Martijn van Leusen
My main interest is in the methodology of landscape archaeological research: in understanding and improving the methods by which we produce and study the 'archaeological record'. This provides the unifying theme for most, if not all, of the research and publications that I have made since graduating at the University of Amsterdam in 1990 - more or less chronologically, in the fields of spatial computing, pseudo-archaeology, GIS applications, data integration, predictive modelling and field walking surveys. Since 1998 I have done a lot of field walking in the two Italian regions (Lazio and Calabria) that my department of Mediterranean Archaeology has been studying since the 1980s, and my most recently completed research projects ("Minor Centers" in Lazio, and "Rural Life" in Calabria) are both - but in very different ways -concerned with deepening our understanding of the datasets produced by field walking. My current research project, 'Probing the Bronze Age-Iron Age Transition' (2018-), revolves around excavations at three Calabrian sites with evidence of habitation during the hard-to-grasp transitional period of the 10th century BC.
As a fulltime faculty member, my time is divided between teaching (40%) and research (60%), and my funding for the latter has for the past decade come almost exclusively from grants won in competition from the Netherlands Foundation for Scientific Research(NWO).
Phone: +31 6 1879 8873
Address: Groningen Institiute of Archaeology
Poststraat 6
9712 ER Groningen
The Netherlands
As a fulltime faculty member, my time is divided between teaching (40%) and research (60%), and my funding for the latter has for the past decade come almost exclusively from grants won in competition from the Netherlands Foundation for Scientific Research(NWO).
Phone: +31 6 1879 8873
Address: Groningen Institiute of Archaeology
Poststraat 6
9712 ER Groningen
The Netherlands
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (20)
Uploads
Landscape archaeology by Martijn van Leusen
This ontology extends the CIDOC CRM 6.2 ontology data standard for cultural heritage data in order to provide classes and properties necessary to describe unique aspects of the archaeological survey process. It also makes use of classes and properties of the CIDOC CRM extensions CRMArchaeo 1.4.1 and CRMsci 1.2.3. The ontology is intended to support researchers interested in integrating archaeology survey data using the CIDOC CRM.
(Italian) A seguito della sintesi pubblicata sulle indagini archeologiche nel territorio di Sezze, condotte dall'Università di Groningen sotto l'egida del Progetto della Regione Pontina (PRP), questo documento discute la metodologia e i primi risultati di due progetti di ricerca sul campo più recenti nel quadro del PRP, entrambi finanziati dall'Organizzazione olandese per la ricerca scientifica (NWO): 1) l'Avellino Event Project (AVP) delle Università di Groningen e Leiden che studia gli effetti distali della grande eruzione del Vesuvio risalente all'età del bronzo sull'ambiente umano della pianura di Fondi e della pianura Pontina. 2) il progetto dei Centri Minori che studia lo sviluppo degli insediamenti di Forum Appi e Ad Medias lungo la Via Appia in relazione allo sviluppo della campagna romana. Entrambi i progetti contribuiscono in modo significativo alla ricostruzione a lungo termine del paesaggio umano nella pianura di Sezze e aprono prospettive su ulteriori lavori interdisciplinari.
Archaeology and prof. dr. Erika Guttmann-Bond of the Institute for Geo- and Bioarchaeology, VU University Amsterdam.
In order to examine the influence of agricultural terraces on the preservation of cultural/ archaeological soils, a buried soil was examined on the transition zone of two agricultural terraces and a buried soil was examined at the transition zone of an agricultural terrace and a river valley. Also several soil exposures in a non-agricultural terrace setting were examined.
The exposures were observed and examined in the field; in total 40 sediment samples were taken and 30 samples were analysed at the Sediment Analysis laboratory at the VU University Amsterdam.
This ontology extends the CIDOC CRM 6.2 ontology data standard for cultural heritage data in order to provide classes and properties necessary to describe unique aspects of the archaeological survey process. It also makes use of classes and properties of the CIDOC CRM extensions CRMArchaeo 1.4.1 and CRMsci 1.2.3. The ontology is intended to support researchers interested in integrating archaeology survey data using the CIDOC CRM.
(Italian) A seguito della sintesi pubblicata sulle indagini archeologiche nel territorio di Sezze, condotte dall'Università di Groningen sotto l'egida del Progetto della Regione Pontina (PRP), questo documento discute la metodologia e i primi risultati di due progetti di ricerca sul campo più recenti nel quadro del PRP, entrambi finanziati dall'Organizzazione olandese per la ricerca scientifica (NWO): 1) l'Avellino Event Project (AVP) delle Università di Groningen e Leiden che studia gli effetti distali della grande eruzione del Vesuvio risalente all'età del bronzo sull'ambiente umano della pianura di Fondi e della pianura Pontina. 2) il progetto dei Centri Minori che studia lo sviluppo degli insediamenti di Forum Appi e Ad Medias lungo la Via Appia in relazione allo sviluppo della campagna romana. Entrambi i progetti contribuiscono in modo significativo alla ricostruzione a lungo termine del paesaggio umano nella pianura di Sezze e aprono prospettive su ulteriori lavori interdisciplinari.
Archaeology and prof. dr. Erika Guttmann-Bond of the Institute for Geo- and Bioarchaeology, VU University Amsterdam.
In order to examine the influence of agricultural terraces on the preservation of cultural/ archaeological soils, a buried soil was examined on the transition zone of two agricultural terraces and a buried soil was examined at the transition zone of an agricultural terrace and a river valley. Also several soil exposures in a non-agricultural terrace setting were examined.
The exposures were observed and examined in the field; in total 40 sediment samples were taken and 30 samples were analysed at the Sediment Analysis laboratory at the VU University Amsterdam.
principles) for systematic Mediterranean archaeological field survey. It reports on the initial stages of work by the authors to
build an extension to the CIDOC CRM ontology to accommodate concepts underlying the description of archaeological field
survey data. We first constructed, based on our own experience as survey directors, a general process model for
archaeological field survey; we then defined the concepts central to such survey practices in consultation with other domain
experts; and we produced a draft conversion of these concepts into CIDOC CRM ‘classes’ with the help of members of the
CRM Special Interest Group. While this work has resulted in a fairly robust conceptual model of field survey as practiced in
the Mediterranean, we also identify and discuss several issues relating to the tension between the desire to enable
comparative analysis of survey databases by improving documentation standards, and the apparent inability of the survey
domain to achieve standardization of field procedures. Although the process of formally agreeing a CIDOC CRM extension
for field survey is a slow one, we believe a global solution to the problem of comparability is worth pursuing over a local,
temporary one. We lay out the steps needed to resolve the remaining conceptual issues, to formalise the CRM extension,
and to implement it in the form of a ‘mapping’ tool.
form. We believe that what is lacking is a software infrastructure that can encompass both ‘traditional’ 2D and ‘new’ 3D archaeological data in the same 3D environment, and can allow for analysis in three dimensions. We propose here to construct such an infrastructure from pre-existing FOSS4G components, and to create a number of additional bespoke query and report functions in order to achieve the functionality required by archaeological researchers.
The 'audience' for this roundtable should be those people who already have, or expect to have, responsibility for documenting archaeological field projects, and are interested either to learn about the status quo of the CRM approach, or to collaborate on the formation of a broad group or network of researchers looking to apply the CRM approach (and finding funding to do so).
But how can we be so sure that the low probability zones are really not interesting? And where do we draw the line between interesting and not interesting? These are difficult choices indeed for those involved in AHM. Archaeologists who do not have to make these choices can criticize the current approach to predictive modelling from the sideline, but do not have to come up with an alternative.
Within the BBO-programme we have been trying to provide such an alternative to the archaeological community (see van Leusen and Kamermans, 2005; Kamermans et al., 2009). However, after five years of research, we have to conclude that we have only been partly successful. In this paper we will shortly explain the research that we have undertaken, and venture to offer some explanations for the lack of success of new approaches to predictive modelling in AHM up to now.
The main reason for using predictive models in AHM is efficiency. In ‘post-Malta’ archaeology, the financial, human and technical resources allocated to archaeology have increased enormously. But at the same time, these resources have to be spent both effectively and efficiently. So why not create and use tools that will allow us to do so? Archaeological predictive models will tell us where we have the best chances of encountering archaeology. Searching for archaeology in the high probability areas will ‘pay off’, as more archaeology will be found there than in low probability zones. It is a matter of priorities: we can’t survey everything, and we don’t want to spend money and energy on finding nothing. And there is also the political dimension: the general public wants something in return for the taxpayers’ money invested in archaeology. It’s not much use telling politicians to spend money on research that will not deliver an ‘archaeological return’. But how can we be so sure that the low probability zones are really not interesting? And where do we draw the line between interesting and not interesting? These are hard choices indeed for those involved in AHM. Archaeologists who don’t have to make these choices have an easy job: they can criticize the current approach to predictive modelling from the sidelines, and don’t have to come up with an alternative.
Within the BBO program we have been trying to provide such an alternative to the archaeological community (Kamermans et al. 2005). However, at the end of the project, we have to conclude that we have only been partly successful. We have done a fair amount of research, published three books and many papers, made the problems with predictive modelling internationally visible but failed to change the procedures of predictive modelling in the Netherlands. In this paper we venture to offer some explanations for the lack of success of new approaches to predictive modelling in AHM in the Netherlands up to now. And finally, we will try to sketch the future of archaeological predictive modelling, for which we can see three distinct scenarios.
Toen de interimwetgeving, die aan de huidige monumentenwet voorafging, aanstaande was, werd de noodzaak tot het voorspellen van archeologische waarden inmiddels zo sterk gevoeld, dat de toenmalige ROB in 1997 de IKAW lanceerde . Daarmee werd in één klap de archeologie op de politieke agenda gezet, en werd voor heel archeologisch en bestuurlijk Nederland inzichtelijk waar er belangwekkende archeologische resten in de grond konden zitten.
poster presented at the 116th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, January 8-11, New Orleans, LA. Abstract published in Archaeological Institute of America 116th Annual Meeting Abstracts 38: 88. [ISBN 1-931-909-30-X]
kind, aim to produce a detailed, fair and complete record of the
archaeological remains detectable on the land surface. However, all
practicing survey archaeologists agree that many factors conspire
to reduce the representativity of the samples collected. In the summer of 2014 the authors have conducted field survey
experiments in the Raganello Basin, the Calabrian study area of the
Groningen Institute of Archaeology (GIA). Field experiments were
conducted to study the variability of standard surface samples in
relation to walker abilities and experience (experiment 1), and to
determine detection curves for different find categories
(experiment 2). This poster reports on the first analyses.
Project (2010-2015), a multidisciplinary geoarchaeological project that aims to obtain a better understanding of the thousands of small protohistoric sites that have been mapped in field walking surveys all over the Mediterranean. The project investigates representative sites and their environments with a combination of invasive and noninvasive methods and at a scales ranging from
the intra-site to the microregional.
In the Groningen Institute of Archaeology (GIA) surveys, conducted since 2000 in the watershed area of the Raganello river (northern Calabria, Italy), field walking has indeed been very successful in the foothill zone - with mostly arable land use - but has met with trouble both in the coastal plain and in the uplands and mountains of the hinterland. In the hinterland, arable fields are scarce, large areas are covered by forest, and the mountains cannot be surveyed by standard methods.
This poster details how experiments were conducted to determine the potential of MS prospection as a complementary method to field walking surveys for the detection of 'hidden' archaeological landscapes.
In 2005 work began to remedy this and other methodological problems encountered by landscape archaeologists - the Hidden Landscapes project. In collaboration with physical geographers from the university of Utrecht, the PC-Raster software is being used to construct the CALEROS dynamic erosion model. This poster presents our preliminary results in modelling the most important natural process - erosion. Future work will focus on refinement of the model, and on the inclusion of the major anthropogenic process - agricultural terracing and plough erosion.
Ephemeral protohistoric remains are recorded in most Mediterranean landscape archaeology projects, yet they are rarely investigated beyond the mapping stage. In our research area, the Raganello basin in northern Calabria, the majority of the 250 known archaeological sites consists of small (less than 10m diameter) concentrations of poorly preserved handmade pottery, dating to the Bronze and Iron Ages (2000-800 B.C.). These were mapped during more than 15 years of field walking surveys by the Groningen Institute of Archaeology and occur throughout the landscape, from the foothills surrounding an (uninvestigated) coastal
In this paper, we will demonstrate how detailed studies on a small scale increase our understanding of site-specific function and formation, while at the same time being incorporated in a landscape-scale approach. Our targeted site studies integrate datasets from high-resolution re-surveys of known surface scatters, geophysical detection techniques, detailed re-studies of problematic survey material categories, and minimally invasive ground-truthing through corings and test pits. We can extrapolate these local data to a larger scale by sampling representative examples of different site types. This typology is based on landscape zones and properties of material categories. Furthermore, the landscape level of investigations includes large-scale magnetic prospection in different parts of the research area, combined with geomorphological and pedological studies in order to explain post-depositional processes and site preservation. A LiDAR dataset is used for GIS-based analysis of slope processes.
To illustrate our approach we will present a case study of a dense rural settlement pattern in a particular section of the foothill zone, datable to the Final Bronze Age (1100-950 B.C.). Re-surveys of previously investigated areas, combined with re-studies of finds categories, have already increased the number of FBA scatters by more than a third. Magnetic gradiometry prospection revealed the presence of rectangular building-sized anomalies dispersed throughout the area, whereas test pits have confirmed the temporal and spatial association between FBA surface remains and these rectangular structures. The implications of these results for regional heritage management, which is still very site-oriented, will be raised.
I will here present the work of my own landscape archaeological research program in the basin of the Raganello river, in northern Calabria region (Italy) as a model for interdisciplinary work, discussing some of its successes and failures and what we should learn from them. This Rural Life in Protohistoric Italy project has conducted experiments to determine which geophysical mapping methods work in the specific Mediterranean geoenvironment, which types of geological and anthropogenis anomalies occur, and how the latter relate to subsurface archaeological reservoirs. The results point to the need for a joint archeogeophysical research agenda and funding application effort, which will be briefly outlined.
- What is the significance of the occasional single lithics found by the RAP surveys? Are they ‘the tip of the iceberg’ or not? And if so, what kind of iceberg?
- Can we obtain general distribution parameters for the ‘lithics landscape’ from a limited resurveying program based on a stratified sampling scheme?
- Which are the – personal and environmental – factors that have the most significant effect on our ability to detect lithics across the landscape?
The outcome and significance of the experiment is discussed in detail, with special reference to the question of spatial scales as applied to landscape and site studies.