Magnetic Prospection of the Pre-Columbian - UMR Sisyphe

Transcription

Archaeological Prospection
Archaeol. Prospect. (2014)
Published online in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/arp.1482
Magnetic Prospection of the Pre-Columbian
Archaeological Site of El Caño in the cultural
region of Gran Coclé, Panama
ALEXIS MOJICA1,2, LOUIS PASTOR2, CHRISTIAN CAMERLYNCK2*,
NICOLAS FLORSCH3 AND ALAIN TABBAGH2
1
Laboratorio de Investigación en Ingeniería y Ciencias Aplicadas, Centro Experimental de Ingeniería,
Universidad Tecnológica de Panamá, Panama City, Panama
2
Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Université Paris 06, UMR 7619 METIS, F-75005, Paris, France
3
Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Université Paris 06, UMI 209 UMMISCO, F-75005, Paris, France
ABSTRACT
The archaeological site of El Caño is located in the cultural region of Gran Coclé and is one of the most important preColumbian ceremonial complexes of the Isthmus of Panama. El Caño is 3.57 ha in area presents a set of mounds and
alignment of columns of carved basalt and tuff. The first organized occupation is dated between 100 and 400 BC, and
this occupation lasted until the arrival of the Spanish conquerors. In order to determine the spatiotemporal organization
of the site, the first magnetic and electrical surveys of this archaeological site were performed in 2005 and 2006.
Although the resistivity mapping survey did not offer any information about buried stone structures, the magnetic
survey in gradiometer mode produced well-characterized magnetic anomalies. A circular magnetic anomaly in the
central area of the site allowed the discovery of one of the largest Panamanian pre-Columbian funerary complexes.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Key words: Magnetic prospection; gradiometer; El Caño; magnetic anomaly; mound; pre-Columbian funerary
complex
Introduction
In recent decades the use of non-invasive geophysical techniques in recognizing the archaeological
potential of a given site has experienced a noticeable
increase due to its speed in the field, the low cost
and high data density, in combination with highresolution results. Today, important geophysical
investigations are applied to the study of archaeological sites in Central America such as Copan
(Pastor et al., 2004).
Although Panama has important pre-Columbian
and Hispanic archaeological sites, geophysical investigations are not numerous. Electrical methods were used
in the eastern sector of Panama to locate buried preColumbian graves (Wake et al., 2012) and in northern
Panama for detection of buried Hispanic structures at
* Correspondence to: C. Camerlynck, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC
Université Paris 06, UMR 7619 METIS, F-75005, Paris, France.
E-mail: [email protected]
the site of Nombre de Dios, which was the first
European port on the Atlantic coast of the Isthmus of
Panama and was in connected with the old city of
Panama for transferring wealth from South America to
Spain (Mojica et al., 2010). Magnetic methods were used
successfully in Panama Viejo, which was the first
European settlement on the Pacific coast of the Americas
(Mojica, 2007; Mojica et al., 2009).
Excavations at the archaeological site of El Caño
began in1961, but it was not until 2005 and 2006 that
the first geophysical magnetic and electrical surveys
were performed by the authors of this article. Electrical
prospecting with a 1-m square grid offered no
evidence of very shallow buried stone structures
within the investigation depth and showed very weak
variations in this area of the fairly uniform alluvial site.
Consequently, the work focused on exploiting the
information of the magnetic survey, previously well
known as a fruitful method in archaeological surveys,
and this paper presents the most important results of
this prospection.
Received 17 October 2013
Accepted 31 January 2014
A. Mojica et al.
Geographical and geological context
The site of El Caño is located in the district of Natá of
Coclé province, in the central sector of the Isthmus of
Panama, about 185 miles west of Panama City (Figure 1)
and near the important archaeological site of Conte. The
elevation of the site is 100 m above sea level and it is
situated in very fertile lowlands that extend along the
coast, which is characterized by a tropical rainy climate
with rainfall of around 2500 mm per year. The average
temperature is 28° and the vegetation is savanna grasses,
shrubs and few trees.
