Presenting the PastCoast-project - A novel interdisciplinary approach to the study of resilience in prehistoric marine coastal environments

This project aims to study changes and breakpoints in utilising prehistoric marine coastal environments, identify possible causes for changes, and create an interpretive framework to identify potential human responses to changing environmental settings. This will be done by combining non-intrusive geophysical survey techniques, palaeoenvironmental studies, trial excavations and digital landscape modelling in an interpretive framework to study human resilience in a changing coastal landscape. Geophysical survey methods provide knowledge of the presence and absence of archaeological features in the ground over large areas in a fast, efficient and non-intrusive manner at a scale not feasible by conventional archaeological methods, and provides a wealth of palaeoenvironmental information. This involves detailed studies of fossil beach ridges, which provides an unprecedented impression of spatial and temporal landscape change. Paired with targeted excavation, for quality control (ground-truthing), and to provide datable evidence, geophysical survey and surface-find studies can tackle important questions of chronological change and generate a new perspective on the cultural-historical development of coastal sites, and their resilience and adaption to a changing landscape. Also, a GIS-modelling approach can reveal spatial patterns of prehistoric activity on a landscape scale and how it might have changed over time by characterizing how much a site location is depending on particular site location parameters at different times. Ultimately, such an interdisciplinary approach can provide further knowledge and understanding regarding the significance of coastal archaeological sites in time and space in a larger cultural-historical perspective, illuminate threats to coastal settlements from future effects of climate change, and how similar threats have been mitigated in the past and an evidence base for future management of cultural and natural landscapes at risk.acceptedVersio

Geophysical prospection of Iron Age coastal sites in Scandinavia known from metal detecting assemblages – new case studies from the PastCoast-project

Geophysical surveying of sites known from metal detecting shows a varying spatial relationship between the finds material and the geophysical information. The survey results of two case studies indicate that coastal erosion has removed parts of the archaeological site at Langelands gaarde. The Austråt manor case study reveal a large number of archaeological features, and a strong spatial correlation between the geophysical observations and metal detecting objects

Effect Of Temperature Change On Iron Age Cereal Production And Settlement Patterns In Mid-Norway

publishedVersio

The Application of Geophysical Methods in Norwegian Archaeology: A study of the status, role and potential of geophysical methods in Norwegian archaeological research and cultural heritage management.

