Spotting historical monuments and sites
Mapping of historical monuments and sites of Delhi using SPOT
satellite image
B. S. Sokhi Head, Human Settlement AnalysisGroup Indian Institute of Remote Sensing,
Dehradun-248001 Email: b.s.sokhi@ait.ac.th
The
world’s cultural legacy consists of rich archaeological ruins (monuments and
palaeontological deposits that illuminate past life on earth. Unique historical
structures tell us how our ancestors lived and worked. But exceptional
population growth, coupled with powerful technologies and industrialisation,
caused a serious cultural crisis. With every destroyed site an opportunity is
lost forever for future generations to be enriched by their cultural history.
The biggest fallacy lies in improper mapping where such monuments are depicted
with ordinary symbols of presentation and only the famous and well-known
monuments are mapped.
Delhi: The Study Area In Delhi, history
is not confined to dusty tombs and archives, but lives in the architecture, in
every stone of its buildings, well-preserved old buildings and others in ruins,
scattered all over the city. The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has listed
1151 monuments worth preserving but there is not a single map showing locations
of even 10% of these listed monuments.
Objectives There are
three broad objectives of this study:
Development of an “Interpretation Key”
Mapping of monuments and sites.
Comparison of SPOT images and aerial photographs to bring out their
advantages and limitations in such studies.
Data products Used For this study the panchromatic SPOT (10 metres resolution) of 1:25,000
scale of September 1989- Geo-coded sub-scenes: GRS D207/41 Scene
centre: N28-42/E77-03 N28-41/E77-12 N28-33/E77-12 and April 1987,
Row: K207, Path: J293 were used. Panchromatic aerial photographs of 1:10,000
scale of the year 1984 for a small sample area were available and were used for
comparison.
Definition of Terms Historical Sites: A
historical site is a place where significant past events have occurred or an
area containing property employed in, or monuments commemorating, such events.
Fig. 1:
Interpretation key
Historical Monuments: A monument
is often defined by law as any immovable property useful in illuminating or
interpreting past events (William, 1978). It can, therefore, encompass monuments
in the traditional sense (that is, a large stone statue or other artifact
serving no function except to commemorate a person, event or idea), site where
significant historical events occurred, buildings, or whole districts’
neighbourhood.
Archaeological Sites: An archaeological site is a
place where material remains give evidence of past human life and activities.
These remains can be movable and can lie above or below the ground.
Difference between Historical and Archaeological Sites and
Monuments Specialists usually differentiate historical sites from
archaeological sites by the advent of writing. If a written history exists of
the area or building in question; the site or building is considered a
historical site building. If the remains were left at a time when writing did
not exist or by a culture that did not possess writing, the site or building is
considered an archaeological one.
Non- specialists often differentiate a
historical site from an archaeological one by its visibility and state of
preservation. Most of the structures and artifacts on archaeological property
lie under the ground and must be excavated, whereas most of the structures and
artifacts on a historical site lie above the ground. Although not always
reliable or accepted, this latter distinction is useful for the purpose of this
paper.
Development of Interpretation Key Interpretation Key is a very
useful clue and tool for identification and image interpretation. Most questions
about classification, interpretation and delineation are answered by the key.
Here an attempt has been made to develop a key for interpretation. After the
visual image analysis of the panchromatic SPOT image, a key has been prepared
which is shown in Fig.1. The explanation of each key is given here:
Key1(a):
It is a monument at ground level or at a
raised platform and having a dome in the centre. It is enclosed by a wall and
there are four gates/ doors on four sides and from pathways leading to the
monumental building.
Key1(b):
A monument at ground level or at a
raised platform and having a dome in the centre and four domes at the corners of
the wall. Having only one gate/ door and a pathway leading to the monument.
Key1(c):
A fort wall with bastions. The gate of
the fort may not be visible and there may be a number of gates. Sometimes there
are structures inside fort or sometimes only fort walls in ruins.
Key1(d):
A group of domed structures at ground
level or at a raised platform, with or without enclosure wall scattered over an
area. There is no defined arrangement.
Key1(e):
A group of monuments enclosed in a wall
and all may be at different or the same area. Sometimes isolated buildings may
or may not be connected with pathways. Domes are of varying sizes.
Key1(f):
A monument with typical fortification
for some unknown reasons. The gate/door may or may not be visible.
