image/svg+xml
19
XIII/1/2022
INTERDISCIPLINARIA ARCHAEOLOGICA
NATURAL SCIENCES IN ARCHAEOLOGY
homepage: http://www.iansa.eu
Geophysical Studies of Wells in the Settlements of Konoplyanka 1
and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
Vladislav Noskevich
1*
, Natalia Fedorova
1
1
Institute of Geophysics Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Amundsen Street 100, 620016, Yekaterinburg, Russia
1. Introduction
In modern archaeology, at the initial stage of the search and
localisation of ancient monuments, geophysical methods
are actively used (Aspinal
et al.
, 2008, Conyers
et al.
,
2016, Scollar
et al.
, 1990). In the Southern Urals, more than
20 fortifed settlements of the Bronze Age dating back to the
21
st
–18
th
centuries BC have been discovered (Gening
et al.
,
1992; Zdanovich and Batanina, 2007). The architecture of the
settlements is almost completely destroyed, and the earthen
walls of the settlements, the ditches and dwelling cavities
have been ploughed up. Over the study area of a number
of settlements (Arkaim, Kamennyi Ambar, Konoplyanka,
Andreevskoe, Sarym-Sakly, Ustye, Zhurumbai, Kuisak,
Rodniki, Ulak), a magnetic survey has been carried out, as
a result of which the locations of the outer defensive walls
and ditches and the walls of buildings have been determined
and the plans of settlements reconstructed (Tibelius, 1995;
Punegov, 2009; Merrony
et al.
, 2009; Noskevich and
Fedorova, 2013; 2020; Hanks
et al.
, 2013; Fornasier
et al.
,
2014; Bakhshiyev
et al.
, 2018). Inside many dwellings, local
magnetic anomalies are clearly distinguishable: created by
the remains of wells, utility pits and stoves. Archaeologists
can use the obtained information concerning the structure
of monuments and their precise referencing and then more
purposefully select sites for excavation (Koryakova
et al.
,
2018). The results obtained in the process of such excavations
help to increase the reliability of the interpretation of the
geophysical anomalies and link them with the site’s specifc
structures.
Extensive excavations were carried out at the Kamenny
Ambar settlement and numerous wells were found inside the
dwellings. These features aroused great interest: not only
because of the artifacts found inside the wells, but also as
they were the frst hydraulic structures found in northern
Eurasia (Koryakova
et al.
, 2019). Epimakhov
et al.
(2020)
presented 44 radiocarbon dates from 18 wells from diferent
eras of the Bronze Age. This settlement functioned for more
than 150 years and, based on the materials obtained from the
wells, it was possible to establish the absolute age and stages
of settlement. It was revealed that most of the wells belong
to the Sintashta-Petrovka period, which is characterised
Volume XIII ● Issue 1/2022 ● Pages 19–28
*Corresponding author. E-mail: ubistu@gmail.com
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Received: 23
rd
March 2021
Accepted: 17
th
August 2021
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24916/iansa.2022.1.2
Key words:
settlement
well
magnetic survey
GPR
magnetic susceptibility
Bronze Age
South Urals
ABSTRACT
In the South Urals, numerous wells have been found inside dwellings in settlements of the Bronze
Age. These features are of great interest, not only because of the artifacts found inside the wells, but
also as the frst hydrotechnical structures within the territory of northern Eurasia. Geophysical studies
were carried out over the area of two Bronze Age settlements: the fortifed settlement of Konoplyanka
and the unfortifed settlement of Konoplyanka 2. A gradient magnetic survey was carried out and
settlement plans reconstructed, which formed the basis for the selection of sites for the archaeological
excavations. Comparison of geophysical and archaeological results showed that, using magnetic maps,
it was possible to accurately reconstruct the plans of ancient settlements and localize the positions
of wells. At the excavation site of the settlement of Konoplyanka 1, as a result of the magnetic
susceptibility survey, it was established that the edges of the wells were reinforced with a special soil
that has higher magnetic properties than the subsoils present. At the excavation site at the settlement
of Konoplyanka 2, ground penetrating radar (GPR) prospection of the four wells was carried out,
the depth and structural features of these wells being determined. Excavations at two of the wells
confrmed the results of the geophysical studies.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
20
by linearly-located blocks of buildings inside fortifed
territories. The second period, marked by randomly-located
dwellings, is associated with Srubnaya-Alakul artifacts
and is represented by only four wells. During this period,
a transformation of the architectural tradition took place,
with both the layout of the settlement and the construction of
the wells being changed.
