Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T15:27:18.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wiggle-Match Dating of Tree-Ring Sequences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Mariagrazia Galimberti ,
Christopher Bronk Ramsey  and
Sturt W Manning
Mariagrazia Galimberti
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Christopher Bronk Ramsey*
Affiliation:
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Sturt W Manning
Affiliation:
Department of Fine Art, University of Toronto, Canada; Also, Department of Archaeology, University of Reading, United Kingdom
*
Corresponding author. Email: christopher.ramsey@archaeology-research.oxford.ac.uk.
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.

Given the non-monotonic form of the radiocarbon calibration curve, the precision of single 14C dates on the calendar timescale will always be limited. One way around this limitation is through comparison of time-series, which should exhibit the same irregular patterning as the calibration curve. This approach can be employed most directly in the case of wood samples with many years growth present (but not able to be dated by dendrochronology), where the tree-ring series of unknown date can be compared against the similarly constructed 14C calibration curve built from known-age wood. This process of curve-fitting has come to be called “wiggle-matching.”

In this paper, we look at the requirements for getting good precision by this method: sequence length, sampling frequency, and measurement precision. We also look at 3 case studies: one a piece of wood which has been independently dendrochronologically dated, and two others of unknown age relating to archaeological activity at Silchester, UK (Roman) and Miletos, Anatolia (relating to the volcanic eruption at Thera).

