scholarly journals Chronological relationship between the fortified settlement of Kamennyi Ambar and the Kamennyi Ambar-5 cemetery in the Southern Trans-Urals: capabilities of the Bayesian statistics

2021 ◽  
pp. 47-58
Author(s):  
I.V. Chechushkov ◽  
A.V. Epimakhov
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Bayesian Modeling ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Chronological Order ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Genetic Link ◽  
Stratigraphic Position ◽  
Calibration Program ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
The Given

By means of the Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates, a comparison of chronologies of the Kamennyi Ambar settlement and the cemetery of Kamennyi Ambar-5 of the Late Bronze Age Syntashta-Petrovka period has been carried out. Both sites are situated in the valley of the Karagaily-Ayat River in Kartalinsky district of Chelyab-insk Region (Russia). Comparison of the pottery assemblages of the settlement and the cemetery demonstrates their similarity, which suggests existence of a genetic link between the sites. The purpose of this work is devel-opment of a generalized chronological model of the two monuments. This is achieved by comparison of uncali-brated intervals of radiocarbon dates and calculation of chronological boundaries of the existence of the settle-ment and cemetery by means of Bayesian modeling of the calibrated dates. The method consists in that, in the beginning, the stratigraphic position of each date is determined, and then the dates suitable for the analysis are arranged in the chronological order and calibrated, while the algorithm of the OxCal 4.4 calibration program is queried for calculation of the boundaries of the given periods and their duration. Also, the paper reports complete sets of the radiocarbon dates: 61 dates have been obtained from the materials of the settlement of Kamennyi Ambar, while 19 measurements originate from the Kamennyi Ambar-5 cemetery. Correlation of the radiocarbon dates and development of the Bayesian chronological models have demonstrated contemporaneousness of the settlement and the cemetery with slightly later beginning of the activity at the latter. This observation is in agree-ment with the concept of the genetic link between the sites and, arguably, can be extended onto other pairs of fortified settlement — kurgan cemetery attributed to the Sintashta-Petrovka period. Our conclusion is also consis-tent with the concept of building the complex of monuments by a newly-arrived population, who founded a settle-ment, occupied the new territory for some time, while the first deaths occurred some time afterwards. That said, the settlement of Kamennyi Ambar existed for no longer than a century in the 1950s — 1860s BC, while the cemetery of Kamennyi Ambar-5 was used for 70–80 years within the same chronological interval.

scholarly journals Chronology of the Early Bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a High Chronology

Radiocarbon ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 54 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 525-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Regev ◽  
Pierre De Miroschedji ◽  
Raphael Greenberg ◽  
Eliot Braun ◽  
Zvi Greenhut ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Bayesian Modeling ◽  
Early Bronze Age ◽  
Southern Levant ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
The Given

The chronology of the Early Bronze Age (EBA) in the southern Levant and the synchronization between the sites, considering seriation and radiocarbon dates, have shown large inconsistencies and disagreement. We have assembled 42014C dates, most of them previously published and a few provided directly by the excavators. The dates have been re-evaluated on the basis of their archaeological context and using analytical criteria. Bayesian modeling has been applied to the selected dates in relation to the given seriation of the EBA subperiods (EB I, II III, IV). Sites with 2 or more sequential sub-phases were individually modeled in order to define the transitions between the subperiods. The new chronology indicates that the EB I–II transition occurred site-dependently between 3200–2900 BC, with EB II–III around 2900 BC, and EB III–IV ∼2500 BC.

Radiocarbon Dating of Aghios Antonios, Potos, and Intersite Chronological Variability in South Thasos, Greece

Radiocarbon ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 807-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannis Maniatis ◽  
Nerantzis Nerantzis ◽  
Stratis Papadopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Northern Greece ◽  
Population Movements ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
The North ◽  
Chronological Sequence ◽  
Hilltop Settlement ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Early Late ◽  
Of Greece

Radiocarbon dates obtained for the coastal hilltop settlement of Aghios Antonios Potos in south Thasos are statistically treated to define the absolute chronology for the start and the end of the various habitation and cultural phases at the site. The location was first occupied during the Final Neolithic (FN) between 3800 and 3600 BC, extending this much contested phase to the lowest up to now record for Thasos and the northern Greece. The site is continuously inhabited from Early Bronze Age I until the early Late Bronze Age (LBA; 1363 BC) when it was abandoned. Comparison with other sites in Thasos and particularly with the inland site of Kastri Theologos showed that the first occupation at Aghios Antonios came soon after the abandonment of Kastri in the beginning of the 4th millennium. In fact, after the decline and abandonment of Aghios Antonios in the LBA, the site of Kastri was reinhabited, leading to the hypothesis that part of the coastal population moved inland. The presumed chronological sequence of alternate habitation between the two settlements may evoke explanations for sociocultural and/or environmental dynamics behind population movements in prehistoric Thasos. A major conclusion of the project is that the 4th millennium occupation gap attested in many sites of Greece, especially in the north, is probably bridged in south Thasos, when the data from all sites are taken together. The mobility of people in Final Neolithic south Thasos may explain the general phenomenon of limited occupational sequences in the FN of north Greece.

scholarly journals Bronze Age and Early Iron Age house and settlement development at Forsandmoen, south-western Norway

AmS-Skrifter ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-300
Author(s):  
Trond Løken
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Early Iron Age ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
15Th Century ◽  
Storage House ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
The University ◽  
House Structure

The ambition of this monograph is to analyse a limited number of topics regarding house types and thus social and economic change from the extensive material that came out of the archaeological excavation that took place at Forsandmoen (“Forsand plain”), Forsand municipality, Rogaland, Norway during the decade 1980–1990, as well as the years 1992, 1995 and 2007. The excavation was organised as an interdisciplinaryresearch project within archaeology, botany (palynological analysis from bogs and soils, macrofossil analysis) and phosphate analysis, conducted by staff from the Museum of Archaeology in Stavanger (as it was called until 2009, now part of the University of Stavanger). A large phosphate survey project had demarcaded a 20 ha settlement area, among which 9 ha were excavated using mechanical topsoil stripping to expose thehabitation traces at the top of the glaciofluvial outwash plain of Forsandmoen. A total of 248 houses could be identified by archaeological excavations, distributed among 17 house types. In addition, 26 partly excavated houses could not be classified into a type. The extensive house material comprises three types of longhouses, of which there are as many as 30–40 in number, as well as four other longhouse types, of which there are only 2–7 in number. There were nine other house types, comprising partly small dwelling houses and partly storage houses, of which there were 3–10 in number. Lastly, there are 63 of the smallest storage house, consisting of only four postholes in a square shape. A collection of 264 radiocarbon dates demonstrated that the settlement was established in the last part of the 15th century BC and faded out during the 7th–8th century AD, encompassing the Nordic Bronze Age and Early Iron Age. As a number of houses comprising four of the house types were excavated with the same methods in the same area by the same staff, it is a major goal of this monograph to analyse thoroughly the different featuresof the houses (postholes, wall remains, entrances, ditches, hearths, house-structure, find-distribution) and how they were combined and changed into the different house types through time. House material from different Norwegian areas as well as Sweden, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands is included in comparative analyses to reveal connections within the Nordic area. Special attention has been given to theinterpretation of the location of activity areas in the dwelling and byre sections in the houses, as well as the life expectancy of the two main longhouse types. Based on these analyses, I have presented a synthesis in 13 phases of the development of the settlement from Bronze Age Period II to the Merovingian Period. This analysis shows that, from a restricted settlement consisting of one or two small farms in the Early BronzeAge, it increases slightly throughout the Late Bronze Age to 2–3 solitary farms to a significantly larger settlement consisting of 3–4 larger farms in the Pre-Roman Iron Age. From the beginning of the early Roman Iron Age, the settlement seems to increase to 8–9 even larger farms, and through the late Roman Iron Age, the settlement increases to 12–13 such farms, of which 6–7 farms are located so close together that they would seem to be a nucleated or village settlement. In the beginning of the Migration Period, there were 16–17 farms, each consisting of a dwelling/byre longhouse and a workshop, agglomerated in an area of 300 x 200 m where the farms are arranged in four E–W oriented rows. In addition, two farms were situated 140 m NE of the main settlement. At the transition to the Merovingian Period, radiocarbon dates show that all but two of the farms were suddenly abandoned. At the end of that period, the Forsandmoen settlement was completely abandoned. The abandonment could have been caused by a combination of circumstances such as overexploitation in agriculture, colder climate, the Plague of Justinian or the collapse of the redistributive chiefdom system due to the breakdown of the Roman Empire. The abrupt abandonment also coincides with a huge volcanic eruption or cosmic event that clouded the sun around the whole globe in AD 536–537. It is argued that the climatic effect on the agriculture at this latitude could induce such a serious famine that the settlement, in combination with the other possible causes, was virtually laid waste during the ensuing cold decade AD 537–546. 

Late Bronze Age Apsidal and Oval Buildings in Greece and adjacent areas

1989 ◽  
Vol 84 ◽  
pp. 269-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Mazarakis-Ainian
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Neolithic Period ◽  
Late Neolithic ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Building Plans

Apsidal and elliptical buildings are characteristic of rural societies. In Greece their tradition goes back to the late Neolithic period. Apsidal houses become common in the EH and especially the MH periods, while oval buildings do not occur as often. It is generally acknowledged that curvilinear plans went out of fashion at the end of the MH period and that they reappeared in the beginning of the EIA. This statement is fundamentally correct for rectangular constructions prevail throughout the Mycenaean era. Yet an attentive survey of LBA sites in Greece proves that curvilinear buildings were still constructed in certain regions. A rapid review of these sites could be beneficial, for it might help in elucidating some of the reasons of the resurgence of these particular building plans shortly after the final collapse of the Mycenaean civilization.

Recalibrating grave-good chronologies: new AMS radiocarbon dates from Late Bronze Age burials in Lika, Croatia

Antiquity ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 93 (367) ◽  
pp. 113-127
Author(s):  
Emily Zavodny ◽  
Brendan J. Culleton ◽  
Sarah B. McClure ◽  
Douglas J. Kennett ◽  
Jacqueline Balen
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Grave Good ◽  
Image Position

Abstract

An Assemblage of Late Bronze Age Metalworking Debris from Dainton, Devon

1980 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 177-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Needham ◽  
R. J. Silvester ◽  
Hilary Howard
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Small Proportion ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Present Evidence ◽  
Permanent Pasture ◽  
South West ◽  
First Millennium ◽  
Agricultural Use ◽  
Field Systems

Excavated sites referable to the earlier first millennium B.C. are rare in the south-west peninsula. Although Dartmoor and Bodmin Moor exhibit well preserved Bronze Age landscapes, most of the upland settlements are attributed to the second millennium and there are few which on present evidence fall within the succeeding centuries (Silvester 1979). Beyond the granite moors, pottery from Kent's Cavern, Torquay and the Mount Batten peninsula, near Plymouth, suggest sporadic occupation, while radiocarbon dates from Killibury in Cornwall imply activity prior to the construction of the hillfort (Miles 1977, 111). Yet such is the imbalance of archaeological activity in the region that even in well worked areas such as west Cornwall, few sites of relevant date can be readily identified. In Devon, other than on Dartmoor and Exmoor, the limestone plateaux around Torbay provide the only surface evidence of open settlements. A small proportion of the modern fields and woods on the limestone preserve groups of clearance cairns and rubble banks of varying complexity; many of these are undoubtedly medieval in date, but in two locations at Dainton, also known as Miltor Mator Common (SX 859668), and Walls Hill, Torquay (SX 935651), there are the unobtrusive remains of rectangular field systems. The former consisted of a minimum of perhaps ten fields, averaging just over 0·4 ha. in area, and randomly spaced cairns, most of which are presumably contemporary (fig. 1). Part of Walls Hill is covered by dense ashwood scrub, a recurring feature of the limestone plateaux, but on the cliff top are the vestiges of nine fields which are generally of smaller size than those at Dainton. That these sites survive is fortuitous but perhaps not surprising; the soil on the plateau is well-drained but normally less than 0·3 m in depth (Clayden, 1971, 122). Loose rock occurs frequently and occasional outcrops add to the problems of agricultural use. Consequently the limestone hills tend to be given over to permanent pasture and are ploughed only rarely.

scholarly journals Late Neolithic and Late Bronze Age lithic assemblages associated with a cairn and other prehistoric features at Stoneyhill Farm, Longhaven, Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, 2002-03

2011 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torben Ballin ◽  
Ian Suddaby ◽  
M Cressey ◽  
M Hastie ◽  
A Jackson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Lithic Technology ◽  
Early Bronze Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Archaeological Record ◽  
Early Neolithic ◽  
Late Neolithic ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Lithic Assemblage ◽  
Lithic Assemblages

Prehistoric remains were recorded by CFA Archaeology Ltd (CFA) in 2002-03 during a programme of fieldwork at the landfill site within the boundaries of Stoneyhill Farm, which lies 7km to the southwest of Peterhead in Aberdeenshire. These included a clearance cairn with a Late Bronze Age lithic assemblage and a burial cairn, with Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age lithics and Beaker ceramics. Other lithic scatters of similar date had no certain associations, although pits containing near-contemporary Impressed Wares were nearby. Additional lithic assemblages included material dated to the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic. What may be proto-Unstan Wares in an isolated pit were associated with radiocarbon dates (barley) of the first half of the fourth millennium bc. These findings represent a substantial addition to the local area's archaeological record and form an important contribution to the understanding of lithic technology and ceramics in earlier prehistoric Scotland.This paper is dedicated to the memory of Ian Shepherd, whose site visits enlightened this and other projects undertaken by one of the authors (IS).

Radiocarbon Chronology of the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Aeneolithic, and Bronze Age Sites in the Trans-Urals (Russia): A General Framework

Radiocarbon ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 505-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia M Chairkina ◽  
Yaroslav V Kuzmin ◽  
Gregory W L Hodgins
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
General Framework ◽  
Early Bronze Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Radiocarbon Chronology

AbstractThe chronology of the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Aeneolithic, and Bronze Age sites in the Trans-Urals (Russia) was studied, and a framework for previously established cultural complexes is suggested based on 153 radiocarbon dates. In this new chronological model, the Mesolithic is dated to ~10,000–6500 cal BC; the Neolithic complexes exist at ~6500–3800 cal BC; the Aeneolithic is dated to ~4300–2800 cal BC; the Early Bronze Age spans ~2500–2100 cal BC; and the Late Bronze Age can be preliminary assigned to ~1600–1100 cal BC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document