In the valley of the Karagailly-Ayat River (Chelyabinsk
region, Russia), at a distance of about 20 km from the
Kamennyi Ambar settlement, there are other settlements
of the Bronze Age: the fortifed settlement of Konoplyanka
and the unfortifed settlement of Konoplyanka 2. The
fortifed settlement of Konoplyanka (hereinafter referred to
as Konoplyanka 1) is located on the banks of the Akmulla
river. The settlement was discovered based on the results
of interpretation of aerial photographs (Zdanovich and
Batanina, 2007). The total area is c.15,000 m
2
, and the area
inside the fortifcations is c. 8400 m
2
. On the other bank
of the river, at a distance of 800 m, there is the unfortifed
settlement of Konoplyanka 2 (Figure 1b). The settlement
was discovered in 1982 (Tarasov, 1983). As a result of
archaeological research, 10 shallow dwelling depressions
were found on the surface. Seven of them are almost closely
adjacent to each other, located in one line along the edge
of the coastal terrace in a north-north-west – south-east
direction. Three more depressions are located 50 m to the
north. This village is located about 100 m east of a small lake
and 200 m from the current river bed.
Figure 1.
a:
Fragment of map of Eurasia, the position of the settlements Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 being marked; b: Present view of the Akmulla
river valley; c: Diagram of location of monuments. Magnetic survey areas are shown with red rectangles. 1 – buildings, 2 – burial mounds, 3 – foodplain
terrace, 4 – border of arable land, 5 – fooded depressions, 6 – river and streams.
0 1000 km
0 50 km
0 200 m
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
21
Agricultural work was carried out in the area of both
archaeological sites in the 20
th
century, and at present, due
to many years of ploughing, their structures are practically
invisible on the land surface (Figure 1b). Over the area of
both these villages we carried out a magnetic survey and
reconstructed the plans of the settlements. This paper presents
a comparison of the magnetic maps that were produced, with
the results of the excavations and geophysical studies of
wells found in the dwellings of these settlements.
2. Geophysical survey technique
A gradient magnetic survey was carried out on a previously
prepared network with an observation step of 0.5×0.5 m. The
survey area was divided into squares with sides from 20 to
40 metres. The measurements were made with a complete
stop of the device, and the magnetometer sensors were
precisely centred over the observation point. The height
of the sensors is 0.35 m and 2.15 m from the ground.
After surveying the squares, the measurement results
were combined into a common database. The magnetic
anomaly map was constructed as the diference between
the measured values of the induction modulus of the
geomagnetic feld of the lower and upper sensors. The
measured data contained a contribution from geological
sources; therefore, to isolate anomalies from the walls of
dwellings, the long-wave component (more than 10 m in
length) was fltered. Absolute modular magnetometers-
gradiometers MMPG-1 (Russia), and Navmag SM-5
Figure 2.
Maps of magnetic anomalies and reconstructed plans of settlements: a: Konoplyanka 1; b: Konoplyanka 2. 1 – dwellings, 2 – excavation contour.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
22
(Canada) were used. The survey error does not exceed ±1
nT (Fedorova
et al.
, 2014).
The kappameter surveys are a supplement to magnetic
prospection and make it possible to measure the magnetic
susceptibility of the soil directly at the archaeological site.
This survey was carried out on the walls of the excavation
along a network of 0.2×0.2 m using a PIMV kappameter
(St. Petersburg, Russia). The error of a single measurement
of the magnetic susceptibility did not exceed ±0.0001 units
SI.
A topographic survey of relief elevations in the
settlements of Konoplyanka 2 was carried out over an area
of 55,000 m
2
. A Sokkia 105 (Japan) total station with
an error of 5″ was used. For a more accurate localisation of
dwelling depressions, the long-wavelength component was
fltered and local relief variations were identifed. The error
in determining the heights of the relief is estimated to be no
more than ±0.02 m.
The GPR method is based on the emission of ultra-
wideband pulses of electromagnetic waves. The peculiarity of
the GPR survey is that the antenna emitting electromagnetic
waves and the antenna receiving refected waves are located
in the same place. Refections occur at the interfaces between
media with diferent relative permittivity of soils. At the point
of measurement on the radargram along the vertical line, the
wave pattern of the refected waves and time are displayed.
We used a grey scale to display the intensity and polarity of
the signal (white is the positive amplitude and black is the
negative part of the waveform). To switch from the time scale
to the depth scale on the sections, the researcher needs to
know the speed of the electromagnetic wave, which depends
on the relative permittivity of the soil. For the settlement
of Konplyanka 2, we used tabular data for dry loams and
adopted a dielectric constant of 4 (Finkelshteyn
et al.
, 1976).
The GPR survey was carried out with the SIR-3000 (GSSI,
2008) along parallel profles with a spacing of 0.5 m. After
processing and interpolation of refections along all profles
for the study area, a plan of isolines of depths of refecting
boundaries and a three-dimensional model of underground
features were built.
3. Results of magnetic surveys of settlements
We carried out magnetic surveys on the site of the fortifed
settlement of Konoplyanka 1 in 2009–2010 and in 2017
on the site of the open settlement of Konoplyanka 2
(Noskevich and Fedorova, 2013; Fedorova
et al.
, 2018).
The resulting magnetic maps and reconstructed settlement
schemes are shown in Figure 2. The fortifed settlement
of Konoplyanka 1 was approximately 150×100 m in size,
enclosed by a wall, a moat and, possibly, an outer rampart.
Two passages to the settlement are clearly visible – from the
north and from the south. A large number of local magnetic
anomalies were found inside the settlement, the most intense
of which formed two chains along the western and eastern
walls. These anomalies are created by wells, utility pits, and
possibly the remains of hearths and stoves inside dwellings.
The dwellings are arranged in two rows, with 11 buildings
in each row. The width of the buildings, determined by the
location of intense local anomalies, is about 10 metres.
The methods developed in magnetometry make it
possible not only to fnd a source’s location, but also to
obtain information about its shape and depth through
the interpretation of magnetic anomalies. Modelling the
sources of several local anomalies showed that the depth
to the upper edges of the sources is 0.6–1.15 m (Noskevich
and Fedorova, 2013). Consequently, the cultural layer of
buildings inside the settlement is at a depth of at least 0.6 cm
from the modern surface. In addition, a number of sources
Figure 3.
Open village Konoplyanka 2: a: Relief altitudes, b: Local anomalies of the relief.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
23
of intense local anomalies are elongated vertically to a depth
of 2–4 m and, undoubtedly, these anomalies were created by
wells. As a result of the interpretation of the linear magnetic
anomaly over the section of the western fortifcation, it was
found that the centre of the source is located at a depth of
0.75 m; hence the source is located below the foor level of
the house in the settlement. Investigation of the same section
of the fortifcation with the help of GPR received intense
refections of the electromagnetic signal from the defence
system at depths of 0.5–2 m. The most intense refections at
a depth of 0.73 m are associated directly with the defensive
wall, and this result does not contradict the data of the
interpretation of the magnetic survey. Deeper refections
on radargrams are created by multiple repeated refections
of electromagnetic waves from the boundaries of the ditch.
Thus, prior to excavation, geophysical methods were able to
trace the position of the defensive wall and its depth relative
to the modern surface of the earth and to connect a number
of local anomalies with wells.
On the unfortifed settlement of Konoplyanka 2, a detailed
topographic survey was carried out and local anomalies of the
relief were highlighted (Figure 3). As a result, 13 dwelling
depressions were discovered, the depth of which varies from
0.1 to 0.4 m. Some depressions consist of 2 or 3 chambers.
A magnetic gradiometer survey was carried out over an area
of 45×210 m (Fedorova
et al.
, 2018). Based on the results
of this survey, it was possible to identify the boundaries of
buildings and reconstruct the settlement plan (Figure 2b). The
number of dwellings turned out to be more than previously
assumed based on the results of archaeological research
(Tarasov, 1983); in fact, this survey identifed 13 houses.
Local magnetic anomalies were revealed inside the houses,
the intensity of some anomalies reaching 12–15 nT, and,
most likely, the anomalies were created by wells and utility
pits.
The magnetic survey was continued by the German
geophysicist A. Patzelt over an area of 10.4 hectares, as
a result of which, 50 m north of the known features, another
line of dwellings was discovered that had no visible signs on
the surface (Koryakova
et al.
, 2020).
4. Research at the excavation site of the Konoplyanka 1
The magnetic maps became the basis for the selection of
sites for archaeological excavations. The frst excavation
site for the Konoplyanka 1 settlement was laid in 2012 by
researchers from the Institute of History and Archaeology
of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
(Sharapova
et al.
, 2014). A sector of 8×12 m was chosen in
the eastern part of the settlement (Figure 2a). The excavation
grid covers a fragment of the enclosure (ditch, wall) and
the corner of the dwelling (Figure 4). The thickness of the
wall at the level of the subsoil was 4–4.5 m. The ditch in
this area is characterised by a not very large diference in
depths from 0.4 m to 1.3 m and had a width of 2–2.5 m.
A residential building adjoins the inner wall of the enclosure,
the foundation pit of which is deepened into the subsoil by
no more than 0.6 m. A well and utility pit were found in the
house.
A fragment of a magnetic map and a plan of the excavation
site are shown in Figure 5. In order to show the intensity of
magnetic anomalies, we used a colour scale. The boundaries
of prehistorical features correspond well to the data of the
magnetic map. A large positive anomaly corresponds to the
foundation pit of the dwelling, and negative anomalies are
located above the walls of both the defensive and separating
adjacent houses. Apparently, there was a fre in this house,
as a result of which the soil acquired stronger magnetic
properties than in the neighbouring dwellings. Two local
magnetic anomalies are associated with a utility pit and
a well, and the third is observed over a small depression on
the foor.
The linear magnetic anomaly is located above the ditch.
Excavation studies revealed that in diferent parts of the ditch
the soil difered in its physical properties: at the outer border
Figure 4.
Konoplyanka 1: a: Photograph of the excavation; b: Photograph of the foor of the building.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
24
it was loose, and at the inner wall it was very dense and dry
(Sharapova
et al.
, 2014). As a result of magnetic surveys
at the excavation site of another Bronze Age settlement,
Kamennyi Ambar, it was established that an anomaly over
the fortifcation is created from the outer side of the wall
and along the edge of the ditch with a layer of 0.3–0.5 m of
light-yellow loam. This material was used to strengthen the
outer surface of the soil wall and the ditch up to its bottom
part (Epimakhov
et al.
, 2016).
Excavations were laid along the southern and western
walls, where the well and the pit were located. The well
has the shape of a funnel, the diameter at the surface
is more than 2 metres and at depth it is reduced to 0.8 m
(Figure 6a). The bottom of the well was found at a depth of
2.6 m from the zero benchmark, the depth of mining in the
subsoil being 1.6 m. At present, the well is dry: apparently,
the groundwater level was much higher in the Bronze Age.
In the photograph can be seen diferent soil colours, which
are caused by the dissolution of magnetic soil minerals by
groundwater (Fassbinder, 2015; Jordanova, 2016). Along
the western wall of the excavation, the pit is about 2 m long
and about 1.1 m deep (Figure 7a). Studies of ceramics and
stone arrowheads showed that the Konoplyanka 1 monument
belongs to the Sintashta-Petrovka culture, and radiocarbon
dating established that the settlement functioned in the
period 1920–1745 BCE. (Sharapova
et al.
, 2014).
We used the excavation to determine the magnetic properties
of the soil. On the profles of the excavation, intersecting the
Figure 5.
a: Part of a magnetic map; b:
Excavation plan; after Sharapova
et al.
(2014).
Figure 6.
Southern wall of the excavation: a: Photograph of the well; b: Result of the magnetic susceptibility measurements.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
25
utility pit and the well, a magnetic susceptibility survey was
carried out. Figures 6 and 7 clearly show that the soils flling
the pit and well difer from the subsoil, both in colour and
in physical properties. The magnetic susceptibility in the pit
and well varies from 0.0012 to 0.0030 SI units, the average
value being 0.0016 SI units. The bottom flling of the well
(silty soil of a grey-green hue) has reduced properties from
0.0008 to 0.0010 SI. In the surrounding subsoil, the values
are an order of magnitude less and do not exceed 0.0002 SI
units. Due to the contrast of magnetic susceptibility above
the well and the pit, anomalies with an intensity of 12–15 nT
are observed. The well and the pit stood open for a long time.
This can be clearly seen from the fllings in the upper parts,
both in their colour and magnetic properties. In the lower
part of the utility pit, the magnetic properties are evenly
distributed. In the well, the greatest values of magnetic
properties are observed along the edges, which indicates that
during construction the edges of the wells were reinforced
with some kind of special soil.
Hence, studies at the Konoplyanka 1 excavation confrmed
the reliability of the reconstructed settlement plan based
on magnetic survey, and made it possible to determine the
magnetic susceptibility inside the utility pit and the ancient
well.
5. GPR survey of the wells
For the excavation at the unfortifed settlement of
Konoplyanka 2, archaeologists chose a site with four local
magnetic anomalies (Figures 2b and 8a). The foor of
a rectangular house with a size of 24×9.5 m was excavated to
a depth of 0.6 m (Koryakova
et al.
, 2020). In its central part,
four wells were found, located in a chain along the long axis
of the dwelling, and a small pit was found near the western
wall (Figures 8b and 8c). A small part of well 5 was found
in the southwest corner outside the end wall of the house.
The epicentres of the magnetic anomalies coincided with the
centres of the wells and pits (Figure 8).
In the 2019 feld season, at the excavation level –0.6 m
from the modern surface, geophysical work was carried out,
the purpose of which was to study the wells using the GPR
Figure
7.
Western wall of the excavation: a: Photograph of the utility pit; b: Result of the magnetic susceptibility measurements.
Figure 8
. Excavation at the settlement of Konoplyanka 2: a: Part of a magnetic map; b: Photograph; c: Plan; after Koryakova
et al.
(2020).
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
26
method before digging them. On the surface, the diameters
of the wells reached 2–2.5 m. The depth of the wells could
vary from 2 to 4 metres. The GPR survey was carried out
by the SIR-3000 along 6 parallel (270 MHz) profles with
a length of 15 metres. The distance between the profles was
0.5 m. (Figure 9).
Since at present the wells are covered with practically the
same soils (loams) of which the subsoil is composed, it was
not expected that there would be a signifcant contrast in
physical properties between them and that during the survey
it would be possible to obtain a clear picture of radio wave
refections from the walls of the wells. On the other hand,
it was expected that a good contrast of electrical properties
exists between the subsoil and the soil with which the
walls of the wells were reinforced. Indeed, this contrast in
magnetic properties was what was found in the well of the
Konoplyanka 1 house.
In addition, at depth, the walls of the wells become almost
vertical and this is a blind zone for the GPR. Therefore, we
performed measurements with a set of antennae with centre
frequencies of 400, 270 and 100 MHz. After analysing the
obtained sections for various frequencies of electromagnetic
waves, the survey carried out with a 270 MHz antenna turned
out to be the most efective. Measurements at 400 MHz
are shallow. For the studied soils, the vertical resolution
is the frst few centimetres; therefore, refections from
small irregularities form numerous noises on the section.
And for an antenna with a frequency of 100 MHz in this
environment, the vertical resolution is greater than 1 metre
and the refective boundaries from the edges of the wells are
simply not visible in the sections.
