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.
Arne Anderson Stamnes · BIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) · 2016
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.