The site is located on an alluvial plain drained by the
Coclé del Sur, El Caño, Grande and Churubé rivers;
according to Miranda and Gutierrez (1993), fluvial
deposits of these rivers comprise sandy-clay sediments
with gravel components of volcanic origin. The regional geology is described as the Rio Hato Formation
(Figure 2), which includes consolidated and nonconsolidated sandstones, conglomerates, shales, tuffs
and Quaternary pumices. The El Caño site is located
close to the Yeguada volcano, one of the major preHolocene active volcanos in Panama (Knutsen, 2010).
Archaeological context
The central zone of the Isthmus of Panama presents
archaeological characteristics of the pre-Columbian
culture of Gran Coclé, which is characterized by the
oldest ceramics of the American continent (Mayo,
2006). According to Briggs (1989), Isaza (1993) and
Cooke (1998) the organized settlements of such sites
as El Caño and Conte date from the first years of the
Christian period. Two periods are distinguished in
these inhabited sites: the first from AD 100–700, which
corresponds to a quite egalitarian social organization,
and the second from AD 700–1550, which is associated
with the occurrence of tribal chiefs (caciques); the social
Figure 1. Location of the pre-Columbian site of El Caño.
Figure 2. Geological map of El Caño and its surroundings (source:
Mapa Geológico de la República de Panamá, Instituto de Recursos
Minerales).
organization, egalitarian in the beginning and then
hierarchical, is verified in the inventory of archaeological funeral excavations. For archaeologists, the site
of El Caño corresponds then to a political and social
centre ruled by the caciques, with production of gold,
copper and various artefacts (Cooke et al., 2003).
A brief physical description of the site indicates a
path of volcanic river cobbles to the east, tuff basalt
monoliths carved in the centre of the site (Figure 3),
and a set of four mounds of few metres high and tens
of metres in diameter: Figure 3c shows one of the
mounds that played an important role in funeral rites.
The chronology of the main archaeological studies of
the site of El Caño is as follows: the first excavations
were carried out in 1926 by the collector Hyatt Verrill;
Gerald Doyle identified later in 1961 a pre-Columbian
cemetery near the basalt monoliths; in 1973, Richard
Cooke developed an archaeological rescue plan of the
site and identified a set of urns with pre-Columbian
and colonial remains; between 1982 and 1985, excavations within mound M4 (excavations E1982-3-4 and
E84-5) revealed pre-Columbian tombs and many
potsherds were discovered (Lleras and Barillas, 1985);
finally Carlos Fitzgerald carried out excavations at
mounds M3 and M4 and highlighted the multicomponent and multifunctional aspects of this site
(Fitzgerald, 1992). Since 2005 the archaeologist Julia
Mayo has been conducting a new archaeological
programme at El Caño and asked us to plan and implement the first geophysical studies at the site.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
Magnetic Prospection of the Pre-Columbian El Caño Site, Panama
Figure 3. Panoramic views of the site of El Caño: (a) monoliths, (b) ‘temple’ (rectangular set of monoliths), (c) mound M1 and (d) the cobbled path.
Methodology
Magnetic prospection instrumentation and
measurements
Magnetic survey is often used in archaeology because it
is a non-invasive, high-resolution method that allows
rapid and extensive coverage of the study area (Aspinall
et al., 2008). We used a G-858 caesium magnetometer
(Geometrics Ltd) with two sensors in vertical gradiometer configuration. This mode is commonly used
in archaeological surveying, whereby the two
sensors are fixed on an aluminum tube and separated
vertically by a distance of 0.7 m (Figure 4), the lower
sensor being at 0.45 m elevation above the ground
surface. At El Caño, the inclination of Earth’s
magnetic field is 37°, its average modulus is 33 653 nT
and its declination 3°4’ west.