Figure 10 shows the results for the central profle obtained
with a 270 MHz antenna. In the section, refections from
the walls of the wells are highlighted in red. The primary
and repeated refections of waves from the inclined walls of
the well form a characteristic X-pattern (or “butterfy”) on
the radargram (Conyers, 2016). This picture of refections
was most clearly manifested for well number 4. After
processing and interpolation of refections from the walls
of the wells along all profles, images of the boundaries of
Figure
9
. GPR survey of the wells.
Figure 10
. Radargram along the central
profle with a 270 MHz antenna. 1 – wall of
well; 2 – the assumed boundary of well 4;
3 – secondary refections from the well’s
wall.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
27
all wells in plan and their three-dimensional view were built
(Figure 11).
6. Discussion of the results of the study of wells
The depth according to the GPR data for wells 2, 3 and 4 from
the survey surface was 2.9–3.1 m, with an estimation error
of ± 0.3 m. Note the peculiarity of well number 3, at depth
the well shaft is not in the centre, but is displaced relative to
the top mouth to the eastern edge. The size of the excavation
limited the length of the radar survey lines, and therefore
only the southern edge was measured for well number 1.
From the well mouth to its depth, stable refections from the
walls of the well can be traced only to the marks of 1–1.2 m.
It is possible that below this depth the well has vertical walls
and they are not visible on the radargram. It can only be
noted that there are refective platforms under the central part
of the well at depths of more than 2 and 3 metres (Figure 10).
A feature of the “cultural layer” inside the wells was the
presence of intense refections on the radargrams. Such
disturbances were most pronounced in well number 3. The
section shows that at a depth of more than 1.2 m, the wave
pattern is signifcantly distorted by numerous refections
in the form of hyperbolas, which indicates the presence of
large inhomogeneities inside this well (blocks of denser soil,
stones, ceramics, coal,
etc.
).
Excavations of two wells confrmed the results of
geophysical studies (Koryakova
et al.
, 2020). The depth of
the well number 3 was 3.17 m, and in the case of the well
number 4 it was 3.03 m. It was found that well number 3 has
an asymmetric shape, its bottom is displaced relative to the
mouth to the eastern edge. Filling was recorded along the
periphery of both features between the shafts of the wells
and the subsoil. It consists of yellow clay as well as yellow
and light brown sand, and was used to strengthen the walls of
the shaft and protect the formwork. Remnants of two types of
wooden formwork were found in the wells: wattle and board.
Two construction phases have been identifed. The frst is
associated with the population of the Srubnaya culture, and
the second with the population of the Cherkaskul culture.
Radiocarbon analysis showed that the settlement functioned
from the 18
th
to the 16
th
century BC.
7. Conclusion
The comparison of geophysical and archaeological results,
both at the fortifed settlement of Konoplyanka 1 (20
th
–19
th
centuries BC) and at the open village of Konoplyanka 2
(18
th
–16
th
centuries BC), showed that with the help of
magnetic maps it was possible to reconstruct plans of
ancient settlements. Intense local magnetic anomalies
inside dwellings made it possible to localise wells and
utility pits.
Geophysical studies carried out on the wells revealed that
the material with which the edges of the wells were reinforced
has not only high magnetization properties, but also difers
in its electrical properties from the subsoil. Therefore,
intense magnetic anomalies are observed above the wells,
and the boundaries of features are confdently determined on
radargrams. As a result of the GPR survey of four wells, their
Figure 11
. Result of GPR survey of wells:
a: 3D format; b: Plan.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2022 ● XIII/1 ● 19–28
Vladislav Noskevich, Natalia Fedorova: Geophysical studies of wells in the settlements of Konoplyanka 1 and Konoplyanka 2 (Bronze Age)
28
depths and structural features were determined. Excavations
of two wells fully confrmed these results.
Acknowledgments
Our studies of Bronze Age settlements in the Southern
Urals were carried out in close cooperation with a team of
archaeologists from the Institute of History and Archaeology
of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We
express our gratitude to L.N. Koryakova, S.V. Sharapova
and S.E. Panteleeva, under whose leadership the excavations
were carried out in these settlements.
