Visible Monuments above and below Ground Level, a Time-Honored Site from the Late Bronze Age to Modern Times

Abstract

Due to the complex geometry of the monuments, it is often necessary to adapt the image collection process for their mapping. For the optimal mapping of the stronghold of Lazaritsa Chorygi (Greece) and its slopes, vertical, inclined, and horizontal images from different heights were collected using an Unmanned Aircraft System. Thus, for a monument of special archaeological/historical interest and natural beauty, a large set of high-spatial resolution data and final products (digital surface model and orthophotomosaic with spatial resolution 5.6 cm and 2.8 cm, respectively) is available. In addition, in the wider area of the fortified site, military structures (fire trenches, communication trenches, shelters, front and support trenches, and strong points) of the Great War length of 9 km were identified and mapped, which were identified in the 2003 or 2004 Google Earth Pro images, but worryingly are almost absent from the contemporary Google Earth Pro images.

Keywords

Unmanned Aerial System / Stronghold / Military structures / Complex geometry / Collecting images / Digital surface model / Orthophoto mosaic / Spatial resolution

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Georgia Stratouli (Head of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Kilkis, Greece) and Nektario Poulakaki (Head of the Department of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities and Museums of the Ephorate of Antiquities of Kilkis, Greece) for permission to collect data of the stronghold of Lazaritsa Chorygi.

Ethics Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No original images or raw data will be made available on the locations, as they concern archaeological/historical sites.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work re-ported in this paper.

References

[1] Chorygi—A Prominent Hill in the Plain of Kilkis with a Timeless History. http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/3/gh352.jsp?obj_id=26864 (accessed on 10 October 2024).

[2] Chorygi Hill—Big Stones, Many Names, Long History. Available online: https://maxitis.gr/xristos-intos-lofos-xorugiou-megaloi-lithoi-polla-onomata-megali-istoria/ (accessed on 10 October 2024).

[3] Support for DJI Mini 3 Pro. Available online: https://www.dji.com/gr/support/product/mini-3-pro (accessed on 10 October 2024).

[4] Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Moore R, Hancher M, Turubanova SA, Tyukavina A, et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 2014, 344, 850-853.

[5] Kobayashi T, Tsend-Ayush J, Tateishi R. A New Tree Cover Percentage Map in Eurasia at 500 m Resolution Using MODIS Data. Remote Sens. 2014, 6, 209-232.

[6] Carroll ML, Townshend JR, Dimiceli CM, Noojipady P, Sohlberg RA. A new global raster water mask at 250 m resolution. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2009, 2, 291-308.

[7] Pekel JF, Cottam A, Gorelick N, Belward AS. High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes. Nature 2016, 540, 418-422.

[8] Schneider A, Friedl MA, Potere D. Mapping global urban areas using MODIS 500-m data: New methods and datasets based on ‘urban ecoregions’. Remote Sens. Environ. 2010, 114, 1733-1746.

[9] Melchiorri M, Florczyk AJ, Freire S, Schiavina M, Pesaresi M, Kemper T. Unveiling 25 Years of Planetary Urbanization with Remote Sensing: Perspectives from the Global Human Settlement Layer. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 768.

[10] Parks L. Digging into Google Earth: An analysis of “Crisis in Darfur”. Geoforum 2009, 40, 535-545.

[11] Chang M, Parrales J, Jimenez M, Sobieszczyk S, Hammer D, Copenhaver R. Kulkarni, Combining Google Earth and GIS mapping technologies in a dengue surveillance system for developing countries. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2009, 8, 1-11.

[12] Myers A. Camp Delta, Google Earth and the ethics of remote sensing in archaeology. World Archaeol. 2010, 42, 455-467.

[13] Myers A. Field work in the age of digital reproduction: A review of the potentials and limitations of Google Earth for archaeologists. SAA Archaeol. Rec. 2010, 4, 7-11.

[14] Luo L, Wang X, Guo H, Liu C, Liu J, Li L, et al. Automated extraction of the archaeological tops of Qanat shafts from VHR Imagery in Google Earth. Remote Sens. 2014, 6, 11956-11976.

[15] Pringle H. Google Earth shows clandestine worlds. Science 2010, 329, 1008-1009.

[16] Palmer R. Google Maps. AARGnews 2005, 31, 38-39.

[17] Beck A. Google earth and world wind: Remote sensing for the masses? Antiquity 2006, 80, 308.

[18] Ur J. Google Earth and archaeology. SAA Archaeol. Rec. 2006, 6, 35-38.

[19] Parcak S. Satellite Remote Sensing for Archaeology; Routledge Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009.

[20] Kaimaris D, Georgoula O, Patias P, Stylianidis E. Comparative analysis on the archaeological content of imagery from Google Earth. J. Cult. Herit. 2011, 12, 263-269.

