GEOPHYSICS.

VOL.

56. NO.

9 (SEPTEMBER

1991):

P. 1310~1319.

IO FIGS

The search for graves

Bruce W. Bevan*

ABSTRACT

Over the decades, grave markers in old cemeteries have been lost. Geophysical exploration can sometimes locate the unmarked burials. The two techniques which may be best for this search are a ground-penetrating radar survey and a soil conductivity survey. A ground-penetrating radar survey, with its capability for estimating the depth and shape of buried objects, is particularly suitable. With an electromagnetic induction survey, the disturbed soil in the grave shaft can sometimes be detected as a change in electrical conductivity. Both of these surveys also can locate large metal objects. These surveys have limitations. At some sites, the radar cannot profile deeply enough; at others, the soil

strata are so complex that graves cannot be distinguished. A conductivity survey can be degraded by metallic trash and other small objects in the topsoil: it can give the best results where the earth is distinctly stratified. Results from nine surveys are illustrated here. The sites are all in the U.S.A. and the graves are not older than the 17th century. Magnetic and resistivity surveys may be suitable for some sites, but they have not been very successful for the sites discussed here. The success of these surveys has ranged widely. from excellent to poor. While little archaeological excavation has followed these surveys, geophysical tests at marked graves show the capability of the instruments.

INTRODUCTION
brave markers nave become lost, destroyed, or misplaced for several reasons. Wood quickly rots. Stone may break or crumble. Vandalism and falling trees also can contribute to the loss. Some graves may never have been marked. As time and land development progress, it can become important to find these old, unmarked graves. Sometimes they are accidentally encountered during construction and someone wishes to determine the extent of the cemetery so tliat it can be preserved. In other cases, it might be necessary to locate individual burials so that they can be removed to another location. The study of old graves also can provide valuable information about changes in social customs (Brown, 1971; Tainter, 1978; Bartel, 1982).

. .

THE CHARACTERISTICS

OF A GRAVE

The most distinctive feature of a grave may be the disturbed soil in the filled excavation. Through the l-2-m depth of a grave shaft, the soil may change markedly. When
Presented at the 59th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration revised manuscript received February 5, 1991. Yieosight, P.O. Box 135, Pitman, NJ 08071. 6 1991 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved. 1310

the excavated earth is replaced. some topsoil may return to the bottom of the hole and subsoil may end up on top and may be spread on the surface. The topsoil can be higher in magnetic susceptibility than the subsoil. Also, the electrical conductivity of the natural earth may increase or decrease with depth. The soil filling the grave shaft could have a different electrical and magnetic stratification than the natural earth. These soil changes could last indefinitely. Except for recent criminal burials (Davenport et al.. 1988; Davenport et al., 1990) nothing may remain except for bones. While the bones may last for thousands of years in some types of soil, they will generally not be directly detectable. However, the decay of the body can possibly alter the chemical composition of the surrounding soil. The soil also could be less compacted at the bottom of the grave shaft. If a coffin is still partially intact, there could be an air-filled void. Coffin nails would usually be undetectable, but some coffin fittings could be large metal objects (Bell. 1990). Metallic or lead coffins could be present. If there is a burial vault of brick or stone, there could be an air cavity, and the brick or stone could be moderately magnetic.
Geophysicists. Manuscript received by the Editor March 21, 1990:

The Search for Graves The soil in the grave shaft might have settled. leaving a shallow depression at the surface. The surrounding soil might have washed into this, filling it up; this extra lens of topsoil might be detectable. Metallic debris could have accumulated in the depression. The grave marker might have fallen and be buried at a shallow depth. Possibly the grave was outlined with a pipe or a stone border. which is now buried in leaf mold. While burial practices change with time and location, some earlier western cultures have aligned graves east-west with a coffin at a depth of l-2 m. A cemetery could more likely be on a hilltop than in a valley. It might be possible to locate the area of a cemetery even though individual graves might not be detectable. Possibly the cemetery was never plowed, although the surrounding land was: the cemetery boundary could mark a contrast in the stratification or moisture retention of the soil. Trees might have been allowed to grow in the cemetery, while the surrounding land remained clear; remnants of the former trees might be detectable if their roots have not decayed or if soil scars from fallen trees are present. Many of the characteristics described above can be detected by geophysics. However, the setting is sometimes difficult: If neglected, the area could be overgrown with trees or brush and there could be a veneer of metallic trash on the surface.

