Interpreting Radiocarbon Dates from the Paleolithic Layers of Theopetra Cave in Thessaly, Greece

Radiocarbon ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 1432-1442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yorgos Facorellis ◽  
Panagiotis Karkanas ◽  
Thomas Higham ◽  
Fiona Brock ◽  
Maria Ntinou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Middle Paleolithic ◽  
Chemical Pretreatment ◽  
Weizmann Institute ◽  
Acid Base ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Cosmogenic Isotopes ◽  
Dating Method ◽  
Age Limits

Theopetra Cave is a unique prehistoric site for Greece, as the Middle and Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic periods are present here, bridging the Pleistocene with the Holocene. During the more than 20 yr of excavation campaigns, charcoal samples from hearths suitable for 14C dating were collected from all anthropogenic layers, including the Paleolithic ones. Most of the samples were initially dated using the ABA chemical pretreatment protocol in the Laboratory of Archaeometry of NCSR Demokritos, Greece, and the Radiocarbon Dating and Cosmogenic Isotopes Laboratory of the Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel. The 14C results, which were not always consistent versus depth, showed that the earliest limit of human presence is ∼50,000 yr BP, thus reaching the age limits of the 14C dating method. However, 10 TL-dated burnt flint specimens unearthed from the lower part of the Middle Paleolithic sequence of the cave gave ages ranging between ∼110 and 135 kyr ago. These results are in disagreement with the 14C dates, as they support a much later date for these layers. In order to clarify the situation further, charcoal samples originating from hearths were conventionally dated in the Laboratory of Archaeometry of NCSR Demokritos using the ABA pretreatment. Additionally, hand-picked charcoal fragments also underwent 14C dating by AMS in the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit using the acid-base wet oxidation (ABOX-SC) pretreatment protocol. The 14C dates from the cave's Paleolithic layers obtained by both pretreatment protocols suggest a probable charcoal diagenesis affecting the 14C results of these very old samples. However, the dates obtained with ABOX-SC pretreatment are considered more reliable and in the younger stratigraphic part produced consistent results with the TL dating.

SUITABILITY OF ACID-SOLUBLE AND ACID-INSOLUBLE LEATHER FRACTIONS IN RADIOCARBON DATING

Radiocarbon ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Alyssa M Tate ◽  
Brittany Hundman ◽  
Jonathan Heile
Keyword(s):  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Insoluble Fraction ◽  
Economic Life ◽  
Chemical Pretreatment ◽  
Acid Base ◽  
The Past ◽  
Acid Soluble Collagen ◽  
Method Of Production ◽  
Insight Into

ABSTRACT Leather has been produced by a variety of methods throughout human history, providing researchers unique insight into multiple facets of social and economic life in the past. Archaeologically recovered leather is often fragile and poorly preserved, leading to the use of various conservation and restoration efforts that may include the application of fats, oils, or waxes. Such additives introduce exogenous carbon to the leather, contaminating the specimen. These contaminants, in addition to those accumulated during interment, must be removed through chemical pretreatment prior to radiocarbon (14C) dating to ensure accurate dating. DirectAMS utilizes organic solvents, acid-base-acid (ABA) and gelatinization for all leather samples. Collagen yield from leather samples is variable due to the method of production and the quality of preservation. However, evaluating the acid-soluble collagen fraction, when available, provides the most accurate 14C dates for leather samples. In instances where gelatinization does not yield sufficient material, the resulting acid-insoluble fraction may be dated. Here we examine the effectiveness of the combined organic solvent and ABA pretreatment with gelatinization for leather samples, as well as the suitability of the acid-insoluble fraction for 14C dating.

Implications of a European radiocarbon calibration

Antiquity ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 52 (206) ◽  
pp. 217-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Pilcher ◽  
M. G. L. Baillie
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Current State ◽  
Calibration Problem ◽  
Dating Method ◽  
La Jolla ◽  
Single Calibration ◽  
Radiocarbon Calibration

Clark (1975) gave a clear account to ANTIQUITY readers of the current state of the radiocarbon calibration problem. It is now 19 years since De Vries demonstrated that one of the primary assumptions of the radiocarbon dating method was in error. Since then more than 1,200 measurements have been made on samples of known-age wood and over 70 papers published on this topic (reviewed by Bermingham and Renfrew, 1972 and by Clark, 1975). In spite of this activity, at the recent radiocarbon conference in Los Angeles and La Jolla no international agreement could be reached on a single calibration or correction that could be used to convert radiocarbon measurements to calendar ages. The problems of calibration have undermined the confidence of many European archaeologists in radiocarbon dating-one hears remarks such as ‘one can’t take the dates seriously, after all they are only radiocarbon dates’. Workers attempting to reconcile calibrated radiocarbon dates with historically based chronologies have found that the agreements do not live up to their expectations based on the quoted standard deviations of the dates. In the short term the results we present here may further convince the archaeologist that radiocarbon dates will not solve his chronological problems. However, we hope to demonstrate that radiocarbon dating is ultimately capable of sufficient accuracy to be fully compatible with historical chronologies

When Dental Enamel is Put to the Acid Test: Pretreatment Effects and Radiocarbon Dating

Radiocarbon ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 893-904 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel J A Hopkins ◽  
Christophe Snoeck ◽  
Thomas F G Higham
Keyword(s):  
Hydrochloric Acid ◽  
Acid Solution ◽  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Dental Enamel ◽  
Chemical Pretreatment ◽  
Acid Pretreatment ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Pretreatment Effects ◽  
High Level ◽  
Acid Test

AbstractThe influence of hydrochloric acid pretreatment on F14C and radiocarbon dates from dental enamel was investigated. Samples from modern equine incisors, a Roman cattle molar, and a Paleolithic woolly rhino molar were sampled and subsequently divided into five fractions. Each fraction was pretreated with a different acid solution, analyzed with Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) 14C dated at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). When compared to a control date (e.g. dentine collagen), better results were observed when increased concentrations of hydrochloric acid solution were used in the chemical pretreatment. This pilot study suggests that decontamination of younger samples may be possible. However, for more fossilized samples with a high level of contamination (e.g. from the European Paleolithic), acid pretreatment under the conditions used in this study does not remove all contamination.

scholarly journals Radiocarbon Dates from Paleolithic Sites in Korea

Radiocarbon ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 473-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kidong Bae
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Last Glacial Maximum ◽  
Formation Process ◽  
Korean Peninsula ◽  
Lower Boundary ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Site Formation ◽  
Middle Paleolithic ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Last Glacial

Fewer than 20 radiocarbon dates have been obtained from Paleolithic sites on the Korean Peninsula. It is still unknown how and when Korean Middle Paleolithic stone industries developed, despite the handful of dates older than 40,000 BP obtained from some sites. A lower boundary for the Korean Upper Paleolithic of approximately 30,000 BP can be inferred from the few dates associated with stone blade industries. 14C dates associated with microlithic industries of 24,000 BP are considered too old in light of evidence from other areas of East Asia. Most such assemblages are post-Last Glacial Maximum in age. Improved understanding of the Korean Paleolithic sequence will depend ultimately on the further accumulation of 14C dates, as well as the application of alternative dating techniques and attention to the reconstruction of site formation process.

scholarly journals ASSESSING THE CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHY OF EL MIRÓN CAVE, CANTABRIAN SPAIN

Radiocarbon ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Rachel J A Hopkins ◽  
Lawrence Guy Straus ◽  
Manuel R González Morales
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Modeling ◽  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Middle Paleolithic ◽  
Faunal Remains ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Modern Period ◽  
Stratigraphic Record ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Taphonomic Processes

