Contradictions in the relative chronology: Archaeological and radiocarbon dating

0Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

When comparing dendrodates and radiocarbon dates, I advocate using the mean value for archaeologically defined data series, as in the usual case, the correct dating is always more precise than the calibrated areas. However, in the extreme gradient of the calibration curve, we must consider the errors. Based on the Corded Ware from the Tauber basin, I put forward a first example in which a contradiction between the archaeological and 14C dating occurs. If one cleanly separates the older measurements from Köln and the younger ones from Heidelberg, the contradiction towards the archaeological dating is canceled out when only the younger Heidelberg dates are taken into account. Regarding the Early Bronze Age, I shall first deal with the cemetery at Singen and will show, using the typology and the horizontal distribution of the graves, how outliers can be identified, thus narrowing the range for dating of the cemetery. The comparison of 2 archaeologically contemporaneous cemeteries in the Neckar basin (Rottenburg and Gäufelden) again results in contradictions between the archaeological and 14C dating. In this case, the contradictions cannot be solved without any new dating measurements. It is recommended that these should be carried out by at least 2 laboratories. Finally, some recommendations are given to archaeologists. In my opinion, 14C dates that are archaeologically unsuitable should be used to check the findings and the archaeologicaltypological classification. The contradictions should be reported immediately to the 14C laboratory, so that any possible experimental errors can be identified. © 2009 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stöckli, W. E. (2009). Contradictions in the relative chronology: Archaeological and radiocarbon dating. In Radiocarbon (Vol. 51, pp. 695–710). University of Arizona. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200056034

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free