The difference between the values of the magnetic
field intensity recorded by the two sensors, divided by
the distance between them, approximates the vertical
magnetic gradient measured at the midpoint between
both sensors, hereafter called pseudo-gradient.
We have prospected a surface area of 3.57 ha distributed into 22 areas, as shown in Figure 5. Magnetic
prospecting was carried out along a set of profiles
separated by a distance of 1 m and the survey was
made in opposite directions between adjacent profiles
(zig-zag mode). In most of the 22 areas, profiles are oriented along the 11°N direction. For practical reasons,
profiles are oriented along the perpendicular 101°N
direction in the two smaller southwestern areas. Along
each profile measurements were made every 0.2 s, that
is, every 20 cm for an operator moving at a speed of
3.6 km h-1, with the data acquisition system interpolating the data to correct variations in operator speed.
The measurement resolution of the G858 magnetometer
Figure 4. Using G-858 caesium magnetometer in gradiometer mode
in the El Caño site.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
A. Mojica et al.
Figure 5. Aerial photograph of the archaeological site with the polygons that define the area surveyed. This aerial photograph was taken after the
ground levelling works in 1970 (Lleras and Barillas, 1985).
is 0.01 nT, but the actual sensitivity is close to 0.1 nT at
the selected sampling rate (Mathé et al., 2006).
Magnetics data analysis
For all geophysical prospection, before obtaining a
simple result or interpretation, the numerical data have
to be cleaned in order to remove effects induced by the
acquisition as well as external factors and defects within
the devices. Thus the removal of all effects not linked to
the buried archaeological structures is necessary and
this pre-processing is particularly needed in magnetic
geophysical prospecting (Scollar et al., 1986; EderHinterleitner et al., 1996; Ciminale and Loddo, 2001).
Figure 6 shows the effects of the magnetic signal
processing on the measured data: the corrections made
to the magnetic signal are explained below.
of the soil (volcanic rock pieces, scrap metal, etc.). A
logarithmic compression algorithm can reduce this
distorting effect:
jxj
þ1
(1)
xcompressed ¼ A log10
A
Figure 6c illustrates the application of this algorithm
on the data corrected for the zig-zag effect.
Figure 6c therefore represents the most important
result in the discussion of the magnetic survey, however,
Zig-zag (or herringbone) effect correction
Measurements along alternating profiles are made in
opposite directions (forward and return) and this process can create a zero drift, an effect that accumulates
in various pairs of profiles to transform a linear anomaly
into a teeth-shaped anomaly (zig-zag effect). An interprofile cross-correlation algorithm therefore was used
to correct this effect and Figure 6b shows the result of
correcting for this effect.
Spike-effect correction
This effect is linked to the existence of specific strong
or spike anomalies caused by the presence of small
magnetic sources distributed randomly on the surface
Figure 6. Map of vertical magnetic pseudo-gradient: (a) measured, (b)
correction of zig-zag effect and (c) correction of spike effects after
correcting for zig-zag effect.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
with the aim of taking into account all magnetic information we have also looked at the magnetic field
recorded by the upper magnetic sensor. Without a continuous record of the magnetic field at a base station,
however, the recorded magnetic field could be corrected
for diurnal variation only by removing a polynomial
trend on a profile-by-profile basis, thus providing residual data. A reduction to the pole was then performed
using a Wiener filter to stabilize the process at the local
37° inclination (Hansen and Pawlowski, 1989). Both
raw data and data reduced to the pole are shown for
the areas east of mounds M3 and M4 and south of the
monoliths (Figure 7). Data that have been reduced to
the pole (Figure 7b) allow magnetic anomalies to be
identified and localized more clearly than the raw
data (Figure 7a), however, these field maps provide
lower frequency information than vertical magnetic
pseudo-gradient maps.
Results and discussion
We did not make magnetic measurements around
mounds M3 and M4 because they are excavated and
exposed to tourism. In addition, although we identified anomalies A3 and A4, we will limit our discussion
to anomalies A1, A2 and A5–A9.