Summary of the thesis: The main aim of this thesis was to examine the role, function, status and impact geophysical methods have had on archaeological research and the cultural heritage management in Norway, and the identification and investigation of important methodical and empirical research areas for a more integrated use of geophysical methods for Norwegian archaeology in general. This was done by reviewing the way geophysical methods have been used on Norwegian archaeological sites. In addition, by examining and analysing statements from various documents, communications, guidelines, directives and initiatives by actors within archaeological research and cultural heritage management, it was possible to gain a deeper understanding on the acceptance geophysical methods have in Norway, what role, function and status the actors assign to geophysical methods, and how geophysical methods have influenced the archaeological practice. The theoretical framework of actor-network theory was used as an analytics tool for this analysis. By identifying and performing methodical and empirical research using geophysical methods on archaeological sites, it was also possible to present, examine and analyse the cultural historical knowledge gained and how these results could influence or alter decision makers, decision-making processes, and practice within the cultural heritage management. The idea of geophysical surveys as something new in Norwegian archaeology is not correct, but there have been a significant increase the last decade. There is no correlation between the amount of archaeological registrations performed in each county and the amount of geophysical surveys conducted in these counties. Statistics also show that the geophysical surveys performed in relation to archaeological registrations is increasing, as well as surveys performed for management purposes in general. The typical role envisioned for geophysical methods are as non-destructive tools for cultural heritage management and in relation to planning permissions, and as a registration method. The main focus is different from the various institutions involved within archaeological registrations, cultural heritage management, and archaeological research. An increased focus on geophysical methods is observed in the various documents analysed, indicating increased awareness. Still, geophysical methods are not used on a regular basis and has not been accepted as a well-known tool for registration purposes. For research applications and management concerns not initiated by a developer, the acceptance for including geophysical methods is higher. The empirical and methodical analysis show possibilities and limitations in using geophysical methods for both research and management purposes. This reveals both instances where the application of geophysical methods revealed important and interesting archaeological observations, but also highlights some of the pitfalls and limitations that one need to take into consideration when commissioning surveys. This relates especially to aspects involving geological conditions, modern influence, ground conditions and field methodical aspects such as resolution and choice of geophysical survey methods. While methodical choices can be tailored to the challenge at hand and increase the possibilities for positive identification of archaeology, it remains that some factors are out of the surveyors hands. The amount of geophysical contrasts of an archaeological feature will vary depending on size and type of the archaeological feature, deposition processes, climatic factors and modern disturbance. A professional judgement relating to what archaeological method that are to be used must take these factors into consideration when assessing the potential gain of suggesting the application of geophysical methods against costs, cultural historical value and other factors. While these uncertainties has to be acknowledged, there are positive benefits of viewing the application of geophysical, non-intrusive methods as part of a longer planning process, as any results revealed in early stages can influence decisions and decision-making processes in later stages. This could be a contribution that reduces bureaucracy, improves budget accuracy, targeted excavations, and an overall better management of the archaeological heritage. Knowledge dissemination, support for training and experience should be encouraged.Sammendrag av avhandlingen: Målet med avhandlingen er å undersøke hvordan geofysiske metoder har påvirket arkeologisk forskning og forvaltning, undersøke hvilke roller og funksjoner disse metodene har, samt hvilken status de har i dagens arkeologisk forskning og forvaltning. Dette målet ble oppnådd gjennom å gjennomgå hvordan geofysiske metoder har blitt anvendt på arkeologiske lokaliteter i Norge. I avhandlingen blir også forskjellige offentlige dokumenter fra ulike deler av kulturminneforvaltningen undersøkt og analysert, noe som førte til en bedre forståelse av hvilken aksept geofysiske metoder har innen arkeologisk forskning og forvaltning, samt hvilken rolle, funksjon og status ulike aktører tilegner disse metodene. Det ble også undersøkt hvordan geofysiske metoder har påvirket den arkeologiske praksisen. Analysen av de offentlige dokumentene ble utført gjennom anvendelse av aktør-nettverk teori som analytisk virkemiddel. Avhandlingen diskuterer også hvordan geofysiske metoder kan bedre integreres i dagens arkeologiske praksis gjennom å identifisere metodiske og empiriske forskningsområder, og gjennomføre undersøkelser og publikasjoner som belyser disse forskningsområdene på en ny måte. De nye resultatene setter den gjeldende arkeologiske praksisen i Norge i et nytt lys gjennom å presentere, undersøke og analysere hvilken ny kulturhistorisk kunnskap man kan danne seg ved hjelp av geofysiske undersøkelsesmetoder, og hvordan disse resultatene påvirker beslutninger, beslutningsprosesser, faglig skjønn og praksis innenfor rammene i norsk kulturminnevern og arkeologisk forskning. Avhandlingen viser at den eksisterende forståelsen av at geofysiske metoder representerer noe nytt innen norsk arkeologi er feilaktig. Det har vært en rekke geofysiske undersøkelser utført over et lengre tidsrom. Derimot har det vært en stor økning i anvendelsen av geofysiske metoder innenfor det siste tiåret, noe som sees i sammenheng med etableringen av satsningsområder hos spesielt NIKU og NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet i denne perioden. Det er ingen sammenheng mellom andelen av arkeologiske registreringer som blir utført av de ulike fylkeskommunene, og hvor i landet det blir utført flest geofysiske undersøkelser. Derimot viser statistikken at andelen geofysiske undersøkelser utført i forbindelse med arkeologiske registreringer øker på landsbasis. Det samme gjør også forvaltningsinitierte geofysiske undersøkelser. Samtidig viser analysene at aksepten for bruk av geofysiske undersøkelser er større for forskningsprosjekter enn for forvaltningsprosjekter. Som oftest tilegnes geofysiske metoder en rolle som ikke-destruktive verktøy innenfor kulturminneforvaltningen, som arkeologisk registreringmetode og i som verktøy i forbindelse med plan- og utbyggingssaker. De ulike institusjonene involvert i kulturhistorisk forskning- og forvaltning, det være seg departementer, Riksantikvaren, universitetsmuseene, NIKU og fylkeskommunene, har ulik fokus i sine omtaler om geofysiske metoder som arkeologisk verktøy. De empiriske og metodiske studiene utført i avhandlingen viser muligheter og begrensninger ved bruk av geofysiske metoder for både forsknings- og forvaltningsformål. De publiserte resultatene viser både eksempler hvor de geofysiske resultatene ga interessante og viktige arkeologiske observasjoner, men også eksempler hvor de geofysiske metodene har sine begrensninger. Begrensningene er spesielt relatert til geologiske forhold, moderne påvirkning, grunnforhold og feltmetodiske aspekter som oppløsning og valg av geofysisk målemetode. For at geofysiske metoder bedre skal kunne aksepteres som et verktøy i forvaltningen, må man ha en god forståelse for de mulighetene og begrensningene som metodene innehar, og kunne ta riktige metodiske valg i forbindelse med integrering av geofysiske metoder i den daglige arkeologiske praksisen. Dette krever økt kunnskap og forståelse hos beslutningstakerne når de skal utøve sitt faglige skjønn. Selv om det også er begrensninger ved de geofysiske metodene, må de positive fordelene veies opp imot kostnader, kulturhistorisk verdi og andre faktorer. Det er også et stort potensiale i å se anvendelsen av inngrepsfrie metoder som del av en lengre planleggingsprosess, hvor resultater fra tidlige stadier i planprosessen kan påvirke beslutninger og beslutningsprosesser i senere stadier. Dette kan eksempelvis være redusert byråkrati, forbedrede og mer presise budsjetter og prosjektbeskrivelser, mer målrettede arkeologiske undersøkelser og en generelt bedre forvaltning av arkeologiske kulturminner. Kunnskapsformidling, støtte til videreutdanning og opplæring, samt økt erfaring bør oppmuntres.Institutt for historiske studier/Vitenskapsmuseet, NTN

Geophysical Surveys

This chapter presents the geophysical surveys of Avaldsnes carried out by several actors between 2004 and 2013 and discusses the surveys’ results. An important part of the discussion is a quantitative and qualitative comparison of the geophysical data compiled and archaeological discoveries made during the field campaign. Such comparisons have seldom been performed on Norwegian material. This work will therefore lead to discussions of the different surveys’ usability for planning archaeological excavations, enabling suggestions for improvements in the quality of geophysical data and methods for data processing so that archaeologically relevant anomalies under similar conditions can be more easily distinguished. The GPR surveys, most notably the survey conducted by the Vienna Institute for Archaeological Science (VIAS) in 2009, revealed a high number of clearly defined, archaeologically significant anomalies; the data was easily applied both prior to and during excavation. Several of the other surveys proved difficult to interpret, as the data lacked spatial detail or was muddled by large amounts of stones, waterlogged soil, or the effects of magnetic geology of volcanic origin. However, during reprocessing and reinterpretation of the data with the excavation results at hand, it became clear that the various surveys have provided significantly more information than was appreciated by geophysicists and archaeologists before the excavation commenced. That the excavation results needed to be known in order to recognise relevant archaeological features illustrates the difficulty of interpreting geophysical data. Such data must be tried against a number of hypotheses for the site in question. Otherwise, the sheer amount of data can be overwhelming and impractical to utilise. Furthermore, the data must be used not only prior to, but also during excavation, and the excavation staff and the geophysics technicians must be able to discuss data and excavation results throughout a project’s lifespan. By evaluating data and adjusting methods, targeted investigations can be carried out in relevant areas, rendering the field campaign more effective.publishedVersion(c) 2017 by Walter de Gruyter. Locked until 31.12.2018 due to copyright restrictions

KOPL – Metode for framstilling av kulturminne- og landskapsverdier tilpasset overordnede planer. Rapport om utarbeiding av metoder for visualisering av kulturminner for kommuneplanens arealdel

Prosjekt: Metode for fremstilling av kulturminne- og landskapsverdier tilpasset overordnetete planer (KOPL). Utført på oppdrag fra Riksantikvare

Geofysisk undersøkelse på Mannsfjellet, Olstad i Skaun kommune

In August 2014 a metal detectorist discovered several objects from the Young Iron Age on the hill called Mannsfjellet at the Olstad-farm in Skaun municipality, Sør-Trøndelag County. This was followed by a small excavation performed by the NTNU University Museum in September/October the same year. This led to the finds of a Viking-Age sword and shield boss, as well as a leather pouch containing amongst other things several Arabic coins. Since it was assumed that this find was a remain from a larger collection of burials in the area, the NTNU University Museum performed a geophysical investigation and photogrammetric documentation on behalf of the Directorate for Cultural Heritage. This investigation was performed on the 18th and 19th of October. The objectives of this investigation was to: 1. Map the presence of dug features, their condition and status, 2. Map the thickness of the topsoil and 3. Map the spread of metal objects as detectable with a gradiometer. The investigation performed was a combination of a ground penetrating radar and gradiometer-surveys, as well as making a detailed landscape model by photogrammetry of aerial images photographed from a drone. The collected data was processed and analyzed to answer these objectives. No dug features relating such as pits or ditches relating to prehistoric activity was detected, but the radar survey detected a large amount of plough furrows which were in average at 20-50cm depth and down to about 10cm across. From this radar-dataset it was also possible to indicate the approximate depth of the topsoil, as well as the depth down to the bedrock in certain areas. The gradiometer survey revealed a strongly magnetic bedrock in parts of the investigation area. This prevented a possible detection of archaeological observation especially in the northern parts of the investigation area. In other parts of the area investigated with the gradiometer we could detect some anomalies interpreted as metal objects, but the position of these did not match known metal detecting hits from the 2014-investigation. The photogrammetry produced a highly detailed terrain model, but no microtopographical evidence revealed additional cultural historically interesting observations. It is assumed that any future ploughing will make the possibilities for in-situ documentation more difficult