1311

Soils in formerly glaciated areas, such as New England. can be very complex and can mask buried features on radar profiles. Stony soil resulting from shallow bedrock can cause the same problem. Grave digging might have left heaps of subsoil scattered on the surface. If the velocity of the radar pulse is markedly different in these soil lenses. the radar images of deeper features can be sheared into complex patterns. making them impossible to recognize. Electromagnetic induction meters Electromagnetic induction meters can provide a fast measurement of the electrical conductivity of the earth (Frohlich and Lancaster. 1986). These instruments, with intercoil spacings of l-4 m, can provide enough lateral and amplitude resolution to detect the contrasting earth that fills a grave shaft. They also can act as metal detectors; this can be good or bad, depending on whether the metal is sought or present as incidental trash. These instruments also can measure magnetic susceptibility. allowing the detection of brick. fired earth, and changes in the thickness of topsoil. Conductivity surveys can be affected by electromagnetic interference in areas with high soil resistivity, such as sand. but they can be done over a dry. hard surface such as an asphalt parking lot. Resistivity meters

INSTRUMENTS

FOR THE

SEARCH

Ground-penetrating radar Ground-penetrating radar (Vaughan, 1986; Imai et al., 1987) can create approximate soil profiles, with reflections caused by contrasts in dielectric constant and electrical resistivity. In practice, these contrasts are often changes in the moisture content or density of the soil. Should the natural soil have a rather planar stratification, then the chaotic soil which fills the grave shaft could be detectable. Figure I shows different soil contrasts which might reveal a grave on a radar profile. While the deep contrast illustrated as A may be the most distinctive, the other effects (B-E) also can be present. Radar is also excellent for finding air-filled voids and metal objects.

Resistivity surveys, with four earth-contacting electrodes. can provide information similar to that from EM conductivity surveys. The Wenner configuration has low lateral resolution, but spatial oscillations in the measurements that have a high frequency could define the area of disturbed earth in a cemetery (Carr. 1982). Other electrode configurations. such as the pole-pole or dipole-dipole arrays. would generally be more suitable for the mapping of individual graves. Resistivity pseudosections also could provide evidence of grave shafts (Ellwood. 1990). Magnetometers If brick vaults are suspected, a magnetic survey should be considered, for brick is rather magnetic. While the nails in a wooden coffin might cause a magnetic anomaly of less than I nT. other iron hardware on the coffin might be massive enough to be detectable. If the background spatial variability of the magnetic field is small, the destratified soil of refilled grave shafts might be detected (Ralph, 1969). There is enough iron debris at many cemetery sites for magnetic surveys to be of little value. Other instruments Many other techniques have also been employed in the search for graves or tombs: seismic (Linehan, 1956), SP (Wynn and Sherwood, 1984), microgravity (Lakshmanan and Montlucon. 1987; Blizkovsky, 1979). In Europe, aerial photography has been particularly successful in the exploration for flattened remnants of ancient burial mounds (Wilson, 1975).

A I

El

D -aD

I--q@=-

ww
I I

I I

I I

I I
L-J

I I
I

I
I L-J

I L-J

I !___!

FIG. 1. The hachured areas show soil contrasts that might suggest a grave on a radar profile. The broken lines indicate the cross-sections of the grave shafts.