Figure 8 presents the vertical magneticpseudogradient-corrected and schematic interpretative
maps. We can classify the set of anomalies observed into
two groups: the first comprises anomalies A6–A9, which
according to the narratives of site workers and our
Figure 7. (a) Map of raw total magnetic field data from the top sensor and (b) of the residual total field reduced to the pole.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
A. Mojica et al.
observations are linked to leveling work at the site
before 1970; the second comprises A1, A2 and A5.
Anomalies A1 and A2 correspond to circles of approximately 15–20 m in diameter, and are surrounded by
the topographical border associated with the remainder
of mounds M1 and M2, which have slightly larger
diameters. Consequently these magnetic anomalies
are interpreted as ‘magnetic traces’ or ‘magnetic
boundaries’ of mounds. Anomaly A5 comprises a set
of circular rings of approximately 80 m in diameter
and is the most important magnetic anomaly identified. In the first instance the regular circle forming
A5 cannot be explained (Figure 8a) by geological
reasons and therefore can be interpreted as
Figure 8. (a) Vertical magnetic pseudo-gradient after corrections. (b) Schematic interpretation of the main magnetic anomalies. Positions of the A–B
and C–D profiles discussed in the text are shown.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
anthropogenic. We therefore proposed to archaeologists that this anomaly could represent the boundary
of a funeral or ceremonial area.
With these results, in 2010 the archaeologists led by
Julia Mayo and Carlos Mayo excavated in centre of
magnetic anomaly A5 and at a depth of about 5 m the remains of a warrior chieftain with golden breastplates,
bracelets and necklaces were found. During the dry
season of 2011, at greater depth, a second grave was
detected with details and ornaments similar to the first,
suggesting the existence of another important cacique.
In the vicinity of this grave a golden dressed baby was
found, who could probably correspond to his son, and
under these residues a set of bones was detected that
probably correspond to sacrifices of slaves or captive
warriors. Radiocarbon analysis showed that these graves
date from AD 900. Other artefacts contained in the excavation walls marked the limits of another four graves
(Williams, 2012). Figure 9, a photograph of the excavations in 2013, shows the great depth at which ceramics
and bones remains have been discovered, and emphasizes that pseudo-gradient or top-sensor magnetic maps
could provide non-redundant interpretations through
different investigation depths (see discussion below).
After the discovery of magnetic anomaly A5 it was
necessary identify its causative feature or causative soil
process. First, as mentioned above, we observe that inside mounds M1 and M2, near their base, there are magnetic circular anomalies. Second, it is known that in the
year 1970, before the site was listed as an archaeological
park, agricultural work had levelled some mounds
(Cooke, 1976; Lleras and Barillas, 1985). Therefore we
can assume the possible existence of a mound, M5
(now levelled), linked to A5 anomaly. It was not possible
to obtain information from maps or aerial photography
showing this mound, but it has been possible to identify
a former farm worker at site, Benjamin Ortega, who confirmed the existence of a low-lying mound (of about
1.5 m height) with a large diameter corresponding to
that of anomaly A5. This information was provided in
the presence of the director of the El Caño Museum,
who knew Benjamin Ortega and confirmed these claims.
Furthermore, we propose that because anomaly A5
corresponds to a ‘magnetic trace’ of mound M5
(now levelled), circular anomalies A1 and A2 would correspond to the ‘magnetic traces’ of mounds M1 and M2.
In order to investigate the physical cause of circular
anomalies A1, A2 and A5, it is noted that stratigraphic
studies conducted in different parts of the site in 1984
showed a simple stratigraphy of alluvial deposits on a
unique sandy-clay layer over almost all parts of the site.
The difference between the inside and outside of the
mounds (existing or levelled) lies in the amount of water
infiltration due to strong runoff on the mounds during
the rainy season, which lasts 8–9 months per year. In
the ‘interior’ of the mounds the balance between
infiltration and runoff is less favourable to infiltration
due to the topography, whereas in the ‘exterior’ of the
mounds the flatness limits runoff and infiltration is
higher. Thus, the physical characteristics of the subsurface
soil vary between the interior and exterior of the mounds.
To verify this fact, two perpendicular electrical
resistivity tomograms (north–south, east–west) were
performed across the mound M1. For a realistic
achievement, we selected the pole–pole array, with 46
(north–south) and 44 (east–west) electrodes with a
Figure 9. Photograph of excavations in the centre of anomaly A5, with Louis Pastor (geophysicist) and Carlos Mayo (archaeologist): (a) indicates a
ceramics deposit and (b) a set of bones. Photograph by A. Mojica, April 2013.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
A. Mojica et al.
Figure 10. Two-dimensional electrical resistivity tomographies across mound M1: (a) north–south direction; (b) east–west direction. The inverted
triangle represents the point of intersection between both tomographic profiles. Superimposed the corresponding vertical magnetic pseudogradient profiles. This figure is available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/arp
0.5 m minimum electrode spacing. Acquisition was
performed using five levels, which provide an inner
current and potential electrodes distance between 0.5
and 2.5 m. Apparent resistivity data were then inverted
using Res2dinv software (Geotomo Software, http://
www.geotomosoft.com). Figure 10 shows the difference
in calculated electrical resistivity under the mound and
outside of the mound, with a range of values between
5.3 and 10.7 Ohm.m for the low electrical resistivity
and between 10.7 and 14.5 Ohm.m for the less conductive surface. Under the mound it can be seen that there
is a surface layer of high resistivity (in dark colour) of
greater thickness than outside the mound. Moreover, it
can also be noted that (particularly in Figure 10a) under
the surface layer, electrical resistivity outside the mound
is less (5.3–7.2 Ohm.m) than electrical resistivity inside
the mound. Also in Figure 10a, and in the vertical
magnetic pseudo-gradient profile, it is evident from the
shape of the north–south profile that the mound is an
accumulation of magnetic material, with some localized
magnetic anomalies coincident with shallow slightly
less resistive material. We therefore postulate that the
Figure 11. (a) Observed (bold line) and modelled (dashed line) vertical magnetic pseudo-gradient profile calculated for a magnetic ring structure
along the A–B profile. (b) Corresponding vertical cross-section of modelled ring structure.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
Figure 12. Stratigraphy of the mound along the A–B profile (a) before
levelling work in 1970, (b) after 1970 and (c) curve of the magnetic
field intensity along the A–B profile with superimposed a running
average curve.
difference in electrical resistivity is associated with a soil
having experienced more than several centuries of
intense rainfall, with severe redox cycles, and this
weathering effect is also responsible for the magnetic
susceptibility differences (Liu et al., 2012) between the
inside and outside of the mound.
A careful analysis of anomaly A5 shows a circular
normal polarity anomaly (positive anomaly to the south,
negative to the north) on the vertical magnetic pseudogradient. To identify the cause of this circular magnetic
anomaly we have calculated the vertical magnetic
pseudo-gradient in the case of a simple model for comparison. The selected model corresponds to a ring with
a +0.0018 u.SI susceptibility contrast, located in the local
magnetic field. Some additional noise based on statistical parameters determined from actual measurements
is included for realism. The modelling result (Figure 11)
shows a corresponding normal bipolar circular magnetic
anomaly very similar, qualitatively, to the circular
anomaly A5 of Figure 8a, through low signal/noise
conditions. As an explanation, the high runoff due to
heavy rains during yearly rainy seasons associated
with the former M1 mound topography therefore
promoted intense infiltrating conditions at the mound
periphery, creating a potential shallow water-storage
phenomenon. The runoff associated with the
infiltrating condition so enriched the former mound
periphery with ferromagnetic soils materials that have
left a residual magnetic anomaly (Orgeira and
Compagnucci, 2006).
We present in Figures 12 and 13 two profiles of the
magnetic field, measured by the upper sensor of the
magnetometer. Figure 12 shows the profile along A–B
(see Figure 8) through anomaly A5, which is associated
with the levelled mound M5, and Figure 13 shows the
profile along C–D (see Figure 8) through existing mound
M1. The stratigraphy chosen for these figures is that
evidenced by archaeologists in boreholes and trenches
performed in the year 1984 in the mounds M3 and M4.
Figure 12a represents a simplified stratigraphic
section along profile A–B: outside the mound a surface
layer of alluvial deposit with humus of approximately
0.5 m thickness rests on sandy-clay material with few
potsherds; inside the mound, we find sandy-clay materials used to build the mound and under this mound a
sandy-clay layer with many potsherds. Figure 12b represents the stratigraphic section along the same profile
A–B after it was levelled in 1970. Figure 12c represents
the variation of the magnetic field measured by the
upper sensor along profile A–B. Between positions 31
and 111 m of the A–B profile, there is a field average
Figure 13. (a) Stratigraphic section along the C–D profile. (b) Curve of the total magnetic field intensity along the C–D profile.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
A. Mojica et al.
value slightly higher than the average values of the field
outside the levelled mound. The profile is disturbed by
magnetic field variations (A6) due to the surface irregularities of the terrain or levelling works.
The C–D profile made through mound M2 is much
simpler, as shown in Figure 13, which shows (a) the
stratigraphic section and (b) the variation of magnetic
field intensity along the profile. We observe an increase
in the value of the magnetic field intensity between
positions 10 and 26 m of the C–D profile that reflects
the magnetic effect of the material under the mound,
which should present a higher magnetic susceptibility
to that of the host rock.
Conclusions
The most important discovery of this first geophysical
survey of the El Caño site corresponds to the circular
anomaly of 80 m in diameter that was revealed
(in the absence of any archaeological or geomorphological indication) by magnetic survey in gradiometer
mode. The perfect regularity of this anomaly and the
discovery of small similar circular anomalies at the
base of two mounds (which are often burial areas),
led us to propose to the archaeologists that this anomaly delimits a large burial or ceremonial area. Five
years after this discovery, in 2010, archaeologists began
excavating in the centre of this circular anomaly and
revealed one of the most important pre-Columbian
funerary complexes in Panama (Williams, 2012).
This anomaly did not appear immediately explicable, and small trenches perpendicular to this anomaly
as well as boreholes did not provide any results, so at
first it was considered to be a ‘magnetic ghost’, in
accordance with Fröhlich et al. (2005). Careful enquiries
about the recent history of the site revealed, in addition
to the existing mounds, there were former mounds that
were levelled after 1970.
This led us to identify the ‘magnetic ghost’ as a
‘magnetic trace’ of mounds (in place or recently
levelled) exposed to high water runoff during the
8 or 9 months of the rainy season. This high water runoff separates the sandy-clay medium of the mound in a
cylindrical space inside the mound, with limited water
infiltration, from the surrounding external environment that is water saturated. Thus revealing the capability of the vertical magnetic pseudo-gradient signal
to detect a peripheral magnetic effect linked to accumulated ferromagnetic material.
In contrast, the total magnetic field signal shows
materials with higher susceptibility located beneath the
mounds. This distinction between ‘inside’ and
‘outside’ the mounds (present or levelled) is visible
with magnetic profiles through mound M1 and
through the central area of the large circular anomaly
This physical distinction between these two media of
the same geological nature is also revealed by the
electrical resistivity tomographies performed through
mound M1. For a complete understanding of these
anomalies, in addition to the possible role of differential water content, we could also take into account
the different densities of ceramic potsherds inside
and outside the mounds and the presence of deep
graves. Above all, however, it would be necessary to
make in situ measurements of soil magnetic properties, both inside and outside the mounds.
As there are no magnetic susceptibility measurements it is difficult to propose quantitative structural
models based on the total field anomalies, however,
in accordance to the archaeologists it is planned to
carry out additional measurements in 2014 and 2015.
