Additional AMS Radiocarbon Age Determinations for the Central Plains Tradition

2012 ◽  
Vol 57 (221) ◽  
pp. 31-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna C. Roper ◽  
Mary J. Adair
Keyword(s):  
Central Plains ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
Central Plains Tradition ◽  
Age Determinations

scholarly journals C14 dating of Survey material performed in 1974

1975 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 19-20
Author(s):  
A Weidick
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Wood Sample ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Plant Anatomy ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
Apparent Age ◽  
Age Determinations

Thirteen radiocarbon age determinations of shell samples (12) and wood (1) are assembled in tbis account. The material dated was collected in connection with GGU field work. The samples have been dated at Isotopes Inc., Westwood, New Jersey, U.S.A. Determination of the wood sample was kindly made by Jette Dahl Møller, Institute of Plant Anatomy and Cytology, University of Copenhagen. Dating has also been carried out on a number of shelIs, dredged alive prior to 1950, in order to control the apparent age in shell dating determinations (Tauber & Funder, tbis report).

Mass Spectrometric Radiocarbon Dates from Three Rock Paintings of Known Age

2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth A. Armitage ◽  
James E. Brady ◽  
Allan Cobb ◽  
John R. Southon ◽  
Marvin W. Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometric ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
Potential Problems ◽  
Rock Paintings ◽  
The Tropics ◽  
Calendar Dates ◽  
Age Determinations

Radiocarbon age determinations are presented on three hieroglyphic texts from Naj Tunich cave in Guatemala containing Maya calendar dates. The ages obtained are on average 110–140 years older than the calendar dates. Several possible reasons are discussed for this discrepancy: one that is applicable to all radiocarbon dates on charcoal, one that applies to rock paintings, and one that is specific for the tropics. Possible problems with the ages ascribed to the Maya calendar dates are also discussed. Even with the potential problems that may exist, these dates still fall within 110–140 years of the ascribed calendar dates. Caution is urged in the interpretation of dates on charcoal pigments from rock paintings; consideration of the “old wood” and “old charcoal” factors is important.

A Middle Archaic Burial from East Central Kansas

2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 717-739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Hoard ◽  
William E. Banks ◽  
Rolfe D. Mandel ◽  
Michael Finnegan ◽  
Jennifer E. Epperson
Keyword(s):  
Soil Horizon ◽  
Central Plains ◽  
Projectile Point ◽  
East Central ◽  
Burial Practices ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
The North ◽  
Wear Analysis ◽  
Use Wear ◽  
Middle Archaic

In late 2001, investigators excavated a solitary Middle Archaic burial from the Plains-Prairie border in east-central Kansas. The burial was contained in a dissected colluvial apron at the foot of the valley wall, in a soil horizon that began accumulating around 9000 B.P. Burial goods include deer bone, a drill, and a side-notched projectile point/knife, the morphology of which is consistent with side-notched Middle Archaic points of the North American Central Plains and Midwest. Use-wear analysis shows that the stone tools were used before being placed with the burial and were not manufactured specifically as burial goods. A radiocarbon assay of the deer bone in direct association with the burial yielded a radiocarbon age of 6160 ± 35 B.P. This is one of only a few burials older than 5,000 years in the region. Comparison of this burial to other coeval regional burials shows similarities in burial practices.

The Context of Early Southeastern Prehistoric Cave Art: A Report on the Archaeology of 3rd Unnamed Cave

1998 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 663-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan F. Simek ◽  
Jay D. Franklin ◽  
Sarah C. Sherwood
Keyword(s):  
Lithic Technology ◽  
Archaic Period ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
Dark Zone ◽  
Cave Entrance ◽  
Karst Cavern ◽  
Age Determinations ◽  
Cave Art

In the deep recesses of “3rd Unnamed Cave,” a karst cavern in Tennessee, evidence for an ancient association between dark zone cave art and chert mining has recently been documented. The art comprises petroglyphs on the ceiling of a chamber more than 1 km from the cave entrance. On the floor below the art, natural sediments were excavated prehistorically to obtain high-quality chert nodules. Radiocarbon age determinations place the mining during the Terminal Archaic period. Studies in lithic technology, geoarchaeology, and petroglyph description are presented.

Variation in Radiocarbon Age Determinations from the Crystal River Archaeological Site, Florida

Radiocarbon ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 801-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Cherkinsky ◽  
Thomas J Pluckhahn ◽  
Victor D Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Gulf Coast ◽  
Archaeological Site ◽  
Bone Collagen ◽  
Shell Midden ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Reservoir Effect ◽  
Radiocarbon Age ◽  
Soil Charcoal ◽  
Crystal River ◽  
Age Determinations

Archaeologists interested in radiocarbon dating shell midden sites express concern regarding the accuracy of shell dates and how such determinations should be interpreted. This article discusses the problem of dating shells from sites in the southeastern United States. New results are presented comparing shell, bone, and soil-charcoal age determinations from the Crystal River site, located along the west-central Gulf Coast of Florida. Crystal River is a large multimound site whose occupants engaged in long-distance exchange throughout eastern North America during the Woodland period (∼1000 BC to AD 1050). In the summer of 2012, test units were excavated in several contexts at the site, including both mounds and occupation areas. Samples were collected for 14C dating, which were then processed at the University of Georgia Center for Applied Isotope Studies. This article focuses on samples from the stratified shell midden, from which it was hoped to construct a local correction for marine shell that could be used to date other contexts. The soil-charcoal and bone collagen from these samples have very similar ages (bone samples ranging from about 100 cal BC to cal AD 530 and soil-charcoal from cal AD 345 to 560); however, the shell samples collected from the same stratigraphic units are significantly older than the terrestrial dates (ranging from 1300 to 390 cal BC). The difference in calibrated ages between organic materials and the shells ranges between 560 to 1140 yr. This phenomenon cannot be explained solely by the marine reservoir effect. It appears that all the shell samples formed in mixed marine (∼50–60%) contexts, as indicated by the stable isotope ratios and the amount of atmospheric carbon remaining in the samples. The age of the shell samples cannot be used to date archaeological events as they are influenced not only by the marine reservoir effect, but also the local hardwater effect, which makes them significantly older.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document