1312
EXAMPLES OF GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS

Bevan Touro Cemetery As the soil strata become more complex, graves can become indistinguishable in the clutter on the radar profiles. The soils found in glacial and periglacial terrain can cause very complex radar profiles. In Newport, Rhode Island, there is a cemetery that dates back to the 17thor early 18thcentury. Figure 4 illustrates the complexity of the radar profiles from the site. Stones indicate that graves are at the two locations marked g. While the

The first examples will illustrate ground-penetrating radar surveys; results from conductivity surveys will follow. The examples which are shown here have a greater clarity than is found at the average site. Detailed notes are given in the Appendix; these will allow the possible unmarked graves to be relocated. The notes also describe the failings of some geophysical surveys. Carroll House As part of a geophysical survey at a historical house in Annapolis, Maryland, a radar survey examined a cemetery. Figure 2 is a radar profile that crosses I4 marked graves; their locations are indicated by g. The sides of the profile show the estimated depth in meters and the delay time of the reflection. On the left, six of the seven graves are indicated by small hyperbolic arcs; the seventh grave is only faintly detected. However, none of the graves on the right side cause noticeable radar reflections. The seven graves on the left are from the period 19541975. The seven graves on the right are reburials, of bones only, from another cemetery; the original burials were from the period 1845-1877. Rockville Baptist Church At many old cemeteries there are some marked graves, but it is suspectedthat there could be additional graves that have lost their markers. This is a good setting for a geophysical survey, for tests at the marked graves can suggestthe reliability of the geophysical survey. An example of this is provided by a ground-penetrating radar survey of a 19th century cemetery where there was once a Baptist Church in Rockville, Maryland. There are about 33 graves that are marked with stones at this site, but it was thought that there also might be additional graves. In Figure 3, the radar profile crosses four marked graves. At least two of these appear to have been detected by the radar as reflections at a depth of 1-2 m. On the left side of the profile, there are three additional reflections that are similar to those from the marked graves. These could be unmarked graves.

FIG. 3. Rockville Baptist Church. Four graves that are marked with stonesare indicated by the letter g; the radar reflections from four possible unmarked graves are indicated by & p. The vertical scales show the round-trip delay time of the reflection and also the estimated range to the reflector.

FIG. 2. Carroll House. Fourteen marked graves are along the line of this radar profile; only six of them were detected by the radar.

FIG. 4. Touro cemetery. A marked grave at g reflection at a depth of I m.

has a

The Search for Graves

1313

marked grave on the left has a clear reflection, the marked grave on the right causes no distinctive reflection. Note that the horizontal scale of the radar profile is compressedby a factor of about five relative to the depth scale. In Figure 4, there are two additional reflections that could reveal unmarked graves; these are at a depth of about I m and are indicated p.
Bruton Parish Church

The depth of a radar reflection is the primary clue that the reflection might be from a grave; a secondary clue is provided by the shape of the reflection. While the size information from radar is rather crude, it can sometimes reveal that a buried object is distinctly longer in one direction than the other; this can indicate a grave. An example of this was found at an 18th century church in the middle of Williamsburg, Virginia. Figure 5a is a north-

south profile with a strong, isolated reflection. The profile of Figure 5b was made in an east-west direction and shows that the object is longer in that direction; it is about l-2 m long. This reflection is possibly caused by an unmarked grave. The radar profiles also reveal several technical points. In these and the other profiles here, both positive and negative signals are printed identically as black bands. The reflection at a depth of I m in Figure 5a is so strong that at least five half-cycles of the reflection are distinct. Furthermore, there appearsto be a second reflection, a reverberation, at a depth of 2 m; because of the weaker signal, only three half-cycles of that reflection are apparent. The long arms on the hyperbolic reflection suggestthat the reflectivity of the object is large over wide angles; a reflection is detected at least 2 m distant from the middle of the object. The profile of Figure 5b is about I m north of the middle of the object; this causesthe

(a)

(b)

(4

FIG. 5. Bruton Parish Church. (a) This is a north-south radar profile over a possible grave. (b) An east-west profile shows that the object is wider in that direction. (c) Buried metal decreasesthe apparent conductivity; the contour interval is I mS/m. The broken lines locate the lines of the two radar profiles. (d) There is also buried iron or brick; the contour interval of this magnetic map is IO nT.