Joint susceptibility and magnetic measurements have
proved very useful for detailed understanding of
archeological sites (Simon et al., 2012). We also show
the potential of using both the total magnetic field
and the vertical magnetic pseudo-gradient signals,
which bring complementary information for the detailed understanding of archaeological sites.
Parallel to measurements of magnetic susceptibility
on samples and along trench walls, we plan to perform
additional electromagnetic surveys and electrical resistivity tomography in selected areas. These surveys will
serve a dual purpose: to find the potential location of
levelled former mounds and to propose quantitative
structural models consistent with the observations
made by archaeologists. Nevertheless, the magnetic
data presented have underlined the complexity of a
major funerary site, the formation process of which is
still debated (Martin Seijo et al., 2012).
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to la Magister Sandra L. Serrud
V., Directora Nacional de Patrimonio Histórico del
Instituto Nacional de Cultura de Panamá for allowing
geophysical surveys on the site, to Julia and Carlos Mayo
for their welcome and support on the archeological site,
to Richard Vanhoeserlande for his kind participation in
the fieldwork, and to Julien Thiesson for some fruitful
discussions. Constructive contributions of three anonymous reviewers are also welcomed. Finally we wish to
thank LIICA of Centro Experimental de Ingeniería Universidad Tecnológica de Panamá for the support
offered for development of this work.
DOI: 10.1002/arp
References
Aspinall A, Gaffney C, Schmidt A. 2008. Magnetometry
for Archaeologists. AltaMira Press: Lanham.
Briggs P. 1989. Art, Death and Social Order: the Mortuary
Arts of Pre-Conquest Central Panama. International
Series 550, British Archaeological Reports: Oxford.
Ciminale M, Loddo M. 2001. Aspects of magnetic data
processing. Archaeological Prospection 8: 239–246.
Cooke R. 1976. Rescate arqueológico en El Caño (NA-20),
Coclé. In Actas del IV Simposium Nacional de
Arqueología, Antropología y Etnohistoria de Panamá.
Instituto Nacional de Cultura: Panamá; 447–482.
Cooke R. 1998. Subsistencia y economía casera de los
indígenas precolombinos de Panamá. In Antropología
Panameña-Pueblos y Culturas, Pastor A (ed.). Editorial
Universitaria: Panamá; 61–134.
Cooke R, Isaza I, Griggs J, Desjardins B, Sánchez LA.
2003. Who crafted, exchanged, and displayed gold in
pre-Columbian Panama. In Gold and Power in Ancient
Costa Rica, Panama, and Columbia, Quilter J, Hoopes
JW (eds). Dumbarton Oaks: Washington, DC; 91–158.
Eder-Hinterleitner A, Neubauer W, Melichar P. 1996.
Restoring magnetic anomalies. Archaeological Prospection
3: 185–197.
Fitzgerald C. 1992. Informe preliminar sobre
excavaciones arqueológicas en El Caño (NA-20),
temporada 1988. In El Caño: Comunidad y Cultura
(OEA-INAC), Arosemena M (ed.). Centro Subregional
de Restauración: Panamá; 33–79.
Fröhlich N, Posset M, Schleifer N. 2005. Fouilles à
l’aveugle ‘Les fantômes magnétiques’ un phénomène
nouveau qui témoigne de l’importance des
prospections géophysiques en archéologie. Les dossiers
d’archéologie 308: 44–50.
Hansen RO, Pawlowski RS. 1989. Reduction to the pole
at low latitude by Wiener filtering. Geophysics 54:
1607–1613.
Isaza I. 1993. Desarrollo estilístico de la cerámica pintada
del Panamá Central con énfasis en el período 500 AC –
500 DC. PhD thesis, University of Guadalajara: Mexico.
Liu Q, Roberts AP, Larrsoana JC, et al. 2012. Environmental magnetism: principles and applications. Reviews of
Geophysics RG4002: 50.
Lleras R, Barillas E. 1985. Excavaciones arqueológicas
en el Montículo 4 de El Caño. Technical ReportInstituto Nacional de Cultura, Dirección Nacional
de Patrimonio Histórico and Centro de Restauración
OEA-INAC: Panamá; 56.
Knutsen KL. 2010. La Yeguada volcanic complex,
Western Panama: an assessment of the geologic
hazards using 40Ar/39Ar ages. Masters thesis, Michigan
Technological University: Illinois.
Martín Seijo M, Mayo Torné J, Mayo Torné C, Piqué y
Huerta R. 2012. Forest resources, chiefdoms and
mortuary practices in the neotropics: preliminary archaeobotanical analysis from El Caño funerary complex
(Coclé Province, Panamá). EGU General Assembly 2012.
Mathé V, Lévêque F, Mathé P-E, Chevallier C, Pons Y.
2006. Soil anomaly mapping using a caesium magnetometer: limits in the low magnetic amplitude case.
Journal of Applied Geophysics 58: 202–217.
Mayo J. 2006. Los estilos cerámicos de la región cultural
de Gran Coclé, Panamá. Revista Española de Antropología
Americana 36: 27–46.
Miranda R, Gutiérrez E. 1993. Geología del parque
arqueológico El Caño y alrededores. In El Caño:
Comunidad y Cultura (OEA-INAC), Arosemena M
(ed.). Centro Subregional de Restauración : Panamá;
11–32.
Mojica A. 2007. Applications des méthodes géophysiques à
la détection des sites précolombiens dans la région
centrale de Panama et paramétrisation géoarchéologique
dans le site hispanique de Panama Viejo. PhD thesis,
University of Paris 6.
Mojica A, Chichaco E, Navarro M, Pastor L,
Vanhoeserlande R. 2009. Magnetic investigation of
cultural features in the west zone of the Old Panama
archaeological site (Central America). International
Journal of South American Archaeology 5: 59–66.
Mojica A, Pastor L, Vanhoeserlande R, Salamanca M.
2010. Using the micro-resistivity method to detect
Hispanic ancient floors at Nombre de Dios, Panama.
Earth Sciences Research Journal 15(1): 2–8.
Orgeira MJ, Compagnucci RH. 2006. Coorelation between
paleo-soil magnetic signal and climate. Earth, Planets
and Space 58: 1373–1390.
Pastor L, Camerlynck C, Florsch N, et al. 2004. Respuesta de
un dipolo magnético vertical ante la presencia de
características paleoambientales de sitios prehispánicos.
Tecnociencia 4(2): 87–99.
Scollar I, Weidner B, Segeth K. 1986. Display of archaeological magnetic data. Geophysics 51: 623–633.
Simon F-X, Koziol A, Thiesson J. 2012. Investigating
magnetic ghost on an early middle age settlement:
comparison of data from stripped and non-stripped
areas. Arcaheological Prospection 19: 191–200.
Wake T, Mojica A, Davis M, Campbell C, Mendizabal T.
2012. Electrical resistivity surveying and pseudo-threedimensional tomographic imaging at Sitio Drago, Bocas
del Toro, Panama. Archaeological Prospection 19(1): 49–58.
Williams AR. 2012. The Golden Chiefs of Panama.
National Geographic 221(1): 66–81.
DOI: 10.1002/arp

Magnetic Prospection of the Pre-Columbian - UMR Sisyphe

Transcription

Similar documents

Medizinische Austellung A4 Wien 2008.indd

ME-709 Magnetic Recumbent Exercise Bike

GEORGIIKOBOLD

Magboy® - Nikken UK Ltd

Rota-Grid Magnet - Eclipse Magnetics

magnasphere - Koloona Industries

Rota-Grid Magnet

EMC analysis with QuickField

BEACONSFIELD ASBESTOS PROSPECT