Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T00:38:17.157Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cation-Ratio Dating and Archaeological Research Design: Response to Harry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Douglas B. Bamforth
Douglas B. Bamforth*
Affiliation:
Anthropology Department, Campus Box 233, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0233
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Harry's recent paper in this journal critiques the use of cation-ratio dating to assess the age of surface-collected artifacts as part of a rejection of this dating technique in general. However, Harry's negative conclusions are difficult to reconcile both with the seemingly successful application of cation-ratio dating as part of the Intermountain Power Project (IPP) in California, the only other project in which surface artifacts have been cation-ratio dated, as well as with Harry's own data. The present comment details substantial differences in (1) the rigor and sophistication of the research designs applied by Harry and the IPP research and (2) the integrity of the sites on which these two projects worked, and points out important components of Harry's data that are inconsistent with her conclusions. Cation-ratio dating is certainly not yet perfected as a dating technique, but the available data indicate clearly that Harry's critique is seriously flawed.

En un reciente artícule, Harry critica el uso de la técnica de datación por radios de catión para calcular la edad de artefactos recolectados en la superficie como parte de un rechazo general de esta técnica de datación. Sin embargo, las conclusiones negativas de Harry son dificiles de reconciliar con el éxito aparente de esta técnica en el Proyecto Intermountain Power (IPP) en California—el ünico projecto que ha usado radios de cation para datar colecciones de superficie aparte de los datos de Harry. El présente comentario detalla diferencias sustanciales entre (1) el rigor y sofisticación del diseño de investigación aplicado por Harry y aquél de IPP y (2) la integridad de los sitios investigados en ambos proyectos, y señala importantes componentes de los datos de Harry que no son consistentes con sus conclusiones. Ciertamente, la técnica de radios de cation no esta perfeccionada, pero los datos obtenidos indican claramente que la critica de Harry está equivocada.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 121 - 129
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Bamforth, D. B. 1990 Settlement, Raw Material, and Lithic Procurement in the Central Mojave Desert. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9: 70–104.Google Scholar
Bamforth, D. B. 1992 Quarries in Context: A Regional Perspective on Lithic Procurement. In Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Distribution in California Prehistory, edited by Arnold, J.. Perspectives in California Archaeology Vol. 2, pp. 131–150. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Bamforth, D. B., and Dorn, R. I. 1988 On the Nature and Antiquity of the Manix Lake Industry. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 10: 209–226.Google Scholar
Bamforth, D. B., Dorn, R. I., Macko, M., and Weil, E. 1986 Tradition and Transmission: Prehistoric Stone Procurement and Tool Production in the Mojave Desert, California-Results of the Intermountain Power Project Data Recovery Program in California. Applied Conservation Technology, Westminster, California.Google Scholar
Bierman, P., and Gillespie, A. 1991 Accuracy of Rock Varnish Chemical Analyses: Implications for Cation Ratio Dating. Geology 19: 196–199.Google Scholar
Bierman, P., and Gillespie, A. 1994 Evidence Suggesting that Methods of Rock Varnish Cation-Ratio Dating Are Neither Comparable nor Consistently Reliable. Quaternary Research 41: 82–90.Google Scholar
Cahill, T. 1992 Comment. Geology 20: 469–470.Google Scholar
Dorn, R. 1989 Cation-Ratio Dating of Rock Varnish: A Geographic Assessment. Physical Geography 13: 559–596.Google Scholar
Dorn, R. 1992 Comment. Geology 20: 470–471.Google Scholar
Dorn, R. 1995 Comment on “Evidence Suggesting that Methods of Rock Varnish Cation-Ratio Dating Are Neither Comparable nor Consistently Reliable,” by Bierman, P. R. and Gillespie, A. R.. Quaternary Research 43: 272–273.Google Scholar
Dorn, R. I., Bamforth, D. B., Cahill, T. A., Dohrenwend, J. C., 1986 Cation-Ratio and Accelerator Radiocarbon Dating of Rock Varnish on Mojave Artifacts and landforms. Science 231: 830–833.Google Scholar
Dorn, R., and Whitley, D. 1983 Cation-Ratio Dating of Petroglyphs from the Western Great Basin. Nature 302: 816–818.Google Scholar
Francis, J., Loendorf, L., and Dorn, R. 1993 AMS Radiocarbon and Cation-Ratio Dating of Rock Art in the Bighorn Basin of Wyoming and Montana. American Antiquity 58: 711–738.Google Scholar
Harrington, C, and Whitney, J. 1995 Comment on “Evidence Suggesting that Methods of Rock Varnish Cation-Ratio Dating Are Neither Comparable nor Consistently Reliable,” by Bierman, P. R. and Gillespie, A. R.. Quaternary Research 43: 268–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harry, K. 1992 Lithic Procurement and Rock Varnish Dating: Investigations at CA-KER-140, a Small Quarry in the Western Mojave Desert. Technical Series No. 36. Statistical Research, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Harry, K. 1995 Cation-Ratio Dating of Varnished Artifacts: Testing the Assumptions. American Antiquity 60: 118–130.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. 1958 The Manix Lake Archaeological Survey. The Masterkey 32: 4–10.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. 1960 Archaeological Survey of the Eastern Calico Mountains. The Masterkey 34: 25–35.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. 1964 The Archaeological Survey of Pleistocene Lake Manix (an Early Lithic Horizon). Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists 35: 5–9. Mexico City.Google Scholar
Whitley, D., and Dorn, R. 1987 Rock Art Chronology in Eastern California. World Archaeology 19: 150–164.Google Scholar