Skip to content
Open menu Close menu

Dr Armin Schmidt

PositionHonorary Visiting Research Fellow in Archaeological Geophysics
DepartmentSchool of Archaeological and Forensic Sciences
EmailA.Schmidt@bradford.ac.uk
ORCID0000-0002-4241-5381

Research Interests (key words only)

archaeological geophysics, geomatics, IT in archaeology

Biography

Armin Schmidt is an Archaeological Geophysicist and IT pioneer, initially trained as a physicist.

He has applied novel methods of geophysical prospection worldwide from Ecuador to Iran, Nepal and Japan, working as a researcher and consultant for UNESCO.

He is the Founder of the International Society for Archaeological Prospection (ISAP), as well as co-founder of the Archaeology Data Service (ADS).

His specialisations are in near-surface geophysics for archaeological prospection and geoarchaeology; geodata processing; and computer applications in archaeology. His main archaeological interests are South Asian archaeology and Iranian prehistory.

Study History

After obtaining a PhD from the RWTH Aachen, Germany, he worked in the School of Archaeological and Forensic Sciences, University of Bradford (UK) from 1993 to 2010 as a Senior Lecturer.

Professional Activities

Research Areas

Research focuses on four main areas:

  1. Integrated archaeological field projects (from intra-site to landscapes) using archaeological geophysical techniques
  2. Development of new, and adaptation of existing, geophysical techniques (instrumental and computational) for use in archaeological prospection
  3. Integration of geophysical and remote sensing techniques for the study of archaeological sites and landscapes, using GIS
  4. The use of IT for the enhancement of the archaeological record

1. Integrated Field Projects

As project- and team-leader Armin Schmidt is involved in several international archaeological research projects.

In Turkey, the Classical site of Pessinus (home of the Mother Goddess Cybele) is investigated through geophysical surveys, remote sensing, fieldwalking and traditional excavations, in collaboration with Gocha Tsetskhladze (University of Melbourne).

In Iran the palaeoenvironment of the Chalcolithic tell of Ghabristan is investigated with geoarchaeological methods to provide further information on the settlement hiatus in the Early Bronze Age (with Hassan Fazeli and Ghasem Azizi, University of Tehran). This project is now part of a larger research network investigating the palaeoclimate of Iran: The Iranian Holocene.

An ongoing project with Robin Coningham (Durham University) investigates the potential for archaeological geophysical techniques in South Asia. As part of UNESCO missions to Bangladesh and Nepal detailed geophysical surveys revealed unknown buried structures (e.g. viharas at Ramagrama, Nepal). In an AHRC funded project, the hinterland of Sri Lanka's ancient capital Anuradhapura is being investigated using various archaeological methods, including detailed geophysical investigations.

In the UK, the Battle of Towton Landscape Project (Tim Sutherland) has demonstrated the necessity for an integration of multi-source data from various field techniques, including metal detectors. The results have shown how archaeological research can inform the evaluation of historical sources.

In other UK projects work is undertaken in collaboration with various local groups (e.g. Huddersfield & District Archaeological Society) to assist with the understanding of archaeological landscapes and remains. Detailed geophysical investigations of ancient metalworking sites have provided considerable insight into the layout of such sites and the morphology of buried furnaces (with Rob Vernon and Gerry McDonnell). Geophysical surveys at several National Trust properties helped to reveal the layout of earlier planting and landscaping schemes.

Geophysical Methodology

A thorough evaluation of magnetic susceptibility measurements on a modern iron production site, which had in recent history been polluted with heavy metals, demonstrated how rapid magnetic measurements can be used to map the spatial distribution of contaminants by proxy.

Data Integration

The integration of several remote sensing data sources (e.g. satellite imagery, aerial photography and geophysical surveys) with other archaeological data (e.g. surface collection and earthwork surveys) using GIS technology has greatly enhanced subsequent archaeological interpretations. For example at Charsadda, Pakistan, such integration was crucial to reveal the relationship between modern surface features, geophysical anomalies and historic excavation records.

IT in Archaeology

GIS tools are being adapted to enhance the digital workflow from field to publications, for example by providing improved tools for the digitisation of earthwork mapping.
An ecological model based on archaeological observations in Iceland (Bumodel) was re-evaluated to be used as a learning game for the teaching of sustainability through an archaeological case study.

Publications

See Armin Schmidt's publications on Bradford Scholars.

