The contribution of geophysical prospecting in the reconstruction of the buried ancient environments of the house of Marcus Fabius Rufus (Pompeii, Italy)

An integrated geophysical study was carried out in a Roman house in the archaeological area of Pompeii (Italy). The house, once owned by Marcus Fabius Rufus, is an important architectural building overlooking a large garden that is likely to contain buried archaeological structures. The geophysical survey was planned to support an archaeological reconstruction of the residential complex, which was based on the assumption that the house was surrounded by an arcade. Electromagnetic data allowed us to assess the most promising areas for investigating the subsoil within the garden. The resistivity method yielded more detailed results and a further non-invasive geophysical technique, self-potential, confirmed the presence of very shallow structures. We performed an integrated interpretation of the data and detected structures buried under different volcanic eruptions succeeding the Plinian event of Mount Somma-Vesuvius in AD79. Specifically, several structures were found at a very shallow depth; their shapes are regular and the physical parameters are interpreted as anthropogenic remnants, whose geometry does not appear to be linked to architectural elements of a classical arcade. A test excavation revealed the presence of walls whose configuration corresponded with basins for water collection. Apart from the detected remains, the characterization of the pyroclastic deposits in terms of conductivity and of susceptibility allowed a synthesis of the stratigraphic context. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Inversion of data from electrical imaging surveys in water-covered areas , 2004 .

[2]  L. Eppelbaum,et al.  Prompt magnetic investigations of archaeological remains in areas of infrastructure development: Israeli experience , 2001 .

[3]  G. Leucci,et al.  Three-dimensional image of seismic refraction tomography and electrical resistivity tomography survey in the castle of Occhiola ` (Sicily, Italy) , 2007 .

[4]  Maurizio Fedi,et al.  Localized Denoising Filtering Using the Wavelet Transform , 2000 .

[5]  M. Drahor,et al.  Application of the self‐potential method to archaeological prospection: some case histories , 2004 .

[6]  L. Bermejo,et al.  Karstic morphologies identified with geophysics around Saulges caves (Mayenne, France) , 2010 .

[7]  N. Papadopoulos,et al.  Two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional resistivity imaging in archaeological site investigation , 2006 .

[8]  Kelsey M. Lowe,et al.  Electromagnetic conductivity mapping for site prediction in meandering river floodplains , 2008 .

[9]  B. Bevan Electromagnetics for Mapping Buried Earth Features , 1983 .

[10]  I. J. Won,et al.  Magnetometers and electro-magnetomenters , 2004 .

[11]  M. Drahor,et al.  Magnetic and electrical resistivity tomography investigations in a Roman legionary camp site (Legio IV Scythica) in Zeugma, Southeastern Anatolia, Turkey , 2008 .

[12]  N. Linford The application of geophysical methods to archaeological prospection , 2006 .

[14]  Dean Goodman,et al.  The study and characterization of Emperor Traiano's Villa (Altopiani di Arcinazzo, Roma) using high‐resolution integrated geophysical surveys , 2003 .

[15]  R. Dalan Defining archaeological features with electromagnetic surveys at the Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site , 1991 .

[16]  Maurizio Fedi,et al.  Decorrugation and removal of directional trends of magnetic fields by the wavelet transform: application to archaeological areas , 2003 .

[17]  R. Barker,et al.  Rapid least-squared inversion of apparent resisitivity pseudosections by a quasi-Newton method , 1996 .