2014
DOI: 10.2458/56.17038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

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

Abstract: 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 14 C 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 14 C dates run on animal bones from the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…26 000–27 210 BP (calendar age— c . 29 780–33 140 cal BP; Kuzmin et al 2014) to c . 28 890–30 700 BP ( c .…”
Section: Is It Possible To Establish the ‘True’ Age Of Palaeolithic Bmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…26 000–27 210 BP (calendar age— c . 29 780–33 140 cal BP; Kuzmin et al 2014) to c . 28 890–30 700 BP ( c .…”
Section: Is It Possible To Establish the ‘True’ Age Of Palaeolithic Bmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…31 700–35 300 cal BP; Marom et al 2012; Nalawade-Chavan et al 2014; see also Reynolds et al 2017) (Figure 1). According to Bader and Bader (2000; see also Kuzmin et al 2014: 456, fig. 2; and Trinkaus et al 2014: 5, fig.…”
Section: Is It Possible To Establish the ‘True’ Age Of Palaeolithic Bmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These 14 C dates have no correlation with each other; at the same time 14 C dates 22,930 ± 200 BP (OxA-9036) and 19,160 ± 270 BP (AA-36473) contradict most of the cultural layer dates (Alekseeva and Bader 2000). It was noted by Kuzmin et al (2004Kuzmin et al ( , 2014) that there was a substantial discrepancy in the results and that a reanalysis was needed. AMS 14 С measurements of the S 1 individual on a sample from the femur and of the S 3 individual's on a humerus were conducted in the Leibniz Laboratory at the Christian-Albrecht-University of Kiel, Germany.…”
Section: Spatial Distribution Of Radiocarbon Dates: Sungirmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interpretation of the radiocarbon ( 14 C) dates from Sungir is one of the most debated issues in the discussion of the peculiarities of the site, with consequences for the view of the cultural layer as well as for the establishment of different periods of human occupation there (e.g., Alekseeva and Bader 2000;Dobrovolskaya et al 2012;Marom et al 2012;Kuzmin et al 2014). It has been repeatedly noted that 14 C dates on human bones from the famous burials do not correspond well to one other and, at the same time, do not correlate with 14 C dates obtained on samples from the cultural layer (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%