[21] Lasaponara R, Masini N. Beyond modern landscape features: New insights in the archaeological area of Tiwanaku in Bolivia from satellite data. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2014, 26, 464-471.

[22] Kennedy D, Bishop MC. Google earth and the archaeology of Saudi Arabia: A case study from the Jeddah area. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2011, 38, 1284-1293.

[23] Thomas D, Kidd F, Nikolovski S, Zipfel C. The archaeological sites of Afghanistan in Google Earth. AARGnews 2008, 37, 22-30.

[24] Sadr K, Rodier X. Google Earth, South Africa. GIS and stone-walled structures in southern Gauteng, J. Archaeol. Sci. 2012, 39, 1034-1042.

[25] Brown Vega M, Craig N, Asencios Lindo G. Ground truthing of remotely identified fortifications on the central coast of Perú. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2013, 38, 1680-1689.

[26] Agisoft Metashape User Manual, Professional Edition, Version 2.0. Available online: https://www.agisoft.com/pdf/metashape-pro_2_0_en.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2024).

[27] Availability Search—Sales of Aerial Photos. Available online: https://gis.ktimanet.gr/gis/apr/ (accessed on 10 October 2024).

[28] Kaimaris D. Aerial Remote Sensing Archaeology—A Short Review and Applications. Land 2024, 13, 997.

[29] Gheyle W, Stichelbaut B, Saey T, Note N, Van den Berghe H, Van Eetvelde V, et al. Scratching the surface of war. Airborne laser scans of the Great War conflict landscape in Flanders (Belgium). Appl. Geogr. 2018, 90, 55-68.

[30] Breg Valjavec M, Zorn M, Ribeiro D. Mapping War Geoheritage: Recognising Geomorphological Traces of War. J. Open Geosci. 2018, 10, 385-394.

[31] de Matos-Machado R, Toumazet PJ, Bergès CJ, Amat PJ, Arnaud-Fassetta G, Bétard F, et al. War landform mapping and classification on the Verdun battlefield (France) using airborne LiDAR and multivariate analysis. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2019, 44, 1430-1448.

[32] Zalewska A, Jakubczak M, Czarnecki J. Archaeological revival of memory of the Great War. The role of LiDAR in tracing the boundaries of the WWI Rawka Battlefield Cultural Park. Archaeol. Pol. 2015, 53, 407-412.

[33] De Matos-Machado R, Amat JP, Arnaud-Fassetta G, Bétard F. Potentialités de l’outil LiDAR pour cartographier les vestiges de la Grande Guerre en milieu intra-forestier (bois des Caures, forêt domaniale de Verdun, Meuse). EchoGéo 2016, 38, 1-22.

[34] Ronchi D, Limongiello M, Barba S. Correlation among Earthwork and Cropmark Anomalies within Archaeological Landscape Investigation by Using LiDAR and Multispectral Technologies from UAV. Drones 2020, 4, 72.

[35] Casana J, Laugier JE, Hill CA, Reese MK, Ferwerda C, McCoy DM, et al. Exploring archaeological landscapes using drone-acquired lidar: Case studies from Hawai’i, Colorado, and New Hampshire, USA. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 2021, 39, 103133.

[36] Li Z. New opportunities for archaeological research in the Greater Ghingan Range, China: Application of UAV LiDAR in the archaeological survey of the Shenshan Mountain. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 2023, 51, 104182.

[37] Stichelbaut Β, Note Ν, Saey Τ, Hanssens D, Van den Berghe H, Bourgeois J, et al. Non-invasive research of tunneling heritage in the Ypres Salient (1914-1918)—research of the Tor Top tunnel system J. Cult. Herit. 2017, 26, 109-117.

[38] Wisniewski DK, Doyle P, Hunter RJS, Pringle JK, Stimpson IG, Wright D, et al. A multidisciplinary scientific investigation of the 1916 Hawthorn Mine Crater, Beaumont Hamel, Somme, Northern France. J. Confl.Archaeol. 2023, 18, 125-156.

[39] Stichelbaut B. The First Thirty Kilometresof theWestern Front 1914-1918: An Aerial Archaeological Approach with Historical Remote Sensing Data. Archaeol. Prospect. 2011, 18, 57-66.

[40] Stichelbaut B, Gheyle W, Van Eetvelde V, Van Meirvenne M, Saey T, Note N, et al. The Ypres Salient 1914-1918: Historical aerial photography and the landscape of war. Antiquity 2017, 91, 235-249.

[41] Georgoula O, Kaimaris D, Karadedos G, Patias P. Photogrammetry and Archaeology: A case study in the archaeological site of Philippoi in N. Greece. In Proceedings of the CAA (Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology) Congress, Enter the Past. The E-Way into Four Dimensions of Cultural Heritage, City Hall Vienna, Austria, 8-12 April 2003; pp. 409-413.