Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Here we present the results of program aerial photography in areas of six fortified settlements of the Southern Trans-Urals (end of the 3rd — first quarter of the 2nd millennium BC; Sintashta and Petrovka archaeological cul-tures). The results are represented by digital surface models (DSM). They were created on the basis of serial photographs taken automatically from unmanned aerial vehicles. Models were built and processed using “Agisoft Metashape Professional” and “Golden Software Surfer” software packages. DSM act as a source for analyzing and clarifying the configurations of the fortified settlements, which is especially important for new and little-studied sites, such as Verkhneuralskoye and Zarechnoye IV. Also, the aerial photography coverage of a wide area allows clear reflection of the features of the landscape location of the settlements (Arkaim, Sarym-Sakly). By means of digital models, it is possible to record the effects of negative natural and anthropogenic factors on the archaeo-logical sites (Alandskoye). The results of aerial surveys can be the basis for the creation of cartographic materials (Sintashta archaeological complex). The comparison of the DSM with data from other methods allows us to con-clude that there is insufficient validity for identifying “additional” elements, such as additional rows of buildings, complex hydraulic structures, extensive structures of unclear purpose, work and utility buildings, on the territory of several sites based solely on the interpretation of individual aerial photographs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Soldatkin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: