Rolling Out Revolution: Using Radiocarbon Dating in Archaeology

Bayliss, Alex

doi:10.1017/s0033822200033750

Cited by 280 publications

(233 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

224

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Buck et al, 1999;Haslett and Parnell, 2008;Ramsey, 2009;Blaauw and Christen, 2011) user-friendly software for Bayesian inference is now available, it is very easy for archaeologists and other researchers to use Bayesian methods without appreciating the important underlying philosophical and mathematical assumptions on which they are based. So much so that several so-called "Bayesian revolutions" have taken place in recent years (Brooks, 2003;Beaumont and Rannala, 2004;Shultz, 2007;Wilkinson, 2007;Kruschke et al, 2012;Drummond et al, 2012;Bouckaert et al, 2014); including the one known as the "third radiocarbon revolution" (Bayliss, 2009), with little associated discussion amongst the protagonists of their underlying presumptions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On being agoodBayesian

Buck

Meson

2015

World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bayesianism is fast becoming the dominant paradigm in archaeological chronology construction. This paradigm shift has been brought about in large part by widespread access to tailored computer software which provides users with powerful tools for complex statistical inference with little need to learn about statistical modelling or computer programming. As a result, we run the risk that such software will be reduced to the status of black-boxes. This would be a dangerous position for our community since good, principled, use of Bayesian methods requires mindfulness when selecting the initial model, defining prior information, checking the reliability and sensitivity of the software runs and interpreting the results obtained. In this paper, we provide users with a brief review of the nature of the care required and offer some comments and suggestions to help ensure that our community continues to be respected for its philosophically rigorous scientific approach.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On being agoodBayesian

Buck

Meson

2015

World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Das neue Datierungsprogramm für Klingenberg wurde von Anfang an im Hinblick auf eine Bayes'sche Analyse entworfen (Buck et al 1996;Bayliss 2009 Buck et al (1996) und Bayliss et al (2007) vorgestellt. Eine vollständige Beschreibung der hier verwendeten Methoden findet sich bei Bronk Ramsey (1995;2009), Bronk Ramsey und Lee (2013) und Bayliss et al (2011).…”

Section: Chronologische Modelleunclassified

“…Eine vollständige Beschreibung der hier verwendeten Methoden findet sich bei Bronk Ramsey (1995;2009), Bronk Ramsey und Lee (2013) und Bayliss et al (2011).…”

Section: Chronologische Modelleunclassified

Die Zeit der großen Gräben: Modelle zur Chronologie des Michelsberger Fundplatzes von Heilbronn-Klingenberg „Schlossberg“, Stadtkreis Heilbronn, Baden-Württemberg

Seidel

Stephan

Stika

et al. 2016

Praehistorische Zeitschrift

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an attempt to establish more precise dating of the Michelsberg enclosure of Klingenberg-Schlossberg in the Neckar valley. The approach used is advocated as the basis on which to explore the timing and duration of other Michelsberg enclosures of the later fifth–earlier fourth millennium cal BC. Excavated extensively in 1986–1987, the Klingenberg enclosure has two ditches across a loess promontory, traces of a palisade inside the inner ditch, remains of burnt superstructure in both ditches, numerous pits both inside and outside, and numerous dog remains. There are some signs of pre-enclosure occupation in the MK II and III/IV phases, but the bulk of activity belongs to the MK V/Munzingen phase. A formal chronological approach combines the detailed archaeological information from the excavation with radiocarbon dates on carefully selected samples, here mainly charred cereals or articulated or articulating animal bones, in a Bayesian statistical framework. No samples were found to date MK II activity. Samples for two MK III/IV pits suggest a date in the 40th–39thcenturies cal BC. MK V/Mz activity began at the very end of the 39thand the start of the 38thcentury cal BC. Unlike in the previously published interpretation of the sequence, this activity probably began with the construction of the enclosure, both ditches being dug either together or in very quick succession. This was followed by pits inside the enclosure, from the earlier 38thcentury cal BC. Probably after a few decades, pits began to be dug outside the enclosure, in the middle part of the 38thcentury cal BC. Both ditches probably went out of use in the mid-37thcentury cal BC, probably simultaneously, after the burning of the rampart between them, and the ending of the external pits could be of the same date; the internal pits might have continued a little longer. A duration of 120–150 years for MK V/Mz activity is estimated. Alternative models are considered. The local and wider implications of these formal date estimates are discussed, topics covered including the circumstances in which the enclosure may have been constructed and those in which it ended, the chronology of MK pottery, and the wider development of MK and other enclosures

show abstract

“…The application of Bayesian-based methods for modeling of sequences of 14 C dates has had such a profound impact in archaeological sciences that Bayliss (2009) describes it as a "third radiocarbon revolution." The potentialities of these methods are particularly evident in those periods where, because of the flat shape of the calibration curve, the chronological resolution achievable with a single 14 C measurement is usually poor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wiggle-Match Dating of Wooden Samples from Iron Age Sites in Northern Italy

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Archaeological excavations carried out at the sites of Laion/Lajen (Bolzano/Bozen) and Stufles-Oberegger (Bressanone/Brixen) in northern Italy uncovered well-preserved wooden samples in cultural layers archaeologically dated to the Iron Age. From the 2 sites, different wooden samples were recovered that were well preserved enough to allow clear identification of the tree species and of the ring structure. Among the different wooden samples, 2 were selected for radiocarbon analyses: from Laion/Lajen, a beam with an unbroken sequence of 158 rings; from Stufles-Oberegger, a combusted trunk with a sequence of 217 rings. Both samples were identified as Larix decidua species. From each sequence, single rings were selected and submitted for accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) 14 C dating analysis at CEDAD. Conventional 14 C ages were then calibrated to calendar ages using the IntCal04 atmospheric data set, while the statistical constraints resulting from the defined ring sequence were used to develop a wiggle-matching approach by making use of the Bayesian analysis functions available in OxCal. The obtained results are an important contribution in refining the chronology of the studied sites.

show abstract

Rolling Out Revolution: Using Radiocarbon Dating in Archaeology

Cited by 280 publications

References 73 publications

On being agoodBayesian

On being agoodBayesian

Die Zeit der großen Gräben: Modelle zur Chronologie des Michelsberger Fundplatzes von Heilbronn-Klingenberg „Schlossberg“, Stadtkreis Heilbronn, Baden-Württemberg

Wiggle-Match Dating of Wooden Samples from Iron Age Sites in Northern Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About