Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:42:08.662Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparison of Radiocarbon and Archaeomagnetic Dating from an Archaeological Site in Spain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

G Catanzariti ,
G McIntosh ,
M L Osete ,
T Nakamura ,
A Z Rakowski ,
I Ramírez González  and
Ph Lanos
G Catanzariti*
Affiliation:
Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
G McIntosh
Affiliation:
Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
M L Osete
Affiliation:
Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
T Nakamura
Affiliation:
Centre for Chronological Research, Nagoya University, Japan
A Z Rakowski
Affiliation:
Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain Centre for Chronological Research, Nagoya University, Japan Radiocarbon Laboratory, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
I Ramírez González
Affiliation:
Gea Patrimonio, Guadalajara, Spain
Ph Lanos
Affiliation:
Civilisations Atlantiques et Archéosciences, CNRS, UMR 6566, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042, Rennes cedex, France
*
Corresponding author. Email: gcatanza@fis.ucm.es
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Reference archaeomagnetic secular variation (SV) curves recently have been proposed for the Iberian Peninsula and may now be used for archaeomagnetic dating. Archaeomagnetic dating is a relative dating technique that is strongly dependent on the age control of the data used to construct the reference curves. In order to test the method, an archaeological structure from central Spain has been studied. Samples have been taken for both archaeomagnetic and radiocarbon dating, and the results are compared. Close agreement is observed between both techniques, with the archaeomagnetic age of AD 603–999 overlapping the calibrated age of AD 770–890. These results demonstrate the reliability of the proposed reference curves as a dating tool within the Iberian Peninsula during this archaeological period.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , 2007 , pp. 543 - 550
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Aitken, MJ. 1990. Science-Based Dating in Archaeology. New York: Longman. 274 p.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 1995. Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of stratigraphy: the OxCal program. Radiocarbon 37(2):425–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2001. Development of the radiocarbon calibration program. Radiocarbon 43(2A):355–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. 1953. Dispersion on a sphere. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 217:295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez-Paccard, M, Chauvin, A, Lanos, P, McIntosh, G, Osete, ML, Catanzariti, G, Ruiz-Martínez, VC, Núñez, JI. 2006. First archaeomagnetic secular variation curve for the Iberian Peninsula: comparison with other data from western Europe and with global geomagnetic field models. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 7: Q12001; doi:10.1029/2006GC001476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirschvink, J. 1980. The least-squares line and plane and the analysis of paleomagnetic data. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 62:699–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, H, Masuzawa, T, Nakamura, T, Matsumoto, E. 1993. A batch preparation method for graphite targets with low level background for AMS 14C measurements. Radiocarbon 35(2):295–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanos, Ph. 2004. Bayesian inference of calibration curves: applications to archaeomagnetism. In: Buck, C, Millard, A, editors. Tools for Constructing Chronologies: Crossing Interdisciplinary Boundaries. Volume 177. London: Springer-Verlag. [RENDATE software available at URL: http://www.meteo.be/CPG/aarch.net/index.html].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mook, WM, van der Plicht, J. 1999. Reporting 14C activities and concentrations. Radiocarbon 41(3):227–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, T, Niu, E, Oda, H, Ikeda, A, Minami, M, Takahashi, H, Adachi, M, Pals, L, Gottdang, A, Suya, N. 2000. The HVEE Tandetron AMS system at Nagoya University. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 172(1–4):52–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nöel, M, Batt, C. 1997. A method for correcting geographically separated remanence directions for the purpose of archaeomagnetic dating. Geophysical Journal International 102:753–6.Google Scholar
Reimer, PJ, Baillie, MGL, Bard, E, Bayliss, A, Beck, JW, Bertrand, CJH, Blackwell, PG, Buck, CE, Burr, GS, Cutler, KB, Damon, PE, Edwards, RL, Fairbanks, RG, Friedrich, M, Guilderson, TP, Hogg, AG, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, G, Manning, S, Bronk Ramsey, C, Reimer, RW, Remmele, S, Southon, JR, Stuiver, M, Talamo, S, Taylor, FW, van der Plicht, J, Weyhenmeyer, CE. 2004. IntCal04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0–26 cal kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46(3):1029–58.Google Scholar
Shuey, R, Cole, E, Mikulich, M. 1970. Geographic correction of archaeomagnetic data. Journal of Geomagnetism and Geoelectricity 22:485–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuiver, M, Polach, HA. 1977. Discussion: reporting of 14C data. Radiocarbon 19(3):355–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar