Survey Archaeology in the Mediterranean World: Regional Traditions and Contributions to Long-Term History

Abstract

In this paper we describe the development and state of archaeological surface survey in the Mediterranean. We focus especially on surface survey as a means of documenting long-term settlement patterns at various scales, as an approach to the archaeology of regions, and as a pathway to the interpretation of past landscapes. Over the last decades, literature on Mediterranean survey has increasingly emphasized a distinct set of practices, viewed both favorably and critically by regional archaeologists in the Mediterranean and elsewhere. We show that Mediterranean survey in fact comprises several discrete regional traditions. In general, these traditions have much to offer to wider dialogues in world archaeology, particularly concerning sampling and research design, the interpretation of surface assemblages, and the integration of complex, multidisciplinary datasets. More specifically, survey investigations of Mediterranean landscapes provide comparative data and potential research strategies of relevance to many issues of global significance, including human ecology, demography, urban-rural dynamics, and various types of polity formation, colonialism, and imperialism.

Beyond dots with dates: A landscape approach to the Sohar hinterlands

“…As has been mentioned, a large proportion of the inhabitable area of the Sohar hinterlands has been completely redeveloped, especially along the coast, resulting in the rapid destruction of ecosystems and rich archaeological landscapes, which have been bulldozed, buried or dug through. Given the speed of these developments, we do not have the luxury to follow the example of colleagues in the Mediterranean, who, from the 1970s onwards, have generally set up survey projects in areas that are less than 50 square kilometres in size (Cherry, 1994; Knodell et al, 2022). However, as has been demonstrated by Wilkinson and colleagues (2004, pp.…”

5 Archaeology in southwest Anatolia: research from Ionia and Caria in the last decade

“…An effervescence of new archaeological field surveys has also greatly shaped our perception of Ionian landscapes in recent years. In the 1980s and 1990s, pioneers Numan Tuna, Recep Meriç, and Hayat Erkanal, inspired by the ‘new wave’ of surveys emerging in Greece (Knodell et al 2022), conducted extensive surveys and recorded archaeological sites outside of urban cores, displaying admirable energy towards the preservation of cultural landscapes. Recently, field surveys employing systematic and intensive survey methods based on the traditional Mediterranean survey model have brought a new holistic dimension to defining the khorai and territories around urban cores.…”

Integrating legacy survey data into GIS‐based analysis: The rediscovery of the archaeological landscapes in Grevena (Western Macedonia, Greece)

“…604-619). Such intensive surveys showed particular care to publish extensive accounts of the collected materials (mostly of pottery) as well as complete site catalogues with corresponding maps (Alcock & Cherry, 2004;Cavanagh et al, 1996Cavanagh et al, , 2002Knodell et al, 2023;Runnels et al, 1995).…”

“…Greece has been a focal region for the emergence and development of surface archaeological surveys, both extensive and intensive, for practitioners in the Mediterranean region since the 1960s (Bintliff, 2012). A surface or field survey can be generally defined as the systematic collection and study of surface remains of archaeological importance from across the landscape (Bintliff, 2014, p. 7139; Knodell et al, 2023). Early survey projects conducted mostly by foreign archaeological schools, particularly the British and the American, have shaped not only the fieldwork strategies still in use today but also the research agenda and publication format for the long‐term interpretation of past cultural landscapes (Alcock et al, 1994; Alcock & Cherry, 2004; Arrington et al, 2016; Bevan & Conolly, 2013; Bintliff & Snodgrass, 1985; Cherry et al, 1991; Davis et al, 1997; Georgiadis et al, 2022; Jameson, 1976; McDonald & Rapp, 1972; Renfrew & Wagstaff, 1982).…”

“…129–137; Cherry et al, 1991, pp. 13–35; Knodell et al, 2023; Tartaron et al, 2006; Whitelaw et al, 2007; Whitelaw, 2013; Wright et al, 1990, pp. 604–619).…”