Advertisement

Vegetation History and Archaeobotany

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 543–549 | Cite as

Pollen modelling, palaeoecology and archaeology: virtualisation and/or visualisation of the past?

  • Chris CaseldineEmail author
  • Ralph Fyfe
  • Kari Hjelle
Review Article

Abstract

Recent developments in pollen modelling and landscape reconstruction have the potential to have a profound impact on our understanding of landscape change related to human activity. Initial findings have already revealed the weaknesses of a number of key assumptions previously made about pollen–landscape relationships. Close interrelationships exist between landscape reconstruction based on pollen analysis and archaeology, and model-based developments raise a range of pertinent issues for both disciplines. These include the way in which past vegetation patterning is conceptualised (the patch vs. the matrix), the nature of the underlying physical environment in vegetation placement, the development of hypothesis-led approaches and the scale of landscapes under consideration. This paper discusses these issues, and also raises questions concerning the meaning of landscape. It may be erroneous to term pollen-based reconstructions as landscapes given the heavily charged meaning of the word as understood by companion and end user disciplines.

Keywords

Pollen modelling Virtualisation Visualisation Archaeology Landscape 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper is a contribution to the POLLANDCAL (POLlen-LANDscape CALibration) network sponsored by NordForsk and co-ordinated by M.-J. Gaillard (University of Kalmar, Sweden) (http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/ecrc/pollandcal/). We are grateful to all POLLANDCAL members for useful and inspiring discussions during the numerous network workshops held between 2002 and 2005, and in particular to Shinya Sugita (University of Minnesota, USA) for providing us with the basic research approaches of POLLANDCAL and for allowing access to his numerous computer programs. We are also grateful to Jane Bunting and Dick Middleton (University of Hull, UK) for developing excellent user-friendly software (the HUMPOL suite of programs) for use in network research activities. Last but by no means least we thank Marie-Jo Gaillard for her continuing inspiration and support.

References

  1. Bradley R, Harding J, Mathews M (1993) The siting of prehistoric rock art in Galloway, south-west Scotland. Proc Prehist Soc 59:269–283Google Scholar
  2. Broström A (2002) Estimating source area of pollen and pollen productivity in the cultural landscapes of southern Sweden—developing a palynological tool for quantifying past plant cover. LUNDQUA. Thesis, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
  3. Broström A, Gaillard MJ, Ihse M, Odgaard B (1998) Pollen–landscape relationships in modern analogues of ancient cultural landscapes in southern Sweden—a first step towards quantification of vegetation openness in the past. Veget Hist Archaeobot 7:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Broström A, Sugita S, Gaillard MJ (2004) Pollen productivity estimates for reconstruction of past vegetation cover in the cultural landscape of Southern Sweden. Holocene 14:368–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broström A, Sugita S, Gaillard MJ, Pilesjö P (2005) Estimating spatial scale of pollen dispersal in the cultural landscape of southern Sweden. Holocene 15:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bunting MJ (2003) Pollen–vegetation relationships in non-arboreal moorland taxa. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 125:285–298Google Scholar
  7. Bunting MJ, Gaillard MJ, Sugita S, Middleton R, Broström A (2004) Vegetation structure and pollen source area. Holocene 14:651–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caseldine CJ, Fyfe RM (2006) A modelling approach to locating and characterising elm decline/landnam clearances. Quat Sci Rev 25:632–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caseldine CJ, Fyfe RM, Langdon CT, Thompson G (2006) Simulating the nature of vegetation communities at the opening of the Neolithic on Achill Island, Co. Mayo, Ireland—the potential role of models of pollen dispersal. Rev Palaeobot Palynol.  dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2006.07.002
  10. Chapman H (2003) Rudston ‘cursus A’—engaging with a Neolithic monument in its landscape setting using GIS. Oxf J Archaeol 22:345–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corner J (1999) Recovering landscape: essays in contemporary landscape architecture. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. Cosgrove D, Daniels S (eds) (1988) The iconography of landscape. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Cummings V, Whittle A (2003) Tombs with a view: landscape, monuments and trees. Antiquity 77:255–266Google Scholar
  14. Fuest R, Glawion R, Schmirch M, Vogellehner D (2004) E-learning modules in biogeography: the visualisation of Holocene vegetation dynamics in the southern Black Forest. Erde 135:205–222Google Scholar
  15. Fyfe RM (2006) GIS and the application of a model of pollen deposition and dispersal: a new approach to testing landscape hypotheses using the POLLANDCAL models. J Archaeol Sci 33:463–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fyfe RM, Brown AG, Rippon SJ (2003) Mid- to late-Holocene vegetation history of Greater Exmoor, UK: estimating the spatial extent of human-induced vegetation change. Veget Hist Archaeobot 12:215–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gaillard MJ, Birks HJB, Emanuelsson U, Karlsson S, Lagerås P, Olausson D (1994) Application of modern pollen/land-use relationships to the interpretation of pollen diagrams—reconstructions of land-use history in south Sweden, 3000–0 BP. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 82:47–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gaillard M-J, Sugita S, Broström A, Eklöv M, Pilesjö P (2000) Long term land-cover changes on regional to global scales inferred from fossil pollen—how to meet the challenges of climate research? IGBP PAGES Newsl 8:30–32Google Scholar
  19. Gillings M (2002) Virtual archaeologies and the hyperreal: or, what does it mean to describe something as virtually real? In: Fisher P, Unwin D (eds) Virtual reality in geography. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 17–34Google Scholar
  20. Hicks S, Birks HJB (1996) Numerical analysis of modern and fossil pollen spectra as a tool for elucidating the nature of fine-scale human activities in boreal areas. Veget Hist Archaeobot 5:257–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hjelle KL (1998) Herb pollen representation in surface moss samples from mown meadows and pastures in western Norway. Veget Hist Archaeobot 7:79–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hjelle KL (1999a) Modern pollen assemblages from mown and grazed vegetation types in western Norway. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 107:55–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hjelle KL (1999b) Use of modern pollen samples and estimated pollen representation factors as aids in the interpretation of cultural activity in local pollen diagram. Norw Archaeol Rev 32:19–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hjelle KL (2005) Pollenanalyse—en nødvendig metode for å forstå jernalderens jordbrukslandskap. Universitetet i Bergen Arkeologiske Skrifter 1:91–103Google Scholar
  25. Lim E-M, Honjo T (2003) Three dimensional visualization forest landscapes by VRML. Landsc Urban Plan 63:175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nakamae E, Qin X, Tadamura K (2001) Rendering of landscapes for environmental assessment. Landsc Urban Plan 54:19–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nielsen AB (2004) Modelling pollen sedimentation in Danish lakes around AD 1800—an attempt to validate the POLLSCAPE model. J Biogeogr 31:1693–1709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nielsen AB, Odgaard BV (2005) Reconstructing land cover from pollen assemblages from small lakes in Denmark. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 133:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nielsen AB, Sugita S (2005) Estimating relevant source area of pollen for small Danish lakes around AD 1800. Holocene 15:1006–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Odgaard BV, Rasmussen P (2000) Origin and temporal development of macro-scale vegetation patterns in the cultural landscape of Denmark. J Ecol 88:733–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ozawa K, Kato T, Tsude H (1995) Detection of beacon networks between ancient hillforts using a digital terrain model based GIS. In: Huggett J, Ryan N (eds) Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology 1994. British Archaeological Reports (Int. series) 600:157–162Google Scholar
  32. Riley H, Wilson-North R (2001) The field archaeology of Exmoor. English Heritage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Sheppard SRJ (2005) Landscape visualisation and climate change: the potential for influencing perceptions and behaviour. Environ Sci Policy 8:637–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sugita S (1994) Pollen representation of vegetation in Quaternary sediments: theory and method in patchy vegetation. J Ecol 82:881–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sugita S (2007a) Theory of quantitative reconstruction of vegetation. I. Pollen from large sites REVEALS regional vegetation. Holocene (in press)Google Scholar
  36. Sugita S (2007b) Theory of quantitative reconstruction of vegetation. II. All You Need Is LOVE. Holocene (in press)Google Scholar
  37. Sugita S, Walker K (2000) Landscape reconstruction algorithm for estimating vegetation changes from pollen records: a case study in the Upper Great Lakes region using modern and presettlement pollen-vegetation data sets. In: “AGU Fall Meeting”, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  38. Sugita S, Gaillard MJ, Brostrom A (1999) Landscape openness and pollen records: a simulation approach. Holocene 9:409–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geography, Archaeology and Earth ResourcesUniversity of ExeterPenrynUK
  2. 2.School of GeographyUniversity of PlymouthPlymouthUK
  3. 3.The Natural History CollectionsUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations