Australian Archaeology Implications of Current Interdisciplinary Research

Shawcross, F. W.; Kaye, Maureen

doi:10.1179/isr.1980.5.2.112

Cited by 22 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the paper by Shawcross and Kaye (1980) was being completed in the wake of the excavations, it seemed a good idea to present some of the raw data as a basis for the readers to think about the 'living floors'. Rajaguru, inspected in 1974 all of the exposures of the underlying, ancient Golgol Unit, eroding on the East facing scarp of the centre of the lunette, for associated, stratified arte- facts and fossil fauna.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Archaeological excavations at Mungo

Shawcross¹

1998

Archaeology in Oceania

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a report on the uncompleted programme of field surveys and excavations of two large trenches, carried out by the author at Mungo between 1974 and 1980. The objective was to substantiate and develop the discoveries of 1969. Influences on the research design and methods, and a short history of ideas in Archaeology and their impact during the protracted study are given. The excavation results reveal an anomaly between the apparent stratigraphy and artefact deposits. This distribution of artefacts is tested by regression, which leads to the identification of micro topography within the Upper Mungo unit, not obvious from the stratigraphy. The reinterpretation is successfully tested by artefact conjoining. The micro topography is then shown to explain other observations on the faunal assemblage and stratigraphy. It is now possible to interpret the site as a specialised manufacturing area located on a part of the lake shore chosen for its local climatic conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Archaeological excavations at Mungo

Shawcross¹

1998

Archaeology in Oceania

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By the early 1980s, widespread application of the radiocarbon technique had pushed the minimum date to just under 40 ka [103,121]. While agreeing that this figure was the proper conservative estimate, the late Rhys Jones [77, p. 30] observed that it was "suspiciously close" to the limits of 14 C chronometry, and suggested that an earlier date might well be documented by another technique.…”

Section: Some Historymentioning

confidence: 93%

Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of recent research

O’Connell

Allen

2004

Journal of Archaeological Science

323

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A National Park and World Heritage Area is centred on Lake Mungo, reflecting the wealth of archaeology and environmental history. Large-scale archaeological excavations were carried out in the early 1970s near the south end of the Mungo lunette, penetrating more than 2 meters to sterile sands (Mulvaney 1974;Shawcross and Kaye 1980;Shawcross 1998). 14 C and TL dating results from the Willandra lakes have been recently reviewed (Bowler 1998;Bowler and Price 1998;Gillespie 1998).…”

Section: Results From Selected Archaeological Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dating the First Australians

Gillespie¹

2002

Radiocarbon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The dating of selected archaeological and megafaunal sites from the Australian region is reviewed, with emphasis on recent work at some of the oldest sites. Improved chemical procedures with decreased analytical background for 14 C analysis, combined with new luminescence dating methods, has confirmed many of the results processed decades ago and significantly increased the maximum age for some others. The oldest occupation horizons in four different regions reliably dated by defendable multi-method results are in the range 42-48,000 calendar years ago, overlapping with the age range for similarly well-dated undisturbed sites containing the youngest extinct megafauna. There is less secure evidence suggesting some archaeology may be earlier and some megafauna may have survived later than this period. INTRODUCTIONEstimates of the time since humans first occupied the extended Late Pleistocene continent Sahul (sometimes called Greater Australia or Meganesia) have steadily increased since systematic archaeological excavation and radiocarbon dating became established in the 1960s. Jones (1968) considered 30,000 BP a reasonable estimate for the earliest arrivals, based on the available evidence showing 3 or 4 sites with 14 C dates of more than 20,000 BP. In the second edition of The Prehistory of Australia (Mulvaney 1975) an appended date list documented four sites in Australia and one in New Guinea with 14 C results older than 25,000 BP. The current edition (Mulvaney and Kamminga 1999) provides an overview of the hundreds of dates now accumulated for Late Pleistocene archaeological sites in Sahul. Some of the robust debate about claims for earliest occupation of the region is presented in Murray (1998).Traditional 14 C dating using radiometric counting has become less important in Sahul, as elsewhere, since accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) laboratories began to take on large workloads from the mid 1980s. In many situations this new measurement technology also allowed better pretreatment chemistry to be applied in the isolation and decontamination of specific sample components. At about the same time newer thermoluminescence (TL), optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), electron spin resonance (ESR), amino acid racemization (AAR), and uranium-thorium series (U/Th) dating methods began to make significant contributions to archaeology and the earth sciences. These and other techniques operate under different rules and on different materials to 14 C. An "archaeological event" such as a fire may sensibly be 14 C dated using charcoal, whereas luminescence methods on quartz sand are likely to be dating an "environmental event" such as exposure to sunlight, not necessarily directly associated with the target archaeological event. However, since everyone should eventually get the same answer to questions like "when did humans first colonize Australia" or "when did the megafauna become extinct" there are some instructive examples of cross-dating with different numerical methods.Projects such as dating the first Au...

show abstract

Australian Archaeology Implications of Current Interdisciplinary Research

Cited by 22 publications

References 8 publications

Archaeological excavations at Mungo

Archaeological excavations at Mungo

Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of recent research

Dating the First Australians

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About