CIP A 2003 XIX th International Symposium, 30 September - 04 October, 2003, Antalya, Turkey 
399 
Figure 9. Quantitative interpretation of anomaly IV (area B) 
3.3 3-D modelling of magnetic anomalies 
The GSFC-1 (Geological Space Field Calculation) program 
was developed for solving a direct 3-D gravity and magnetic 
prospecting problem under complicated geological conditions 
(Khesin et al., 1996; Eppelbaum, 2003). This program has been 
designed for computing the field of Ag (Bouguer, free-air or 
observed value anomalies), AZ, AX, AT, AT, as well as second 
derivatives of the gravitational potential under conditions of 
rugged relief and inclined magnetization. The geological space 
can be approximated by (1) three-dimensional, (2) semi-infinite 
bodies and (3) those infinite along the strike (closed, L.H. non- 
closed, R.H. non-closed and open). Geological bodies are 
approximated by horizontal polygonal prisms. 
The basic algorithm realized in the GSFC program is the 
solution of the direct 3-D problem of gravimetric and magnetic 
prospecting for horizontal polygonal prism limited in the strike 
direction. In the presented algorithm integration over a volume 
is realized on the surface limiting the anomalous body. 
Results of 3-D modelling of magnetic field produced by the 
buried target at area B have shown in Figure 10. 
As initial model for the computing, the data obtained at the 
previous stage of quantitative interpretation (see Figure 6), were 
utilized. Figure 10 illustrates that observed and computed 
graphs gave an excellent agreement. Thus, good coinciding the 
observed and computed graphs proves the reliability of 
performed quantitative interpretation. Similar results were 
obtained and for anomalies II - IV. 
GSFC-1 program. Arrow indicates the direction of magnetic 
vector 
Finally, Figure 11 shows an image of the examined area B at 
Emmaus-Nicopolis showing the projection of the upper edge of 
anomalous body to the earth’s surface. On the basis of 
integrated analysis of geophysical and archaeological data we 
may suggest that this anomaly (see Figure 9) may be produced 
by some archaeological remain(s) containing in underground 
tunnel. 
4. Conclusions 
We can conclude that four analyzed magnetic anomalies with a 
high probability can correspond to buried archaeological 
remains. Despite of the fact that the recognized anomalies at the 
area A have more high intensity than the single anomaly at the 
area B, we propose that the last anomaly may have more 
important archaeological significance and it should be 
excavated for the first time. 
Preferably, three magnetic anomalies displayed at the area A, 
must be examined also by conventional metal detector 
equipment. 
The areas of geophysical examination must be extended to the 
west where also archaeological remains may be found. 
References 
Dalan, R.A. and Banerjee, S.K., 1996. Soil magnetism, an 
approach for examining archaeological landscapes. Geophysical 
Research Letters, 23 (2), pp. 185-188.