Key1(g):
A monument enclosed in wall either at
the time of construction or later on enclosed by some preserving agency and
landscaped for tourist attraction.
Key1(h):
Single structures scattered all over the
city, with domes and built over a raised platform of different geometrical
shapes like circle, square, hexagon, octagon etc., the identification of such
structures is really very difficult in built up areas.
Key1(i):
Historic sites with structures scattered
all over in ruins, sometimes traces of forts and enclosed walls are
visible
Methodology Adopted
A definite systematic approach of study is required for such investigations
and in this study the following methodology has been followed.
An interpretation key was prepared first for interpretation purpose.
After preparation of the key, the SPOT image was visually interpreted
monoscopically and various monuments and historical sites were delineated on the
image using the interpretation elements- shape,size,pattern and tonal variation.
All these delineated polygons were transferred to a base map (Fig 2).
Based on the available aerial photographs of a small area, the sample area
was marked on the image and the base map.
Aerial photographs were interpreted stereoscopically for comparison purpose,
that is, to find out the potentials and limitations of imagery vis-à-vis aerial
photos for such studies. In this process, a few more monuments were interpreted
which were not identifiable on the satellite image. The monuments and sites were
transferred to the base map and are shown by different cartographic symbols
within the photo coverage area marked with broken line (Fig-2).
A limited field check was carried out to verify the accuracy of photo
interpretation, image analysis as well as of key.
No statistical test was carried out to find the percentage of accuracy
because in such studies this has got very limited significance.
Fig. 2: Spotting
Historical Monuments and sites
Restrictions At the
identification, delineation and fieldwork stages various restrictions were taken
into account, like:
On 1:25,000 scale SPOT image monuments on 75m x 75m size on ground can be
identified, i.e., 3mm x 3mm on image. But for delineation purpose (for
cartographic ease) 4mm x 4mm was kept. In the case of aerial photographs of
1:10,000 scale 50m x 50m can be identified easily with 3mm x 3mm delineation
unit.
Various small structures within the built-up area were not considered
because they might be non-historical religious places and buildings in use.
At the time of delineation of isolated structures, some excess area around
them was delineated for the purpose of cartographic ease.
Buildings built by Britishers were excluded after field work because they
were considered as non-historical for this work and as part of designed and
planned cityscape except Coronation Pillar and its adjacent park. But any
building built on any historical place was taken as a historic site rather than
a building.
After the final mapping, it was decided not to do the labelling because the
names of many lesser known and unknown monuments were not available
Discussions
Four elements of image interpretation viz. pattern, shape, tone variation,
and size played a significant role in identification of monuments and sites.
Shape of the objects combined with size played a significant role in
interpretation. Since people build things as square, rectangular, circular or
straight lines, features of this type having considerable size were identified
easily.
Pattern or repetition is a characteristic of many man-made features. Since
cultural features consist of straight lines or other configuration, this helped
in interpretation and delineation of monuments.
In the case of panchromatic image, tone variation is a very vital element
especially in built-up area. If the tonal variation with surroundings is poor,
then many buildings and sites may merge with the surroundings.
Appropriate scale for identification of buildings and sites for SPOT
satellite image should be 1:10,000 or more. But keeping in view the inherent
weakness of spatial resolution and pixel size, it is not possible.
Development of modern buildings and dense residential colonies near
historical monuments and sites creates difficulties in identification and
idealisation.
Isolated monuments within built-up area were difficult to identify unless
the size of monuments was big enough. But when isolated monuments of smaller
size are located in open spaces or green areas properly landscaped, then
identification was rather easy.
Conclusion
Two inherent
properties of remote sensing image make the data derived from it extremely
useful in building a broad induction base:
The wider environmental perspective afforded by remote sensing techniques
over more traditional ones on the ground surveys.
The permanent nature of such imagery provides a fixed time space perspective
of ever- increasing historical value.
The role of large scale vertical
aerial photographs is undisputed in such studies because on 1: 10,000 under
magnification objects of 0.5 m can be identified, i.e, a spatial resolution of
1m is best suited while resolution and scale of the existing satellite images
for this kind of study pose problems. (Excerpts from Photonirvachak, Vol. No.
20, no. 2 & 3, June & Sept. 1992 )