ABSTRACT El Mirón is an important archaeological cave site in Cantabria (Spain) with a stratigraphy covering the late Middle Paleolithic to the Modern Period. The Magdalenian levels are especially rich in artifacts, faunal remains, and features, and included the burial of an adult female (“the Red Lady”), as well as other scattered human remains, while the Neolithic levels contained the oldest combined evidence of ceramics, domesticated grain and livestock in the region. However, in the absence of diagnostic artifacts in many levels that would always provide a traditional cultural chronology, radiocarbon dating has been essential in understanding the temporal framework for human activity at the site. Over the duration of more than two decades, the El Mirón Project has therefore obtained 93 radiocarbon dates, which cover the entire stratigraphic record as found in several different excavation areas. In light of the considerable methodological advances that radiocarbon dating has seen since 1996 we aim to evaluate the reliability of the published 14C record for El Mirón Cave, and to improve the accuracy of the radiocarbon based chronostratigraphy through Bayesian modeling. The results shed light on which dates may be used for future research and where dating discrepancies reflect taphonomic processes, thereby advancing intra-site and regional archaeological comparisons.

scholarly journals Refining Background Corrections for Radiocarbon Dating of Bone Collagen at Orau

Radiocarbon ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 600-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
R E Wood ◽  
C Bronk Ramsey ◽  
T F G Higham
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Detection Limit ◽  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Bone Collagen ◽  
Chemical Pretreatment ◽  
Carbon Contamination ◽  
Severe Effect ◽  
Collagen Sample

During the laboratory pretreatment of samples for radiocarbon dating, small amounts of carbon may be added to a sample. Contamination can be incorporated at any stage: during chemical pretreatment, combustion to CO2, graphitization, or accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) measurement. Such carbon contamination is often modern in age, and so can have an especially severe effect on samples older than ∼25 ka BP. During the extraction of collagen from bone using the ultrafiltration protocol at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU), small amounts of young carbon are added to the sample. Currently, this contamination is poorly characterized when less than 10 mg of collagen is extracted from a bone. Demand to date small collagen samples with 14C concentrations that approach the detection limit of AMS measurement has increased recently with the growing interest in, for example, directly dating Neanderthal remains and Upper Paleolithic bone artifacts. This paper aims to reduce the minimum collagen sample size required to produce a reliable date from 10 to 5 mg by re-examining the combustion background and subsequently the pretreatment background for bone. The average of 136 measurements of directly combusted nylon suggests that 0.0007 ± 0.001 mg of modern carbon is added to each sample, although the distribution is positively skewed. Regression analysis of the measurements of 52 collagen samples extracted from a bone of background age results in a background of just less than 50,000 BP for bone treated at ORAU.

scholarly journals Reevaluating the timing of Neanderthal disappearance in Northwest Europe

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (12) ◽  
pp. e2022466118
Author(s):  
Thibaut Devièse ◽  
Grégory Abrams ◽  
Mateja Hajdinjak ◽  
Stéphane Pirson ◽  
Isabelle De Groote ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil Contamination ◽  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Genomic Analysis ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Specific Approach ◽  
Northwest Europe ◽  
Carbon Based

Elucidating when Neanderthal populations disappeared from Eurasia is a key question in paleoanthropology, and Belgium is one of the key regions for studying the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition. Previous radiocarbon dating placed the Spy Neanderthals among the latest surviving Neanderthals in Northwest Europe with reported dates as young as 23,880 ± 240 B.P. (OxA-8912). Questions were raised, however, regarding the reliability of these dates. Soil contamination and carbon-based conservation products are known to cause problems during the radiocarbon dating of bulk collagen samples. Employing a compound-specific approach that is today the most efficient in removing contamination and ancient genomic analysis, we demonstrate here that previous dates produced on Neanderthal specimens from Spy were inaccurately young by up to 10,000 y due to the presence of unremoved contamination. Our compound-specific radiocarbon dates on the Neanderthals from Spy and those from Engis and Fonds-de-Forêt demonstrate that they disappeared from Northwest Europe at 44,200 to 40,600 cal B.P. (at 95.4% probability), much earlier than previously suggested. Our data contribute significantly to refining models for Neanderthal disappearance in Europe and, more broadly, show that chronometric models regarding the appearance or disappearance of animal or hominin groups should be based only on radiocarbon dates obtained using robust pretreatment methods.

scholarly journals Puzzling Radiocarbon Dates for the Upper Paleolithic Site of Sungir (Central Russian Plain)