We are grateful to Dale Bradford and Elena Nikolaeva
who edited our English text.
References
ASPINAL, A. GAFFNEY, C., SCHMIDT, A., 2008.
Magnetometry for
Archaeologists
, Lanham, Maryland: Altamira Press.
CONYERS, L.B., 2016.
Ground-penetrating Radar for Geoarchaeology.
Analytical Methods in Earth and Environmental Science.
New York:
Wiley Publishing.
BAKHSHIEV, I.I., NOSKEVICH, V.V., NASRETDINOV, R.R., 2018.
Geophysical and remote studies of the Ulak-1 fortifed settlement of
the Bronze age in Bashkir Trans-Urals: the correlation of the obtained
data with the results of the archaeological excavations.
Povolzhskaya
Arkheologiya
, 3(25), 30–44.
EPIMAKHOV, A.V., BERSENEVA, N.A., FEDOROVA, N.V.,
NOSKEVICH, V.V., 2016. Geophysics and archaeology of Bronze Age
settlements – A case study from Kamennyi Ambar fortifed settlement
(South Urals). In:
Proceedings 22
nd
European Meeting of Environmental
and Engineering Geophysics. Near Surface Geoscience 2016, September
2016
. Barcelona: European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers.
DOI:10.3997/2214-4609.201602029.
EPIMAKHOV, A.V., PANTELEYEVA, S.E., KORYAKOVA, L.N
.
,
2020.
Wells as a source of cultural and chronological information: The case
of Kamennyi Ambar, Southern Trans-Urals.
Archaeology Ethnology
and Anthropology of Eurasia
, 48(4), 95–105. DOI: 10.17746/1563-
0110.2020.48.4.095-105.
FASSBINDER, J.W.E., 2015. Seeing beneath the farmland, steppe and
desert soil: magnetic prospecting and soil magnetism.
Journal of
Archaeological Science,
56, 85–95 DOI:10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.023.
FEDOROVA, N.V., NOSKEVICH, V.V., IVANCHENKO, V.S., BEBNEV,
A.S., MALIKOV, A.V., 2014. A magnetic survey of the Bronze Age
archaeological settlements in the South Urals.
Geophysical Research,
15(3), 24–37.
FEDOROVA, N.V., NOSKEVICH, V.V., MOLCHANOV, I.V., 2018. Results
of geophysical studies of the Bronze Age settlement Konoplyanka-2
(South Ural
). Uralskiy geofzicheskiy vestnik,
2, 61–66. DOI: 10.25698
/ UGV.2018.2.8.61.
FINKELSHTEYN, M.I., KUTEV, V.A., ZOLOTAREV, V.P., 1986.
The use
of radar subsurface sounding in engineering geology.
Moscow: Nedra
Publishing.
FORNASIER, J., KRAUSE, R., KORJAKOVA, L.N., STOBBE, A., RUHL,
L., SCHNEIDER, H., THIEMEEYER, H., PETERS, S., EPIMAKHOV,
A.V., SHARAPOVA, S.V., PANTELEEVA, S.E., MOLCANOV,
I.V., BERSENEVA, N.A., PATZELT, A., NOSKEVICH, V.V., 2014.
Architektur, Wirtschaft und Landschaft der Bronzezeitlichen Siedlungen
am Nordrand der Eurasischen Steppe im Trans-Ural (Russische
Föderation).
Eurasia Antiqua
, 20, 229–272.
HANKS, B.K., CHECHUSHKOV, I.V., DUNAN, R.K., PITMAN, D.,
MUZHICH, B., MEDARICH, I., MORI, M., 2013. Recent results and
prospects of research of the ancient Ustye settlement area and the lower
Toguzak river valley. In: N.B. Vinogradov and A.V. Epimakhov, eds.
Ancient Ustye: A fortifed Bronze Age settlement in the South Trans-
Urals.
Chelyabinsk: Abris, pp. 393–416.
GENING, V.F., ZDANOVICH, G.B., GENING, V.V., 1992
. Sintashta:
Archaeological sites of the Aryan tribes of the Urals-Kazakhstan steppes
.
Chelyabinsk: South Urals Publishing.
GSSI, 2008.
SIR-3000, RADAN
,
Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc. Salem
.
NH, USA. Available from: http://www.geophysical.com/software
.
JORDANOVA, N., 2016.
Soil magnetism: Applications in Pedology,
Environmental Science and Agriculture,
Elsevier: Academic Press.
KORYAKOVA, L.N., KRAUSE, R., SHARAPOVA, S.V., FEDOROVA,
N.V., KOSINTSEV, P.A., ZAYKOV V.V., ANKUSHEV, M.N., 2018.
Enclosed settlements of the Karagaily-Ayat river basin through the prism
of the multidisciplinary approach.
History of Science and Engineering
,
1, 22–36.
KORYAKOVA, L.N., PANTELEYEVA, S.E., 2019. Wells of the fortifed
settlement Kamennyi Ambar.
Uralskiy istoricheskiy vestnik
, 1(62),
17–27. DOI: 10.30759/1728-9718-2019-1(62)-17-27
KORYAKOVA L.N., KRAUSE R., PANTELEEVA S.E., STOLYARCHIK
E., BULAKOVA E.A., SOLDATKIN N.V., RASSADNIKOV A.YU.,
MOLCHANOVA V.V., ANKUSHEV M.N., MOLCHANOV I.V.,
YAKIMOV A.S., FEDOROVA N.V., NOSKEVICH V.V., 2020.
Settlement Konoplyanka 2 in the Southern Trans-Urals: preliminary
research results.
Uralskiy istoricheskiy vestnik
, 4(69), 51–63. DOI:
10.30759 / 1728-9718-2020-4 (69) -51-63.
MERRONY, C., HANKS, B., DOONAN, R., 2009. Seeking the Process:
The Application of Geophysical Survey on some Early Mining and
Metalworking Sites. Studies in honour of Barbara S. Ottaway. In:
Universitatsforschungen zur prahistorischen Archaologie
. Bonn:
Metalsand Societies, pp. 421–430.
NOSKEVICH, V.V., FEDOROVA, N.V., 2013.
Remote sensing methods
of survey. In: R. Krause and L.N. Koryakova, eds.
Multidisciplinary
investigations of the Bronze Age settlements in the Southern Trans-Urals
(Russia)
. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt Publishing, pp. 67–84.
NOSKEVICH, V., FEDOROVA, N., 2020. Geophysical investigations
of the Bronze Age Andreevskoye settlement in the Southern Trans-
Urals (Russia).
Interdisciplinaria Archaeologica, Natural Sciences
in Archaeology
, 11(2), 139–147. DOI: 10.24916/iansa.2020.2.1.
PUNEGOV, B.N., 2009. Micromagnetic survey during archaeological
research (on the example of Arkaim).
Uralskiy geofzicheskiy vestnik
, 1,
50–58.
SCOLLAR, I., TABBAGH, A., HESSE, A., HERZOG, I., 1990.
Archaeological prospecting and remote sensing
. Cambridge and New
York: Cambridge University Press.
SHARAPOVA, S.V., KRAUSE, R., MOLCHANOV, I.V., STOBBE,
A., SOLDATKIN, N.V., 2014. Multidisciplinary investigations of
Konoplyanka settlement in the Southern Trans-Urals: preliminary results.
Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya,
flologiya
, 13(3), 101–109.
TARASOV, Y.V., 1983.
Report on archaeological exploration in the Kartaly
district of the Chelyabinsk region in 1982
., Chelyabinsk: Arkhiv IA RAN.
TIBELIUS, V.Y., 1995. Results of geophysical research on Arkaim. In:
Russia and the East: Problems of interaction.
Chelyabinsk: CSU, pp.
184–193.
ZDANOVICH, G.B., BATANINA, I.M., 2007.
Arkaim – country of
towns.
Space and images
. Chelyabinsk: Krokus Publishing.