Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T00:18:35.313Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dendrochronology and Radiocarbon Dating Methods in Archaeological Studies of Scythian Sites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

V A Dergachev ,
S S Vasiliev ,
A A Sementsov ,
G I Zaitseva ,
K A Chugunov  and
I Ju Sljusarenko
V A Dergachev*
Affiliation:
Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute, Politekhnicheskaya ul.26, 194021 St. Petersburg, Russia
S S Vasiliev
Affiliation:
Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute, Politekhnicheskaya ul.26, 194021 St. Petersburg, Russia
A A Sementsov
Affiliation:
Institute for History of Material Culture, Dvortsovaya nar. 18, 191186 St. Petersburg, Russia
G I Zaitseva
Affiliation:
Institute for History of Material Culture, Dvortsovaya nar. 18, 191186 St. Petersburg, Russia
K A Chugunov
Affiliation:
Institute for Cultural and Natural Heritage, Petrodvorez 5, Plekhanova ul. 4, 198903 St. Petersburg, Russia
I Ju Sljusarenko
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Prospect Lavrent'eva 17, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia
*
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
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.

We propose a new method of cross-dating the wood samples based on the classical methods of spectral estimation. This method uses the average cross-spectral density as a function of the relative position of the series. Because it is not sensitive to phase shifts in data it is appropriate for cross-dating samples originating from geographically distinct areas.

The accuracy of cross dating depends on the integrity of the samples used, and in the case of well-preserved wood samples, the precision of relative age comparison may reach a single year. The method was tested on two dendrochronological series from Scythian barrows of known age in Southern Siberia: the Pazyryk barrows (the Altai Mountains) and the Dogee-Baary-2 burials (Western Sayan Mountains) separated by 450 km. The analysis has shown that the Pazyryk barrow is younger by 80 ± 4 yr than the Dogee-Baary −2 burials. This result is in agreement with the new chronology of Scythian-related sites suggested for Southern Siberia and Central Asia.

Type
II. Getting More from the Data
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 43 , Issue 2A: Proceedings of the 17th International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 3) , 2001 , pp. 417 - 424
Copyright
Copyright © The Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Baillie, MGL. 1982. Sampling strategies. In: Hughes, MK, Kelly, PM, LaMarche, VC Jr, editors. Climate from tree rings. Cambridge: University Press. p 7.Google Scholar
Baillie, MGL, Pilcher, JR. 1973. A sample crossdating program for tree-ring research. Tree-Ring Bulletin 33: 7–14.Google Scholar
Bitvinskas, TT. 1974. Dendroclimatic investigations. Leningrad: Hydrometeoizdat. In Russian.Google Scholar
Briffa, KR, Jones, PD. 1990. Basic chronology statistics and assessment. In: Cook, E, Kairiukstis, L, editors. Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental science. Dordrecht: Kluver. p 137–52.Google Scholar
Bunker, EC. 1991. The Chinese artifacts among the Pazyryk finds. Notes in the History of Art 10:20–4.Google Scholar
Bunker, EC, Juliano, A, Kawami, T, Lerner, J. 1991. Introduction. Notes in the History of Art 10:4–6.Google Scholar
Chugunov, KV. 1993. The dating of the Great Pazyryk barrows: the new cycle of old discussion. In: Kiryushin, Yu, editor. Zastchita i Issledovania Kulturnogo Nasledia Altaya. Doklady na nauchno-practicheskoy conferentsii 1. Barnaul: Altai State University. p 167–9. In Russian.Google Scholar
Deetz, J, Dethlefsen, E. 1965. The Doppler Effect and archaeology: a consideration of the spatial aspects of seriation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 21(3): 196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckstein, D, Bauch, J. 1969. Beitrag zur Rationalisierung eines dendrochronologischen Verfahrens und zur Analyse seiner Aussagesicherheit. Forstwiss. Centralbl. 88:230–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritts, HC. 1976. Tree rings and climate. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fritts, HC, Swetnam, TW. 1989. Dendroecology: a tool for evaluating variations in past and present forest environments. Advances in Ecological Research 19:110–88.Google Scholar
Görsdorf, J, Parzinger, H, Nagler, A, Leont'ev, N. 1998. Neue 14C-datierungen für die Sibirische Steppe und ihre Konsequenzen für die regionale Bronzezeitchronologie. Eurasia antiqua 4:73–80.Google Scholar
Hall, ME. 1997. Towards an absolute chronology for the Iron Age of Inner Asia. Antiquity 71:863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, B. 1935. Die Physiologiche Bedeutung der Ring und Zerstreutporingkeit. Berliner Deutches Botanisches Gesellschaft 53:711–9.Google Scholar
Kawami, TS. 1991. Greek art and finds at Pazyryk. Notes in the History of Art 10:16–9.Google Scholar
Lerner, J. 1991. Some so-called Achaemenid object from Pazyryk. Notes in the History of Art 10:8–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marple, SL Jr. 1987. Digital spectral analysis with applications. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Pearson, G, Stuiver, M. 1993. High-precision bidecadal calibration of radiocarbon time scale 500–2500 BC. Radiocarbon 35(1):25–34.Google Scholar
Pilcher, JR. 1990. Sample preparation, cross dating, and measurement. In: Cook, E, Kairiukstis, L, editors. Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental science. Dordrecht: Kluver. p 40–50.Google Scholar
Schweingruber, HF. 1988. Tree rings: basics and applications of dendrochronology. Dordrecht: Kluver.Google Scholar
Sementsov, AA, Zaitseva, GI, Görsdorf, J, Nagler, A, Parzinger, H, Bokovenko, NA, Chugunov, KV, Lebedeva, LM. 1998. Chronology of the barrow finds from Scythian monuments in Southern Siberia and Central Asia. Radiocarbon 40(2):713–20.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Pearson, G. 1993. High-precision bidecadal calibration of radiocarbon time scale AD 1950–500 BC and 2500–6000 BC. Radiocarbon 35(1):1–24.Google Scholar
Wigley, TML, Briffa, KR, Jones, PD. 1984. On the average value of correlated time series, with applications in dendroclimatology and hydrometeorology. Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology 23:201–13.Google Scholar
Zaitseva, GI, Vasiliev, SS, Marsadolov, LS, Dergachev, VA, Sementsov, AA, Lebedeva, LM. 1997. Calibration curves and chronology of key sites of Sayan-Altai. In: Jungner, H, Lavento, M, editors. Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on the Application of Scientific Methods in Archaeology: Savonlinna, Finland, 7–11 September 1996. Helsinki, Suomen muinaismuistoyhdistys. p 23–32.Google Scholar
Zaitseva, GI, Vasiliev, SS, Marsadolov, LS, van der Plicht, J, Sementsov, AA, Dergachev, VA, Lebedeva, LM. 1998. Tree-rings and 14C chronology of the key Sayan-Altai monument: statistical analysis. Radiocarbon 40(2):571–80.Google Scholar
Zakharieva, EI. 1974. Archaeological trees as the source of historical information: dendrochronology of Sayan-Altai barrows [PhD thesis]. Leningrad State University. In Russian.Google Scholar
Zamotorin, IM. 1959. Relative chronology of Pazyryk barrows. Sovetskaya arkheologia 1:21–30. In Russian.Google Scholar