The historical legacy of anthrosols at Sandhavn, south Greenland
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The impact of European settlement and farming on the landscape of southwest Greenland has been considered in many landscape and archaeological studies, however the nature and extent of soil modification associated with European land management has yet to be determined. This paper explores the historical legacy of anthrosols at a large Norse farm site in south Greenland. Changes in land management, resource exploitation and site formation are examined, and the notion of soils based evidence for cultural interaction is explored. Key Words Anthrosols, Norse, Homefield, Manuring, Irrigation, Inuit, Greenland Introduction Modification of the landscape through implementation of historic European farming practises is observable at a regional scale and at the individual farm level in southwest Greenland. The landscape across both the Norse Eastern and Western Settlement areas is characterised by a scattered settlement distribution reflecting the importation of a pastoral farming economy by European settlers thin the 11 century AD (Arneborg 2005). In particular there is a distinct correlation between farm location and areas of high quality pasture in inner-fjord areas (McGovern 1980a, 1980b). Although all farms were engaged in pastoral agriculture, farms in more peripheral and/or marginal locations specialised in additional modes of subsistence. Interior farms were positioned to exploit migratory caribou, similarly coastal farms specialised in marine resource extraction (Berglund 1986). The settlement pattern of Norse farms was dictated by a European model of subsistence which extended to the spatial organisation of land at the individual farm level. Farmland was divided and utilised according to the infield-outfield system. The infield, also referred to as the homefield, was located near to the farmstead and was used to grow fodder for overwintering cattle. The outfield was used to graze cattle during the summer, and sheep and goats all year. Farming in Greenland differed from mainland Europe in that it was based exclusively on livestock, however comparable management strategies to ensure maximum growth yields are apparent. The use of irrigation networks to supply the homefield with a regulated water supply has been identified at several Norse sites including Igaliku and Quassiarsuk (Arneborg 2005). This strategy enabled maximisation of fodder crop yields and led to increased growth security in more marginal years through offsetting growing season soil moisture deficits (Adderley and Simpson 2006). In contrast irrigation in mainland Europe was used as a mechanism to increase grain production. The establishment of saeters (shielings) is an additional example of European resource management in southwest Greenland. Within the Eastern Settlement hay making saeters are restricted to marginal resource areas. In addition, there is a close association between milking saeters and areas of medium quality pasture with limited opportunities for grazing (Albrethsen 1991). The impact of European settlement and farming on the landscape of southwest Greenland has been considered in many landscape and archaeological studies, however the nature and extent of soil modification associated with European land management has yet to be determined. This paper explores the historical legacy of anthrosols at a large Norse farm site in south Greenland. Changes in land management, resource exploitation and site formation are examined, and the notion of soils based evidence for cultural interaction is explored.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».