Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 45 (2) 2017   DOI: 10.17746/1563-0110.2017.45.2.062-070

Annotation:  “Ceramics” from the Zaraysk Upper Paleolithic Site Koksharovsky Kholm and Chertova Gora, Two Neolithic Sanctuaries in the Ural and in Western Siberia: Technical and Morphological Model of Chalcolithic Chopping Tools of the Russian-Karelian Type from K Geochemical Soil Analysis and Environmental Reconstructions at the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Settle Issues in the Calendar Chronology of the Seima-Turbino Transcultural Phenomenon Beads in the Finno-Ugric Women’s Costume: The Evidence of Tarasovo Cemetery on the Middle Kama (0–50 Comprehensive Geophysical Studies at the Suzdal Opolye Settlements Metal Bowls from a Medieval Cemetery at Rusenikha Newly Discovered Bronze Artifacts of the Scythian Period from Archekas Mountain, Kuznetsk Alatau Bronze Age Axes from the Forest-Steppe Altai Wooden Paddles from Trans-Urals and from Eastern and Western European Peat-Bog Sites A Golden Plaque of the Hellenistic Period from Zeravshan, Uzbekistan Albazin, a Russian Town on the Amur: Population Size in the Late 1600s The Variation of Russian Festive Ritualism in Russian Ethnography Ust-Tsilma Female Headdress: Description and Use (Mid-19th to Early 21st Century) Principles of the Information Modeling of Cultural Heritage Objects: The Case of Wooden Buddhist Tem Cranial Injuries in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age Population of the Shnogh River Basin, Armenia   

Comprehensive Geophysical Studies at the Suzdal Opolye Settlements

I.V. Zhurbin¹ and A.N. Fedorina²

¹Physico-Technical Institute, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kirova 132, Izhevsk, 426000, Russia

²Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dm. Ulyanova 19, Moscow, 117036, Russia

Rural landscapes, especially those affected by plowing, mostly reveal no outward signs of archaeological sites. Best-preserved parts of buildings are cellars, utility pits, and other underground objects not visually observable on the surface. A new strategy is proposed for gaining preliminary information about the outlines and inner structures of medieval settlements of that type. It is based on a comparison of geophysical findings with those of drilling, pilot excavations, and tendencies in the distribution of surface finds. The application of this strategy to the study of various types of medieval unfortified sites in the Suzdal Opolye, central Russia, including large settlements (Kibol-5, Shekshovo-2, and Bolshoye Davydovskoye-2), a stratified site (Ves-5), and small unstratified sites (Vishenki-3 and Kistysh-3), demonstrates its efficiency. Specifically, magnetic survey has allowed us to delineate the borders of the settlements, locate densely inhabited areas, production complexes, and sometimes pits. Electr ical survey proves more efficient for assessing spatial characteristics (size and shape) of sites. The excavation area, however, is selected according to the magnetic prospecting data.

Keywords: Suzdal Opolye, Middle Ages, rural settlements, magnetic prospecting, electrical prospecting, groundpenetrating radar, research methods.