  • Schmidt, A., P. Linford, N. Linford, A. David, C. Gaffney, A. Sarris & J. Fassbinder 2015. Guidelines for the use of Geophysics in Archaeology: Questions to Ask and Points to Consider. Namur: Europae Archaeologia Consilium (EAC)

  • Schmidt, A. 2013. Earth Resistance for Archaeologists. Lanham: AltaMira Press
  • Schmidt, A. & G. Tsetskhladze 2013. Raster was Yesterday: Using Vector Engines to Process Geophysical Data. Archaeological Prospection 20(1):59-65 DOI: 10.1002/arp.1443
  • Schmidt, A & E. Ernenwein 2011. ADS Guide to Good Practice: Geophysical Data in Archaeology - 2nd fully revised edition
  • Quigley, M., M. Fattahi, R. Sohbati & A. Schmidt 2011. Palaeoseismicity and pottery: investigating earthquake and archaeological chronologies on the Hajiarab alluvial fan, Iran. Quaternary International 242(1): 185-195. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2011.04.023
  • Schmidt, A., M. Quigley, M. Fattahi, G. Azizi, M. Maghsoudi & H. Fazeli 2011. Holocene settlement shifts and palaeoenvironments on the Central Iranian Plateau: investigating linked systems. The Holocene 21(4): 583-595. DOI: 10.1177/0959683610385961
  • Camidge, K., P. Holt, C. Johns, L. Randall & A. Schmidt 2010. Developing magnetometer techniques to identify submerged archaeological sites (5671 DT). Historic Environment Service, Environment and Heritage, Cornwall County Council Report No: 2010R012. ADS Version
  • Schmidt, A. 2009. Electrical and magnetic methods in archaeological prospection. In S. Campana and S. Piro (ed.) Seeing the unseen. Geophysics and landscape archaeology: 67-81. London: Taylor & Francis Group
  • Aspinall, A., C. F. Gaffney & A. Schmidt 2008. Magnetometry for Archaeologists. Lanham: AltaMira Press
  • Coningham, R., P. Gunawardhana, M. Manuel, G. Adikari, M. Katugampola, R. Young, A. Schmidt, K. Krishnan, I. Simpson, G. McDonnell & C. M. Batt 2007. The state of theocracy: defining an early medieval hinterland in Sri Lanka. Antiquity 81: 699-719
  • Schmidt, A. 2007. Archaeology, magnetic methods. In D. Gubbins and E. Herrero-Bervera (ed.) Encyclopedia of Geomagnetism and Paleomagnetism: Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. 23-31. Heidelberg, New York: Springer
  • Schmidt, A. & B. Edwards 2007. The non-intrusive surface surveys. In R. A. E. Coningham and I. Ali (ed.) Charsadda: the British-Pakistani excavations at the Bala Hisar: BAR International Series 1709. Society for South Asian Studies (British Academy) Monograph 5. 33-46. Oxford: Archaeopress
  • Schmidt, A. & H. Fazeli 2007. Tepe Ghabristan: A Chalcolithic Tell Buried in Alluvium. Archaeological Prospection 14: 38-46
  • Schmidt, A., T. Sutherland & S. Dockrill 2006. Inside the mound: geophysical surveys of the Scatness Iron-age Broch, Shetland. In R. E. Jones and L. Sharpe (ed.) Going over old ground: British Archaeological Reports British Series 416. 225-230. Oxford: Archaeopress
  • Schmidt, A., R. Yarnold, M. Hill & M. Ashmore 2005. Magnetic susceptibility as proxy for heavy metal pollution: a site study. Journal of Geochemical Exploration 85: 109-117
  • Schmidt, A. 2003. Remote Sensing and Geophysical Prospection. Internet Archaeology 15:
  • Sutherland, T. & A. Schmidt 2003. Towton, 1461: An Integrated Approach to Battlefield Archaeology. Landscapes 4: 15-25
  • Pringle, J. K., A. R. Westerman, A. Schmidt, J. Harrison, D. Shandley, J. Beck, R. E. Donahue & A. Gardiner 2002. Investigating Peak Cavern, Castleton, Derbyshire, UK: integrating cave survey, geophysics, geology and archaeology to create a 3D digital CAD model. Cave and Karst Science 29: 67-74
  • Schmidt, A. 2002. Geophysical Data in Archaeology: A Guide to Good Practice. ADS series of Guides to Good Practice. Oxford: Oxbow Books
  • Vernon, R. W., G. McDonnell & A. Schmidt 2002. The Geophysical Evaluation of British Lead and Copper Working Sites. Comparison with Iron Working. Archaeological Prospection 9: 123-134
  • Mercer, E. & A. Schmidt 2001. A magnetometer survey of an Iron Age settlement site at Uppåkra, Skåne, Sweden. In L. Larsson (ed.) Uppåkra: Centrum i analys och rapport, Uppåkrastudier 4: 65-78. Lund: Acta Archaeologica Lundensia (Series 8 no 36)
  • Schmidt, A. 2001. Visualisation of multi-source archaeological geophysics data. In M. Cucarzi and P. Conti (ed.) Filtering, Optimisation and Modelling of Geophysical Data in Archaeological Prospecting: 149-160. Rome: Fondazione Ing. Carlo M. Lerici
  • Schmidt, A. & M. Atha 2001. An integrated site investigation of the Deserted Medieval Complex at High Cayton, England. In M. Doneus, A. Eder-Hinterleitner and W. Neubauer (ed.) Archaeological Prospection 2001: 174-175. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences

Impact

Lead author of EAC guidelines on geophysics in archaeology.

Share this