1314

Bevan

reflection there to be detected at a slightly greater range, which is greater than the actual depth of the object. A conductivity survey was done over the possible grave with a Geonics EM31 electromagnetic induction meter. Figure 5c shows a pattern typically caused by buried metal: low values over the object with slightly higher values around it. The low values are simply caused by the inherent nonlinearity of the instrument near excellent conductors. A resistivity pseudosection was made across this object, but it revealed no anomaly. A magnetic survey was also done; Figure 5d showsa 40 nT magnetic high with evidence of a magnetic low on the north. This could be caused by roughly 3 kg of iron at a depth of about I m. A larger mass of brick also could cause the anomaly. All the evidence suggeststhat there is an unmarked grave at a depth of I m; it could contain a metal or metal-framed coffin, and it is also likely that iron or brick is in the grave. The Poor Farm cemetery A pauper s cemetery in Rockville, Maryland, has graves dating back as early as 1789. None of the graves is marked. A radar survey was done at this cemetery and Figure 6 shows one profile with a reflection that was thought likely to be caused by a grave. This profile was made along a line in a north-south direction; perpendicular profiles, directed east-west, showed that the reflecting object was longer in that direction. However, excavation at this location showed that the cause of the reflection was a natural change in the complex soil strata that are found at this site. Mount Vernon A historical record has suggestedthat the graves of slaves are located on a ridge close to George Washington s tomb. In Figure 7a, this tomb is marked with a rectangle in the upper right corner; the contour lines, with an interval of 5 ft (I .5 m), show the wooded ridge to the southwest. While there is a commemorative monument on the ridge, no graves are marked. A radar survey may have located about 50 unmarked graves; these are shown by small ovals in Figure 7a. Figure 7b shows reflections that could be caused by graves. By making closely spaced profiles along perpendicular paths, it was found that most of the reflections were distinctly broader in the east-west direction than they were north-south. This, combined with the depth of the reflections, suggeststhat these reflections may indicate unmarked graves. Since the example above shows that quite natural changes in the soil can cause radar reflections that are identical to these, this survey has indicated only the possible locations of graves. Ely, Minnesota At a cemetery in this town, only one grave is marked with a stone. A radar profile which crossed the grave showed a clear reflection at a depth of about I m. There are I8 shallow oval depressions in the area, suggestingthat there could be FIG. 6. Poor Farm cemetery. The radar reflection in the middle of this profile looked like it was caused by a grave, but it was not a grave. It was caused by a natural change in the soil strata.

64

(b)

10
N70 I

m
I --A

20

40 ns P PP P P

FIG. 7. Mount Vernon. (a, left) Possible unmarked gra by small ovals on this topographic map. (b, above unmarked graves are evident on this radar profile.

1316

Bevan fittings, were detectable at a short distance. Because of the normal nonlinearity of the instrument, metal that is closer than about I m can cause low or negative readings of apparent conductivity; at a somewhat greater distance, the readings can show high conductivity. About 25-50 anomalies, showing low or negative values of apparent conductivity, were found in areas where no burials could be seen. Six of these anomalies were tested by shallow excavations and five graves were partially exposed at depths of less than I m. Figure 9a shows the type of conductivity anomalies that were found: low or negative readings surrounded by highs. While the two marked areas were not excavated, they are probably graves that contain coffins with metal handles and possibly metal frames. The burials appear to be slightly oblique to the measurement lines; this causes each anomaly to be split into two areas. Figure 9b is a magnetic map of the same area; there is no significant anomaly in the area of the conductivity lows. Neither geophysics nor excavation could detect any graves near the cemetery monument.

unmarked graves. Figure 8 shows three possible graves, all unmarked. The area is wooded and it is possible that some of the depressions could be caused by uprooted trees that have long since decayed. There are three possible associations: Grave-like reflections at locations without depressions, grave-like reflections where there are depressions,and depressionswhere there are no reflections. At this site, nine examples were found in each of these three categories. It is uncertain whether the depressions or the radar reflections are more reliable indicators of graves.

Kettering Shaker cemetery

There is a 19th century Shaker cemetery in Kettering, Ohio. Historical evidence suggestedits location and a monument was placed there. During construction in the area, excavations about 100 m from the monument exposed burials and an archaeological test was begun. The upper layer of silty soil was removed to a depth of less than I m but grave shafts could not be seen in the underlying gravelly soil. A conductivity survey was done with a Geonics EM38 electromagnetic induction meter after initial tests showed that the exposed coffin remains, which contained metal

Lamington Black cemetery

Another example of an EM38 conductivity survey done at a cemetery is shown in Figure 10. Several profiles in the cemetery gave evidence of a correlation between the locations of known graves and conductivity highs. Therefore, some of the conductivity highs shown in the figure could be caused by unmarked graves. This site is a cemetery in Lamington, New Jersey. It is possible that the conductivity highs are caused by soil contrasts in the grave shafts, rather than by metal.

CONCLUSION For the sites that have been investigated, the groundpenetrating radar has had the greatest success at locating unmarked graves. The best conditions for this instrument are at sites where the radar detects few underground objects and either no apparent stratification or only weak, planar strata. The soil should be high in resistivity, possibly greater than 200 R * m. The worst conditions for radar are conductive, clayey soils. Complex profiles, such as can be found in areas with glacial till or rocky soil, can make it difficult to isolate any possible graves. The radar reflections from the depth of the burial appear to provide the strongest evidence for a grave; reflections that are elongated in one direction relative to the perpendicular direction also suggesta grave. Measurements of electrical conductivity also appear to be suitable for the search for graves. Low values can indicate a proximity to metal, but high conductivity has been associated with grave shafts at one cemetery. These surveys have found no guarantee of success. Geophysical evidence has suggested that there were graves where there were none; known graves have also been invisible to these surveys.

FIG. 8. Ely, Minnesota. Three possible unmarked graves are marked with the letter p here; the radar reflections are at depths of l-2 m.

The Search for Graves

1317

(4

(b)

FIG. 9. Kettering Shaker cemetery. (a) Apparent electrical graves could be indicated at p in this Shaker cemetery. nT. shows no anomalies at the conductivity lows.

conductivity is contoured at an interval of I mS/m. Two (b) The magnetic map of the same area. contoured at I

Apparent mS/m

electrical

conductivity,

20 ;
I :

10

i I I I I \ 3 3 ft ft W of E of center center

0: 0

20

60

80 N coordinate,

100 ft

120

140

160

180

FIG. IO. Lamington Black cemetery. Three parallel conductivity profiles are spaced by about 0.9 m. There is a depression at y that is likely a grave and high readings were found there: other anomalies marked p could be more unmarked graves.

1318
REFERENCES

Bevan
in current Middle Eastern archaeology: Application and evaluation: Geophysics. 51, 141~1425. Imai. T .. Sakayama. 7.. and Kanemori. T.. 19X7. Use of groundprobing radar and resistivity survey\ for archaeological investigations: Geophysic\. 52, 137-150. I.akshmanan. J.. and Montlucon. J.. 19X7. Microgravity probes the Great Pyramid: The Leading Edge. 6. no. I. l&17. Linehan. D.. 1956. A seismic problem in St. Peter s Basilica. Vatican City. Kome. Italy. in Lyons. P.L.. Ed.. Geophysical case histories: Sot. Expl. Geophys.. vol. 2. 615-692. Ralph. E. K.. 1969. Archaeological prospecting: Expedition. I I. no. 2. l-1-21. Tainter. J.A.. lY78. Mortuary practices and the study of prehistoric social systems. in SchifTer. M. B.. Ed.. Advances in archaeological method and theory: Academic Press. vol. I. 105-141. Vaughan. C.J.. 19x6, Ground-penetrating radar surveys used in archaeological investigations: Geophysics. 51. 595-604. Wilson. D.K.. Ed.. 1975. Aerial reconnaissance for al-chaeology: The Council for British Archaeology. Research Report no. 12. Wynn. J.C.. and Sherwood. S.I.. 1984. The self-potential (SP) method: An inexpensive reconnaissance and archaeological mapping tool: J. Field Archaeology. 11, 195-204.

Bartel. B.. 1982. A historical review of ethnological and archaeological analyses of mortuary practice: J. Anthropol. Archaeology. 1, 32-58. Bell. E.L.. 1990. The historical archaeology of mortuary behavior: Coffin hardware from Uxbridge. Massachusetts: Historical Archaeology. 24, 54-78. Blirkovsky, M.. 1979, Processing and applications in microgravity surveys: Geophys. Prosp.. 27, 84X-861, Brown. J.A., Ed.. 1971, Approaches to the social dimension\ of mortuary practices: Memoirs Sot. Am. Archaeology. no. 25. Carr. C., 1982, Handbook on soil resistivity surveying: Center for Am. Archeology Press. Davenport, G.C.. Lindemann. J.W., Griffin. T.J.. and Borouski. J.E., 1988, Crime scene investigation techniques: The Leading Edge. 7, no. 8. 64-66. Davenport, G.C.. Griffin. T.J.. Lindemann. J.W.. Heimmer. 0.. 1990, Geoscientists and law enforcement professional5 work together in Colorado: Geotimes. 35, 13-15. Ellwood. B.B.. 1990. Electrical resistivity surveys in two historical cemeteries in northeast Texas: A method for delineating unidentified burial shafts: Historical Archaeology. 24. 91-98. Frohlich. B.. and Lancaster, W.J.. 1986. Electromagnetic wrveying

APPENDIX
NOTES ON THE SURVEYS urban and a moderate amount of interference was detected from other transmitters. The upper 1.7 m of the soil has a resistivity of about 1100 0 * m: below that the resistivity is about 370 0 . m. The reference point for the survey was the south end of a grave stone for Elizabeth Braddock (1856 1870). The illustrated profile is line WS. Grid north is a magnetic bearing of 5 degrees and extends parallel to a line of graves. Figure 4: The profile was made with a model 3102 (315 MHz) antenna on 23 May 1985. The pulse velocity is assumed to be 8.8 cm/m. The electrical resistivity of the earth was not measured, but the soil is probably sand and gravel. The survey was done for Joan Gallagher at the Public Archaeology Laboratory (Pawtucket, Rhode Island). Information about the site was provided by Bernard Kuzinitz, the historian of the Touro Synagogue. The grid reference point is the eastern corner of the boundary fence: the grid is aligned with this fence and grid south is a magnetic bearing of 219 degrees. The profile is line W22.S. The marked grave of Jacob Lopez is at S7l. The surface is mown lawn with some trees and bushes. Figure 5: The radar antenna was a model 3105 (180 MHz) and the depth scale assumes a pulse velocity of 8.2 cmins. This survey was done on l-2 April 1985 for John Milewski and John Pillsbury and was funded by the Veritat Foundation. The EM survey was done with the magnetic dipoles vertical and at an elevation of about I m. The averages of pairs of readings are mapped here; one with the bar of the instrument north-south and the other, east-west. The measurement spacing was 5 ft. The magnetic survey was done with a sensor height of 5 ft (I .S m) and a Scintrex MP-2 proton magnetometer. The average magnetic field was 53 960 nT; no temporal correction was made to the data and the Fredericksburg A-index was 16 on the day of survey. The measurement spacing was 2.5 ft (0.76 m) and traverses were made east-west. The soil resistivity at the site is about 400 R . m in the upper 0.3 m and 135 n . m below that. The

