Cumbria. Hydrobiologia 214: 63–70.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2005. OxCal 3.10. Oxford: Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
Cook, G.T., Baxter, M.S., Duncan, H.J., Toole, J. & Malcolmson, R.. 1984. Geochemical association of plutonium in the Caithness environment. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research 223: 517–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cremers, A., Elsen, A., Depreter, P. & Maes, A.. 1988. Quantitative analysis of radiocaesium retention in soils. Nature 335: 247–9.Google Scholar
Darvill, T.C. & Fulton, A.K.. 1998. The Monuments at Risk Survey of England 1995. London & Bournemouth: English Heritage/School of Conservation Sciences, Bournemouth University.Google Scholar
Davidson, D.A., Grieve, I.G., Tyler, A.N., Barclay, G.J. & Maxwell, G.S.. 1998. Archaeological sites: assessment of erosion risk. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 857–60.Google Scholar
Dejong, E., Begg, C.B.M. & Kachanoski, R.G.. 1983. Estimates of soil erosion and deposition for some Saskatchewan soils. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 63: 607–17.Google Scholar
Defra, UK. 2004a. Environmental Stewardship. http://www.defra.gov.uk/erdp/schemes/es/default.htm (accessed 15/9/2004).Google Scholar
Defra, UK. 2004b. The first soil action plan for England 2004–2006. London: Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.Google Scholar
Findlay, D.C., Colborne, G.J.N., Cope, D.W., Harrod, T.R., Hogan, D.V. & Staines, S.J.. 1984. Soils and their use in south west England. Harpenden: Soil Survey of England and Wales Bulletin.Google Scholar
Lambrick, G. 1977. Archaeology and agriculture: A survey of modern cultivation methods and problems of assessing plough damage to archaeological sites. London & Oxford: Council for British Archaeology and Oxford Archaeological Unit.Google Scholar
Quine, T.A. 1995. Estimation of erosion rates from caesium-137 data: the calibration question, in Foster, I.D.L., Garrett, A.M. & Webb, B.W. (ed.) Sediment and water quality in river catchments: 307–29. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Quine, T.A. & Walling, D.E.. 1992. Patterns and rates of contemporary soil erosion derived using caesium-137: measurement, analysis and archaeological significance, in Bell, M.G. & Boardman, J. (ed.) Past and present soil erosion (Monograph 22): 185–96. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
Reimer, P.J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J.W., Bertrand, C.J.H., Blackwell, P.G., Buck, C.E., Burr, G.S., Cutler, K.B., Damon, P.E., Edwards, R.L., Fairbanks, R.G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T.P., Hogg, A.G., Hughen, K.A., Kromer, B., McCormac, F., Manning, S., Bronk Ramsey, C., Reimer, R.W., Remmele, S., Southon, J.R., Stuiver, M., Talamo, S., Taylor, F.W., van der Plicht, J. & Weyhenmeyer, C.E.. 2004. IntCal04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0-26 cal kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46: 1029–58.Google Scholar
Somerset County Council. 2005. Somerset Historic Environments Record. http://webapp1.somerset.gov.uk/her/sop.asp?flash=true (accessed 30/12/05).Google Scholar
Trow, S. 2004. Saving sites from the plough. Institute of Field Archaeologists Yearbook and Directory 2004: 37–8.Google Scholar
Tyler, A.N. 1999. Monitoring anthropogenic radioactivity in salt marsh environments through in situ gamma ray spectrometry. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 45: 235–52.Google Scholar
Tyler, A.N. 2004. High accuracy in situ radiometric mapping. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 72: 195–202.Google Scholar
Tyler, A.N., Davidson, D.A. & Grieve, I.G.. 2001. In situ radiometric mapping of soil erosion and field-moist bulk density on cultivated fields. Soil Use and Management 17: 88–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walling, D.E. & Quine, T.A.. 1990. Use of caesium-137 to investigate patterns and rates of soil erosion on arable fields, in Boardman, J., Foster, I.D.L. & Dearing, J.A. (ed.) Soil erosion on agricultural land: 33–53. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Webster, C.J. & Brunning, R.A.. 2004. A 7th-century AD cemetery at Stoneage Barton Farm, Bishop's Lydeard, Somerset and square-ditched burials in post-Roman Britain. Archaeological Journal 161: 54–81.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, K.N. & Thorpe, I.J.N.. 1999. The Southern Quantock Archaeological Survey: research design. Unpublished document, King Alfred's College, Winchester.Google Scholar
Zhang, X.B., Higgitt, D.L. & Walling, D.E.. 1990. A preliminary assessment of the potential for using caesium-137 to estimate rates of soil-erosion in the Loess Plateau of China. Hydrological Sciences Journal 35: 243–52.Google Scholar