PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 18, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Geophysical Survey at Land at Tolgarrick, Truro, Cornwall

View Full Paper
JBJ BamptonNBN Boyd

Key Points

  • The survey aims to identify the presence and character of potential archaeological features in the land at Tolgarrick.
  • Conducted a gradiometer survey following best practices and guidelines.
  • Identified anomalies through non-intrusive measurements of subsurface physical properties.
  • Categorized anomalies based on archaeological potential.
  • Identified 103 anomalies across 15 groups, suggesting medieval and prehistoric activity.
  • Noted possible ditches and features indicating former field systems.
  • Highlighted moderate to high archaeological potential in the southeast field.

Abstract

The geophysical (gradiometer) survey was undertaken in accordance with current best practice and CIfA guidance; and follows the guidance outlined in Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation (English Heritage 2008); Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Geophysical Survey (2020); EAC Guidelines for the use of geophysics in Archaeology: Questions to Ask and Points to Consider (Europae Archaeologiae Consilium/European Archaeological Council 2016). 'Archaeological geophysical survey uses non-intrusive and non-destructive techniques to determine the presence or absence of anomalies likely to be caused by archaeological features, structures or deposits, as far as reasonably possible, within a specified area or site on land, in the inter-tidal zone or underwater. Geophysical survey determines the presence of anomalies of archaeological potential through measurement of one or more physical properties of the subsurface.' (Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Geophysical Survey 2020). The results of the survey will, as far as possible, inform on the presence or absence, character, extent and in some cases, apparent relative phasing of buried archaeology to better understand the heritage assets on the site within their immediate context and potentially inform a strategy to mitigate any threat to the archaeological resource. The geophysical survey identified fifteen groups of anomalies comprising of c.103 anomalies. These are indicative of: earlier and relict aspects of the extant probable Medieval and later field system; a handful of ditches associated with a possible earlier field system; and a number of possible discrete anomalies and a small number of tentative curvi- and recti-linear anomalies that could be associated with prehistoric activity. This could be a continuation of prehistoric activity identified to the south-east of the site and includes a possible enclosure and possible pit in the south-east field of the site that were identified in a previous geophysical survey in 2009. Areas of ploughing, including possible ridge and furrow and lines associated with possible orchards are also evident in the geophysical survey dataset. Given the presence of prehistoric features identified during earlier fieldwork to the south-east of the site, the location itself, and the results of this geophysical survey, the south-east (field A1) of the site must be considered to have a moderate to high archaeological potential; while the rest of the site has a moderate to low archaeological potential.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bampton et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e31f7340886becb653ec0ehttps://doi.org/10.5284/1140726
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper