Christopher GAFFNEY

Dr. Christopher GAFFNEY

Head of School of Archaeological and Forensic Sciences

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

33Years (1994-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications

30 April 2012 in Archaeological Prospection
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CGChristopher GAFFNEY
Christopher GAFFNEY
Vincent Lawrence GaffneyVincent Lawrence Gaffney
Vincent Lawrence Gaffney
WNWolfgang Neubauer
Wolfgang Neubauer
EBEamonn Baldwin
Eamonn Baldwin
HCHenry Chapman
Henry Chapman
MDMichael Doneus
Michael Doneus

1 July 2013 in Archaeological Prospection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JBJames Bonsall
James Bonsall
RFRobert Fry
Robert Fry
CGChristopher GAFFNEY
Christopher GAFFNEY
IAIan Armit
Ian Armit
ABAnthony Beck
Anthony Beck
Vincent Lawrence GaffneyVincent Lawrence Gaffney
Vincent Lawrence Gaffney
In this article we assess the abilities of a new electromagnetic (EM) system, the CMD Mini‐Explorer, for prospecting of archaeological features in Ireland and the UK. The Mini‐Explorer is an EM probe which is primarily aimed at the environmental/geological prospecting market for the detection of pipes and geology. It has long been evident from the use of other EM devices that such an instrument might be suitable for shallow soil studies and applicable for archaeological prospecting. Of particular interest for the archaeological surveyor is the fact that the Mini‐Explorer simultaneously obtains both quadrature (‘conductivity’) and in‐phase (relative to ‘magnetic susceptibility’) data from three depth levels. As the maximum depth range is probably about 1.5 m, a comprehensive analysis of the subsoil within that range is possible. As with all EM devices the measurements require no contact with the ground, thereby negating the problem of high contact resistance that often besets earth resistance data during dry spells. The use of the CMD Mini‐Explorer at a number of sites has demonstrated that it has the potential to detect a range of archaeological features and produces high‐quality data that are comparable in quality to those obtained from standard earth resistance and magnetometer techniques. In theory the ability to measure two phenomena at three depths suggests that this type of instrument could reduce the number of poor outcomes that are the result of single measurement surveys. The high success rate reported here in the identification of buried archaeology using a multi‐depth device that responds to the two most commonly mapped geophysical phenomena has implications for evaluation style surveys. © 2013 The Authors.Archaeological Prospectionpublished by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

1 October 2014 in Journal of Archaeological Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PSPhilippe De Smedt
Philippe De Smedt
MMMarc Van Meirvenne
Marc Van Meirvenne
TSTimothy Saey
Timothy Saey
EBEamonn Baldwin
Eamonn Baldwin
CGChristopher GAFFNEY
Christopher GAFFNEY
Vincent Lawrence GaffneyVincent Lawrence Gaffney
Vincent Lawrence Gaffney

1 June 2000 in Archaeological Prospection
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CGChristopher GAFFNEY
Christopher GAFFNEY
JGJ. A Gater
J. A Gater
PLP Linford
P Linford
VGV. L Gaffney
V. L Gaffney
RWR White
R White

1 January 2013 in Internet Archaeology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Vincent Lawrence GaffneyVincent Lawrence Gaffney
Vincent Lawrence Gaffney
SFSimon Fitch
Simon Fitch
EREleanor Ramsey
Eleanor Ramsey
RYRon Yorston
Ron Yorston
ECEugene Ch'ng
Eugene Ch'ng
AHAndy Howard
Andy Howard