On the chronology of the Uluzzian

Douka, Katerina; Higham, Thomas; Wood, Rachel; Boscato, Paolo; Gambassini, Paolo; Karkanas, Panagiotis; Peresani, Marco; Ronchitelli, Anna María

doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.12.007

Cited by 111 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given this, how can one reliably establish a chronological relationship between the ornamental shell and the human remains they are supposed to date by association (Zilhão 2013)? The interpretation that arose from this research redefined the entire Uluzzian as a product of modern humans, not Neanderthals, and by so doing back dated the arrival of Homo sapiens in Italy (Douka et al 2014;Moroni et al 2012). (2003) (2012) found support for this early age on the basis of Bayesian modelling of 23 new AMS radiocarbon measurements.…”

Section: Site Formation: Samples Must Derive From Reliable Stratigrapmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The cave's deposits derived from high energy sedimentation, were subsequently disturbed, poorly excavated, and sparsely recorded (White and Pettitt 2012). We note that Kent's Cavern is omitted from discussion of potential contemporaneity between Neanderthals and modern humans in Higham et al 2014. The lesson is that unless one has humanly-modified materials available for dating, some early excavations should be left well alone.…”

Section: Sample Selection: Dated Samples Must Reflect Human Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Problematizing Bayesian approaches to prehistoric chronologies

Pettitt

Zilhão

2015

World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. as human dispersals and extinctions, the spread of agriculture and culture change, the method can offer a powerful means to improve considerably the precision of prehistorians' investigation of some of the most major questions in human prehistory. As such its potential is profound -it has even been regarded as the third radiocarbon revolution -but its appropriateness is dependent on the assumptions that must be made of the samples selected for dating. How sound are these assumptions, and therefore how reliable are Bayesian analyses? Here, we introduce some aspects and assumptions that underline Bayesian modelling of radiocarbon measurements, and we problematise their application in Palaeolithic archaeology. We conclude that many existing models are faulty, and suggest some criteria for quality control in this field.

show abstract

Section: Site Formation: Samples Must Derive From Reliable Stratigrapmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Sample Selection: Dated Samples Must Reflect Human Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Problematizing Bayesian approaches to prehistoric chronologies

Pettitt

Zilhão

2015

World Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Radiocarbon ( 14 C) dating is playing a crucial role is estimating the timing of the transition from the Middle Palaeolithic (MP) to the Upper Palaeolithic (UP) in Europe (e.g., Benazzi et al, 2007;Pinhasi et al, 2011;Douka et al, 2014;Higham et al, 2014;Wood et al, 2013). In doing so, it contributes towards an improved understanding of the nature of the transition, the process of Neanderthal extinction, and the peopling of Europe by early anatomically modern humans.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing of a single grain OSL chronology across the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition at Les Cottés (France)

Jacobs

Jankowski

et al. 2015

Journal of Archaeological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe timing of the Middle Palaeolithic to Upper Palaeolithic transition in France is important to help understand when, where and how Neanderthals have been replaced by Homo sapiens. Radiocarbon dating has been the dating workhorse in constructing the chronological framework pertinent to these questions. In this study, we are testing whether single grain OSL dating has the accuracy and precision to be useful as a complementary dating method. The site of Les Cott es provides an ideal testing ground because of its stratigraphic integrity and reliable radiocarbon chronology. We applied single grain OSL dating of quartz to 19 samples and multi-aliquot MET-pIRIR dating of potassium-rich feldspar grains to 5 samples to explicitly test assumptions of pre-depositional resetting of the OSL signal and postdepositional exposure to variable beta dose rates. The good agreement between the single grain OSL and the multi-aliquot MET pIRIR ages suggest that the optical signals of both quartz and feldspar grains were reset prior to deposition and that much of the extra scatter observed in the equivalent dose distribution of quartz grains are likely due to the small-scale differences in beta dose delivered to individual grains. Both the quartz OSL and feldspar MET-pIRIR ages show great consistency with the 14 C ages on bone collected from the same units. This gives confidence in the measurement and analytical approaches used to derive both the equivalent dose and dose rate, the numerator and denominator, respectively, of the luminescence age equation. These results suggest that a systematic and detailed single grain OSL dating study can have the accuracy and precision that is necessary to play a powerful role in the dating of the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic transition and other questions of importance in this time range and geographical area.

show abstract

“…Further details about the measurement procedures and instrumentation can be found in (Douka et al 2014). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pleistocene Archaeology and Chronology of Putslaagte 8 (PL8) Rockshelter, Western Cape, South Africa

Mackay

Jacobs

Steele³

2015

J African Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on excavations of a small rock shelter -Putslaagte 8 (PL8) -located on the arid interior fringe of South Africa's Fynbos biome. The shelter preserves a long sequence of Holocene and late Pleistocene occupation dating back beyond 75,000 years BP. This paper presents data on the technological, faunal and chronological sequence. Occupation is markedly pulsed and includes three late Pleistocene Later Stone Age (LSA) units (macrolithic, Robberg and early LSA), as well as several distinct Middle Stone Age (MSA) components from Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 3-5. Pulsing may reflect the arid and possibly marginal environments in which the shelter is situated, and to that end some elements of the sequence contrast with occupational patterns towards the coast. Viewed in a regional setting PL8 suggests: 1) complementarity of resource movements between the coast and interior in terminal MIS 2; 2) distinctions in material selection, and possibly technology, between the coast and interior in earlier MIS 2; 3) an MSA lasting to at least 40,000 years before present; 4) a weak Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort in the interior; 5) possibly distinct periods of denticulate manufacture within the MIS 5 MSA; 6) highly localised patterns of material acquisition in the earlier MSA.

show abstract

On the chronology of the Uluzzian

Cited by 111 publications

References 52 publications

Problematizing Bayesian approaches to prehistoric chronologies

Problematizing Bayesian approaches to prehistoric chronologies

Testing of a single grain OSL chronology across the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition at Les Cottés (France)

Pleistocene Archaeology and Chronology of Putslaagte 8 (PL8) Rockshelter, Western Cape, South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About