Type
Part II
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 46 , Issue 2: Proceedings of the 18th International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 2 of 2), Conference Editors: Nancy Beavan Athfield, Rodger J Sparks , 2004 , pp. 917 - 924
Copyright
Copyright © The Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Bietak, M. 2003. Science versus archaeology: problems and consequences of High Aegean chronology. In: Bietak, M, editor. The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium BC II. Proceedings of the SCIEM 2000–Euro-Conference, Haindorf, 2001, Vienna. p 23–33.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C, Higham, TFG, Leach, P. 2004a. Towards high-precision AMS: progress and limitations. Radiocarbon, these proceedings.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C, Manning, SW, Galimberti, M. 2004b. Dating the volcanic eruption at Thera. Radiocarbon, these proceedings.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C, van der Plicht, J, Weninger, B. 2001. “Wiggle-matching” radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 43(2A):381–9.Google Scholar
Christen, JA, Litton, CD. 1995. A Bayesian approach to wiggle-matching. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:719–25.Google Scholar
Clarke, RM, Morgan, RA. 1983. An alternative statistical approach to the calibration of floating tree-ring chronologies: two sequences from the Somerset levels. Archaeometry 25:3–15.Google Scholar
Clarke, RM, Renfrew, C. 1972. A statistical approach to the calibration of floating tree-ring chronologies using radiocarbon dates. Archaeometry 14:5–19.Google Scholar
Clarke, A, Fulford, M. 2002. The excavation of Insula IX, Silchester: the first five years of the “Town Life” project, 1997–2001. Britannia 33:129–66.Google Scholar
Dee, M, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2000. Refinement of graphite target production at ORAU. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 172:449–53.Google Scholar
Ferguson, CW, Huber, B, Suess, HE. 1966. Determination of the age of Swiss lake dwellings as an example of dendrochronologically-calibrated radiocarbon dating. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung 21A:1173–7.Google Scholar
Friedrich, M, Kromer, B, Kaiser, KF, Spurk, M, Hughen, KA, Johnsen, SJ. 2001. High-resolution climate signals in the Bølling-Allerød Interstadial (Greenland Interstadial 1 as reflected in European tree-ring chronologies compared to marine varves and ice-core records). Quaternary Science Reviews 20:1223–32.Google Scholar
Guo, Z, Liu, K, Lu, K, Ma, H, Li, K, Yuan, S, Wu, X. 2000. The use of radiocarbon dating AMS for Xia-Shang-Zhou chronology. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 172:724–31.Google Scholar
Hajdas, I, Bonani, G, Seifert, M. Forthcoming. Radiocarbon and calendar chronology of Ulandryk 4 and Pazyryk 2 tombs. In: 14C and Archaeology: Proceedings of the 4th Symposium. Oxford: Oxford University School of Archaeology Monographs.Google Scholar
Hammer, CU, Kurat, G, Hoppe, P, Grum, W, Clausen, HB. 2003. Thera eruption date 1645 BC confirmed by new ice core data? In: Bietak, M, editor. The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millenium BC II. Proceedings of the SCIEM 2000–Euroconference, Haindorf, 2001, Vienna. p 87–94.Google Scholar
Hedges, REM, Law, IA, Bronk, CR, Housley, RA. 1989. The Oxford accelerator mass spectrometry facility: technical developments in routine dating. Archaeometry 31:99–113.Google Scholar
Imamura, M, Sakamotu, M, Shiraishi, T, Sahara, M, Nakamura, T, Mitsutani, T, van der Plicht, J. 1998. Radiocarbon age calibration for Japanese wood samples: wiggle-matching analysis for a test specimen. In: Evin, J, Oberlin, C, Daugas, J-P, editors. 1999. 14C and Archaeology, 3rd International Symposium. Rennes: Université de Rennes. p 79–82.Google Scholar
Kilian, MR, van Geel, B, van der Plicht, J. 2000. 14C AMS wiggle-matching of raised bog deposits and models of peat accumulation. Quaternary Science Reviews 19:1011–33.Google Scholar
Kromer, B, Manning, SW, Kuniholm, PI, Newton, MW, Spurk, M, Levin, I. 2001. Regional 14CO2 offsets in the troposphere: magnitude, mechanism, and consequences. Science 294:2529–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowe, JJ, Hoek, WZ, INTIMATE group. 2001. Interregional correlation of palaeoclimatic records for the Last Glacial-Interglacial transition: a protocol for improved precision recommended by the INTIMATE project group. Quaternary Science Reviews 20:175–87.Google Scholar
Manning, WS. 1999. A Test of Time. The Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and History of the Aegean and East Mediterranean in the Mid-Second Millennium BC. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
Manning, SW, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2003. A Late Minoan I–II absolute chronology for the Aegean—combining archaeology with radiocarbon. In: Bietak, M, editor. The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium BC II. Proceedings of the SCIEM 2000–EuroConference, Haindorf, 2001, Vienna. p 111–33.Google Scholar
Manning, WS, Bronk Ramsey, C, Doumas, C, Marketou, T, Cadogan, G, Pearson, CL. 2002. New evidence for an early date for the Aegean Late Bronze Age and Thera eruption. Antiquity 76:733–44.Google Scholar
Manning, WS, Kromer, B, Kuniholm, PI, Newton, MW. 2001. Anatolian tree-rings and a new chronology for the East Mediterranean Bronze-Iron Ages. Science 294:2532–5.Google Scholar
Pearson, GW. 1986. Precise calendrical dating of known growth-period samples using a ‘curve fitting’ technique. Radiocarbon 28(2A):292–9.Google Scholar
Slusarenko, IY, Christen, JA, Orlova, LA, Kuzmin, YV, Burr, GS. 2001. 14C wiggle-matching of the “floating” tree-ring chronology from the Altai Mountains, southern Siberia: the Ulandryk-4 case study. Radiocarbon 43(2A):425–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slusarenko, IY, Kuzmin, YV, Christen, JA Burr, GS, Jull, AJT, Orlova, LA. Forthcoming. 14C wiggle-matching of the Ulandryk 4 (Early Iron Age, Pazyryk Cultural Complex) floating tree-ring chronology, Altai Mountains, Siberia. 14C and Archaeology: Proceedings of the 4th Symposium. Oxford: Oxford University School of Archaeology Monographs.Google Scholar
van de Plassche, O, Edwards, RJ, van der Borg, K, de Jong, AFM. 2001. 14C wiggle-match dating in high-resolution sea-level research. Radiocarbon 43(2A):391–402.Google Scholar
van der Plicht, J, Jansma, E, Kars, H. 1995. The “Amsterdam Castle”: a case study of wiggle matching and the proper calibration curve. Radiocarbon 37(3):965–8.Google Scholar
Vasiliev, SS, Bokovenko, NA, Chugunov, KA, Dergachev, VA, Sementsov, AA, Sljusarenko, JU, Zaitseva, GI. 2001. Tree ring, “wiggle-matching” and statistics in the chronological studies of Scythian Age sites in Asia. Geochronometria 20:61–8.Google Scholar
Warren, P. 1984. Absolute dating of the Bronze Age eruption of Thera (Santorini). Nature 308:492–3.Google Scholar
Warren, P. 1987. Absolute dating of the Aegean Late Bronze Age. Archaeometry 29:205–11.Google Scholar
Warren, PM. 1988. The Thera eruption: continuing discussion of the dating. III—Further arguments against an early date. Archaeometry 30(1):176–9.Google Scholar
Warren, P. 1996. The Aegean and the limits of radiocarbon dating. Acta Archaeologica 67:283–90.Google Scholar
Wille, M, Hooghiemstra, H, van Geel, B, Behling, H, de Jong, A, van der Borg, K. 2003. Submillennium-scale migrations of the rainforest savanna boundary in Colombia: 14C wiggle-matching and pollen analysis of core Las Margaritas. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 193:201–23.Google Scholar