Gjellestad: a newly discovered ‘central place’ in south-east Norway

Gustavsen, Lars; Gjesvold, Per Erik; Gundersen, Sigrid Mannsåker; Hinterleitner, Alois; Nau, Erich; Paasche, Knut

doi:10.15184/aqy.2020.39

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, the visualisation of the GPR multi-trace coherence using the same data set and depth-range (Fig. 1B) clearly shows several, regularly palced, large pits that belong to the buried remains of two Viking Age hall buildings, H2: 28 m long, 6.5 m width, H3: 38 m long, 7 m width (Gustavsen et al, 2020), as it has been confirmed by subsequent excavation.…”

Section: The Viking Age Site Of Gjellestadmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…By using efficient motorised multichannel ground-penetrating radar (GPR) array systems with cross-line spacings of 10 cm and less, it has become possible to generate highly detailed three-dimensional datasets of the subsurface covering entire archaeological sites (Trinks et al, 2018). Amplitude visualisations of the reflected energy in form of GPR depth-slices of only a few centimetres thickness have revealed fascinating traces of buried archaeological remains not only in case of urban Roman structures (Neubauer et al, 2018), but also in case of entire Viking Age settlements in Scandinavia (Trinks et al, 2013 ;Gustavsen et al, 2020).…”

Section: Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The GPR survey at Gjellestad in Norway, carried out by NIKU (Gustavsen et al, 2020), is an example of archaeological structures that became more clearly recognisable or only visible through coherence imaging. The ground at Gjellestad consists of marine sediments that formed cambisols, clay soils and brown earths, today used agriculturally.…”

Section: The Viking Age Site Of Gjellestadmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

GPR Coherence Imaging Examples: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Hinterleitner¹,

Trinks²,

Nau³

et al. 2021

archeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Viking Age Site Of Gjellestadmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Viking Age Site Of Gjellestadmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GPR Coherence Imaging Examples: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Hinterleitner¹,

Trinks²,

Nau³

et al. 2021

archeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…GPR is a non-invasive method that enables the collection of geological information by performing near-surface geophysical investigations. The method has been widely used in different subjects in Norway (archaeology, e.g., [2,3]; glacial and Quaternary studies, e.g., [4,5]; geotechnics and geohazards, e.g., [6][7][8]; and construction and urban infrastructure mapping, e.g., [9]). Compared to geotechnical drilling, GPR is a cheaper and more urban-friendly alternative that does not imply big logistical efforts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holistic 3D Model of an Urban Area in Norway: An Integration of Geophysical, Geotechnical, Remote Sensing, and Geological Methods

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the distribution and characterization of natural and non-natural materials on the surface and near-subsurface is important for the development of infrastructure projects. This may be a challenge in highly urbanized areas, where outcrops are scarce, and anthropogenic activities have altered the morphological expression of the landscape. This study tests the integration of ground-penetrating radar (GPR), borehole drilling, aerial imagery, geological mapping, and aerial laser scanning as complementary mapping tools for determining the stratigraphy of glacial and post-glacial Quaternary sediments, the depth to the bedrock, and the distribution of anthropogenic material in Mosvatnet, a lake in Stavanger, Norway. The integration proved to be efficient and enabled the generation of a 3D holistic model, which provided a broad understanding of the subsurface geology and the induced anthropogenic changes in the area through time. Bedrock, till, fluvioglacial, and lacustrine geological units were modeled. Accumulations of post-glacial organic matter were mapped, and the distribution of non-natural infill material was determined. The interpreted dataset suggests that the eastern shoreline of Mosvatnet has artificially prograded about one hundred meters westward since the 1930s and the elevation of the corresponding area has increased by about ten meters relative to the lake level.

show abstract

A Review on the Development and Current Role of Ground-Based Geophysical Methods for Archaeological Prospection in Scandinavia

Stamnes,

Cuenca-García,

Gustavsen

et al. 2024

One World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter provides an extensive overview of the use of geophysics in archaeological research and cultural heritage management in Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. It discusses the current status, role and acceptance of geophysical methods in each country, and outlines the state-of-the-art based on a synthesis of existing knowledge and experience. The authors consider the past, present and future of archaeo-geophysics in the individual regions, taking into account the academic, curatorial and commercial aspects of their use. This, in turn, serves as the basis for a discussion of the reasons for the varying degrees of acceptance and integration of the methods in each country, and aid the distribution of knowledge and experience gained across Scandinavia and beyond. The practical experience, application and general acceptance are not similar in the different Scandinavian countries. There is a general lack of integrating geophysical (and by extension non-intrusive methods) within the archaeological practice and guidelines. The case studies presented here show a range of archaeological applications of geophysics in Scandinavia, demonstrating how geophysical methods should by no means be considered “new” or “untested”. While there is a need for targeted research, there has also been a challenge in disseminating the already generated knowledge and experiences to other actors within the archaeological community. Some of this can be explained by a lack of trained personnel, domestic competence and archaeological institutions undertaking research into the applicability of geophysical methods, and data-sharing and making reports accessible.

show abstract

Gjellestad: a newly discovered ‘central place’ in south-east Norway

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

GPR Coherence Imaging Examples: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

GPR Coherence Imaging Examples: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Holistic 3D Model of an Urban Area in Norway: An Integration of Geophysical, Geotechnical, Remote Sensing, and Geological Methods

A Review on the Development and Current Role of Ground-Based Geophysical Methods for Archaeological Prospection in Scandinavia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About