My thanks go to the sponsors and coordinators of these surveys: their investment in these tests will aid others in the search for graves. For the surveys illustrated here, the ground-penetrating radar was a SIR System-7. from Geophysical Survey Systems. Range scales on the profiles have been estimated by a geometrical analysis of hyperbolic reflections: the vertical scales also show the round-trip delay time of the reflections. For each example, the electric dipole of the antenna was perpendicular to the line of traverse. The two electromagnetic induction meters were from Geonics. The EM38 has an intercoil spacing of I m, an operating frequency of 13.2 kHz. and a detection range of about I.5 m: the EM31 has an intercoil spacing of 3.66 m. an operating frequency of 9.8 kHz, and a detection range of about 6 m. Figure 2: This line was profiled with a model 3102 radar antenna (having a spectral peak at about 315 MHz) on 20 March 1987. For this and the other illustrations here. tic marks on the top of the profile are at 5 ft (I 3 m) intervals. The depth scale assumes a pulse velocity of 10.7 cmins. The soil resistivity is 50-80 f1 . m. The survey was coordinated by Paul Shackel, then with Historic Annapolis but now with the National Park Service, and was sponsored by the Charles Carroll of Carrollton 250th Anniversary Committee. This is part of the property of St. Mary s Roman Catholic Church and is located on Duke of Gloucester Street. Grid north was a magnetic bearing of 5 degrees and the southeast corner of the Carroll House is at coordinates N166 E47; these coordinates, like all the others here, are in feet. The profile in the figure is line N 140. The ground surface is mown lawn. Figure 3: The survey was done with a model 3105 (180 MHz) antenna and the pulse velocity is 7.6 cmins. The survey was done on 5 June 1986 for Peerless Rockville Historic Preservation and was coordinated by Eileen McGuckian. The site is located on Jefferson Street and the surface is mown lawn with only a few trees. The area is

The Search resistivity pseudosection was done with the Wenner array and inter-electrode spacings of 2.5, 5, and 7.5 ft (0.76, 1.5. and 2.3 m). The reference point for the survey was the northwest corner of the tower of the present church and the grid was aligned with this tower. The surface is covered by mown lawn and is flat. Figure 6: The radar had a model 3105 (180 MHz) antenna and the pulse velocity is assumed to be 7.3 cmins. This survey was coordinated by Doug Comer and Paul Inashima (Applied Archaeology Center. National Park Service) and Joann Robertson (Montgomery County Attorney s Office) and was sponsored by Montgomery County. The survey was done over the period of 27 April-4 May 1986. The illustration is from line E355. The site was cleared of brush and bare soil was at the surface: several loose metal grave markers were visible. The excavation of the site was directed by Diane Rhodes (Denver Service Center, National Park Service): this revealed that the soil strata had complex, undulating interfaces with lenses of clay and gravel in silty soil. While burials were found at two areas where graves were suggested by the radar, at seven other areas where graves were indicated by the geophysical survey, none were found; also, graves were found in three areas where none were interpreted from the radar profiles. At the location of this figure, measurements were also made with a magnetometer and a conductivity meter: while they revealed no anomaly, a resistivity pseudosection found a 20 percent increase in the resistivity at the location of the radar reflection. The soil resistivity here was about 200 0. m in the upper 0.6 m and 2000 R . m below that. Figure 7: The radar antenna was a model 3102 (315 MHz) and the depth scale assumes a pulse velocity of 7.6 cmins. The survey was done on 7-8 January 1985 and was directed by Alain Outlaw; Dennis Pogue is the current director of the archaeological program at the site. The survey was sponsored by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association of the Union. For the radar survey. profiles were spaced by 2.5 ft (0.76 m). Resistivity profiles on two lines showed no correlation between resistivity anomalies and 1I radar reflections. These measurements found an average resistivity of 350 f2 . m with anomalies of 100 0 . m using the Wenner array and an electrode spacing of 5 ft (I .5 m). A magnetic survey was unsuccessful because of an iron-containing fence and also iron objects buried in the soil: the magnetic anomalies did not correlate with radar reflections. The base map was provided by Mount Vernon. The reference point for the survey was the middle of the circular monument and the grid was aligned with the north-going path: this is a magnetic bearing of 0.5 degrees. The illustrated profile is line W30. The surface is covered by leaves and the average distance between trees with trunk diameters greater than 5 cm is about 4 m; three trees have trunk diameters of about I m. The area is rural. The ovals on the map show the estimated orientation of the burials. The survey did not explore the eastern side of the ridge. Figure 8: The profile was made with the model 3105 (180 MHz) antenna. The depth scale assumes a pulse velocity of

for Graves

1319

9. I cmins. The survey was done over the period IS-20 June 1984 for Gordon Peters. USDA Forest Service. as part of contract 43.63A9-4-864. The average resistivity of the earth is about 2300 II . m: the soil is mostly gravel but contains some boulders 0.3 m in size. The radar determined that the deeper, natural strata dip down 13 degrees to the northwest. Resistivity profiles across five possible graves with the Wenner array and an electrode spacing of 5 ft (1.5 m) detected no anomalies where there were radar reflections. The average spacing between trees is about 3 m in the area of survey: their trunk diameters range between 9 cm and 45 cm. The surface is covered by pine needles. The coordinate system was set up by the U.S. Forest Service and aligned with magnetic north: the Isaac Rova (1866-1898) grave is located at N 1I2 E30. The site is on the property of the Ely Service Center and the area is rural. Figure 9: This survey was done on 18 August 1985 and sponsored by the Dayton Power and Light Company as part of an archaeological survey done by Greenhouse Consultants and directed by Joel Grossman. The conductivity measurements were made with the Geonics EM38 on the ground and with its dipoles vertical and along an east-west line. This causes the elongation of the anomalies in the east-west direction. The measurement spacing was I ft (0.3 m) and traverses were made going east-west. The magnetic survey was done with a Scintrex MP-2 proton magnetometer with its sensor at a height of 2.5 ft (75 cm). Measurements were made at intervals of 1 ft (0.3 m) along east-going traverses. The average field is 55 900 nT. The temporal variation during the survey was 6 nT and it was not corrected. Grid north is true north and a magnetic bearing of about 0.5 degrees. The resistivity of the silt here is 120 IZ . m and the sandy gravel which is below has a resistivity of about 1800 0 * m. Fewer than I percent of the gravel pebbles were strongly magnetic. but they caused the complex magnetic map. The 0. 0 point on the figures has truncated state plane coordinates of N898 E603. The metal fittings on the coffins were iron, lead, silver-plated metal, and possibly copper. Some wood remained from the coffins. The one conductivity anomaly that was excavated but which was not a grave was apparently caused by a lateral contrast in the sand and gravel. Figure IO: This survey was done on 17 October 1986 for John Seidel, Pluckemin Archaeological Project (now at the University of Maryland), by F. Estrems and Joanne Galinis of Rutgers University. The Geonics EM38 had its dipoles vertical and along an east-west line. The measurement spacing was 2 ft (0.6 m). The area is wooded but the brush was cleared. It appears unlikely that the geometrical effect of the depression caused the conductivity high. With the high conductivity of the soil, the radar was not successful: the radar profiled several dozen known or likely graves but only one might have been detected. Magnetic and resistivity surveys were not helpful either. The illustrated line follows a magnetic bearing of 15 degrees. The conductivity low at N94 is near the grave of Samuel Lane. The site is on CowperthWaite Road in a rural area.