Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:06:10.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Interpretation of Tree-Ring Dates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bryant Bannister
Bryant Bannister*
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Tree-Rino Research, University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Four types of error are commonly associated with the basic problem of the time relationship that exists between the date of a tree-ring specimen and the archaeological manifestation being dated. These errors may sometimes be discovered and amended by using the clustering of dates and the clustering of archaeological traits. A secondary problem arises when lost exterior rings produce non-cutting dates in contrast to cutting dates. Tree-ring data may also be employed in deriving information of a non-chronological nature.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , April 1962 , pp. 508 - 514
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1962

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

Bannister, Bryant 1959 Tree-Ring Dating of Archaeological Sites in the Chaco Canyon Region, New Mexico. MS, doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson [published on film by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor].Google Scholar
Bannister, Bryant, and Smiley, T. L. 1955 Dendrochronology. In “Geochronology, with Special Reference to Southwestern United States,” edited by Smiley, T. L., pp. 177–95. University of Arizona Bulletin, Vol. 26, No. 2, Physical Science Bulletin No. 2. Tucson.Google Scholar
Douglass, A. E. 1929 The Secret of the Southwest Solved by Talkative Tree Rings. National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 736–70. Washington.Google Scholar
Douglass, A. E. 1939 Notes on Beam Dating by Sap-Heart Contact. Tree-Ring Bulletin, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 3–6. Tucson.Google Scholar
Giddings, J. L. Jr., 1940 The Application of Tree-Ring Dates to Arctic Sites. Tree-Ring Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 10–14. Tucson.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1934 The Canyon Creek Ruin and the Cliff Dwellings of the Sierra Ancha. Medallion Papers, No. 14. Gila Pueblo, Globe.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1935 Tree Rings — The Archaeologist's Time Piece. American Antiquity, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 98–108. Menasha.Google Scholar
Judd, N. M. 1954 The Material Culture of Pueblo Bonito. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 124. Washington.Google Scholar
Kluckhohn, Clyde, and Reiter, Paul (Editors) 1939 Preliminary Report on the 1937 Excavations, Be 50-51, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. University of New Mexico Bulletin 345, Anthropological Series, Vol. 3, No. 2. Albuquerque.Google Scholar
O'bryan, Deric 1949 Methods of Felling Trees and Tree-Ring Dating in the Southwest. American Antiquity, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 155–6. Menasha.Google Scholar
Schulman, Edmund 1956 Dendroclimatic Changes in Semiarid America. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Smiley, T. L., Stubbs, S. A., and Bannister, Bryant 1953 A Foundation for the Daring of Some Late Archaeological Sites in the Rio Grande Area, New Mexico: Based on Studies in Tree-Ring Methods and Pottery Analyses. University of Arizona Bulletin, Vol. 24, No. 3, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research Bulletin, No. 6. Tucson.Google Scholar