Georadarundersøkelse av veifar med mulig kavlvei. Tiltereide i Nesset kommune, Møre og Romsdal

På Tiltereide i Nesset kommune i Møre- og Romsdal fylke har en observert trerester som er i ferd med å presse seg opp igjennom veidekket. En av disse ble datert til middelalder ved bruk av 14C-metoden(AD 1160-1220). I lys av kjente funn av kavelveier og veifar i området fra flere forhistoriske perioder ble disse observasjonene tolket som mulige spor etter en fortsettelse av dette veifaret. På bakgrunn av denne informasjonen ble det tatt initiativ til en georadarundesøkelse for å kartlegge omfang og tilstedeværelse av flere stokker fra en kavelvei i asfalten ellers på dette veistrekket, skadepotensialet samt tykkelse av asfalten i dette området. Resultatet av en slik undersøkelse kan gi økt kunnskap om kulturminnets beskaffenhet, samt gi bakgrunnskunnskap for fremtidige valg i forhold til sikring og forvaltning av dette kulturminnet. Denne undersøkelsen ble utført av NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet på oppdrag fra Riksantikvaren. Totalt ble cirka 1615 m² undersøkt med en 3d-radar Mark IV med et bakkekoplet antennesystem med bredt frekvensspekter, noe som ga høyoppløselige data i tre dimensjoner over undersøkelsesområdet. Ved sammenligning mellom de innsamlede georadardataene og plasseringen av kjente stokker ble det klart at vertikale stokkeender ikke var synlige i de innsamlede dataene, mens horisontale stokker med en tverrside på 10-15 cm kunne sees i dataene. Sammenligningen med kjente stokker ga en pekepinn over hvilken geofysisk respons og utseende vi kunne forvente for liknende stokker i resten av undersøkelsesområdet. Det ble påvist få avvik innenfor de øverste lagene av asfalten som var lik kontrasten til kjente stokker. Dette sannsynliggjør at det er få stokker innenfor denne sonen i asfalten. Derimot sees det ved ca. 30-57cm dybde en rekke anomalier som har samme form og retning som kjente stokker, og sees som en forlengelse av de kjente stokkene. Disse anomaliene er tolket som fundamentet til et veifar. Det var også mulig å estimere omtrent asfalttykkelse, som få steder var dypere enn 35cm. Det at de geofysiske avvikene var under normal asfalttykkelse, styrker tolkningen av disse observasjonene som forekomsten av fundamentet til et veianlegg

Sensing Archaeology in the North: The Use of Non-Destructive Geophysical and Remote Sensing Methods in Archaeology in Scandinavian and North Atlantic Territories

In August 2018, a group of experts working with terrestrial/marine geophysics and remote sensing methods to explore archaeological sites in Denmark, Finland, Norway, Scotland and Sweden gathered together for the first time at the Workshop ‘Sensing Archaeology in The North’. The goal was to exchange experiences, discuss challenges, and consider future directions for further developing these methods and strategies for their use in archaeology. After the event, this special journal issue was arranged to publish papers that are based on the workshop presentations, but also to incorporate work that is produced by other researchers in the field. This paper closes the special issue and further aims to provide current state-of-the-art for the methods represented by the workshop. Here, we introduce the aspects that inspired the organisation of the meeting, a summary of the 12 presentations and eight paper contributions, as well as a discussion about the main outcomes of the workshop roundtables, including the production of two searchable databases (online resources and equipment). We conclude with the position that the ‘North’, together with its unique cultural heritage and thriving research community, is at the forefront of good practice in the application and development of sensing methods in archaeological research and management. However, further method development is required, so we claim the support of funding bodies to back research efforts based on testing/experimental studies to: explore unknown survey environments and identify optimal survey conditions, as well as to monitor the preservation of archaeological remains, especially those that are at risk. It is demonstrated that remote sensing and geophysics not only have an important role in the safeguarding of archaeological sites from development and within prehistorical-historical research, but the methods can be especially useful in recording and monitoring the increased impact of climate change on sites in the North

The Agrarian Life of the North 2000 BC AD 1000

The 14 articles presented in this publication represent some of the latest and most relevant research on rural settlement and farming from the Late Neolithic through the Early Medieval Period in Norway. It deals with the impact of climate change, plague and the AD 536â 7 volcanic event and some of the earliest farms north of the Arctic Circle. It provides new perspectives and archaeological evidence for the Viking age farm of Norway, differences in regional settlement structures of agrarian societies, the relation between houses and graves in the Iron Age, and varying food practices as indicators of societal change