Archaeological Site Detection and Mapping: some thoughts on differing scales of detail and archaeological ‘non-visibility’

Archaeological mapping shares affinities with topographical mapping but there are also significant differences. This contribution will concentrate on two basic aspects: differences in the scale of representation, and the question of archaeological visibility. The traditional subdivision between micro, semi-micro, mid- and macro scale tends to omit the ‘local’ level which more closely matches the characteristics and needs of field archaeology and landscape studies. As regards archaeological visibility and non-visibility the key point is that, in contrast to topographical cartography, the majority of the features depicted in archaeological mapping are not directly recognisable in their own right but reveal themselves as micro variations in the topsoil or as surface reflections of things buried beneath the ground. This contribution aims to present a summary of the main archaeological survey methods, along with their key characteristics and limitations, while also outlining the potentialities that can arise from their integration with one another in the creation of cartography at the macro, local and micro-territorial scale.