Radiocarbon ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 451-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslav V Kuzmin ◽  
Johannes van der Plicht ◽  
Leopold D Sulerzhitsky
Keyword(s):  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Russian Plain ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Paleolithic Site ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Animal Bones ◽  
Human Burials ◽  
Age Range

A summary is presented of more than a decade-long study of direct radiocarbon dating for one of the most important human burials in Eurasia, the Sungir site in eastern Europe. Eighteen 14C dates were produced before early 2014 on three skeletons (Sungir 1–3), and there is still no consistency in the results. In the absence of other independent methods to establish the antiquity of Sungir, a careful analysis is performed of the site's stratigraphy, paleoenvironment, and 14C dates run on animal bones from the same layer as the burials. Although the conclusions of this work cannot be guaranteed to be absolutely correct, we suggest that at the present stage of research the age range of ∼26,000–27,210 BP is the most probable time for the creation of the elaborate human burials at the Sungir site.

scholarly journals Puzzling Radiocarbon Dates for the Upper Paleolithic Site of Sungir (Central Russian Plain)

Radiocarbon ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 56 (02) ◽  
pp. 451-459
Author(s):  
Yaroslav V Kuzmin ◽  
Johannes van der Plicht ◽  
Leopold D Sulerzhitsky
Keyword(s):  
Radiocarbon Dating ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Russian Plain ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Paleolithic Site ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Animal Bones ◽  
Human Burials ◽  
Age Range

A summary is presented of more than a decade-long study of direct radiocarbon dating for one of the most important human burials in Eurasia, the Sungir site in eastern Europe. Eighteen14C dates were produced before early 2014 on three skeletons (Sungir 1–3), and there is still no consistency in the results. In the absence of other independent methods to establish the antiquity of Sungir, a careful analysis is performed of the site's stratigraphy, paleoenvironment, and14C dates run on animal bones from the same layer as the burials. Although the conclusions of this work cannot be guaranteed to be absolutely correct, we suggest that at the present stage of research the age range of ∼26,000–27,210 BP is the most probable time for the creation of the elaborate human burials at the Sungir site.

scholarly journals Chronological Framework of the Siberian Paleolithic: Recent Achievements and Future Directions

Radiocarbon ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 757-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslav V Kuzmin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Far East ◽  
Far East ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Northern Eurasia ◽  
Middle Paleolithic ◽  
Neolithic Period ◽  
Altai Mountains ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The Russian Far East

In Siberia, the accumulation of radiocarbon dates from archaeological sites since the 1960s makes it possible to compile a general Paleolithic 14C database, which contains about 440 entries as of late 2005. With these data, we can reveal the main chronological patterns of Paleolithic complexes, with a focus on the late Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) and Upper Paleolithic. The 14C dates for late Middle Paleolithic industries in Siberia are quite “young,” up to about 30,000–28,500 BP and perhaps ∼27,000 BP. The emergence of the Upper Paleolithic in Siberia took place relatively early compared with Eastern Europe. At about 43,000–35,000 BP, blade-dominated industries existed in the Altai Mountains and Lake Baikal region, and numerous adornments are known from several sites of that age. The late Upper Paleolithic complexes with microblade technology from the Altai Mountains are 14C dated to about 35,000–28,000 BP, and represent the earliest unequivocal evidence of microblade manufacture in northern Eurasia. The end of the Paleolithic in Siberia is related to the appearance of pottery, which indicates the beginning of the Neolithic period. In northern Transbaikal, the earliest pottery complexes are dated to about 12,000–11,000 BP and in the Russian Far East even to ∼13,000 BP, while in most of Siberia they date to approximately 8000–6000 BP. The most important features of the Siberian Paleolithic chronology are: a) the long persistence of Middle Paleolithic complexes, until about 30,000–27,000 BP; b) very early Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition, ∼43,000 BP, closely connected with the emergence of art and symbolic behavior in the earliest Upper Paleolithic at this time; c) the very early origin of microblade complexes, at least at about 35,000 BP; and d) a gradual Paleolithic–Neolithic transition, beginning in the Russian Far East at ∼13,000 BP and in Transbaikal about 12,000–11,000 BP, in most of Siberia at about 8000–6000 BP, and even later in some northern regions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document