Should dates trump context? Evaluation of the Cave 7 skeletal assemblage radiocarbon dates
Should dates trump context? Evaluation of the Cave 7 skeletal assemblage radiocarbon dates
复制标题
日期应该胜过上下文吗？
DOI：
10.1016/j.jas.2013.01.034
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Hurst, Winston B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Geib, Phil R.;Hurst, Winston B.
自19世纪90年代以来，对北美西南部犹他州东南部第7洞穴中约90人的史前骨骼组合，人们普遍认为是“大屠杀”。科尔特兰和其他人(《考古科学杂志》39,2220-2230)否认了这一说法，他们基于从埋葬的个人身上提取的纯化骨胶原上分散的一套AMS放射性碳日期。由于显示死前损伤的骨骼的日期分散在大约400个放射性碳年，科尔特兰等人说。主张几个世纪以来多次埋葬暴力受害者和相关亲属。显然，在第7洞穴中埋葬事件的时间位置显然不能独立于放射性碳分析而知道，但这种分析不应该优先于关于哪些人被一起埋葬的背景信息，除非得到独立的测年实验室的验证。只有忽略了1893年田野记录中有关埋葬环境的重要信息，才能确定科尔特兰等人的日期。被认为是死亡时间的准确估计。我们重新确定了7号洞穴中11个个体的残留胶原蛋白的年代，因为与之前的一些结果有显著的背景异常。新的分析结合背景证据表明，科林等人的一些S年代要么太老，要么太年轻；日期既不够准确(对样本年龄的真实估计)，也不够精确(小的可信区间)，不足以驳斥一次单一事件的大屠杀，也不足以证实第七窟的多起安葬事件。然而，满足这些标准的日期至少披露了两次安葬事件，一次是以成年男性为主的大年龄段，许多人表现出死前的损害(一次大屠杀)，另一次是由一名带着三个孩子的成年女性组成的小年龄段。少数成年女性和儿童的第三次安葬事件可能主要基于上下文，因为本案中的日期分布与大屠杀受害者的日期分布有很大重叠；上下文也暗示了其他安葬事件。除了年表外，我们还澄清了在现场埋葬的制篮工个人的数量和围产期暴力的发生率。对于大约58个人来说，单事件大规模杀戮仍然是最有可能的解释，其中大部分是成年男性(至少35人)，但也有成年女性和儿童。这件事发生在卡尔之间。公元20-80年代，由于其规模之大，无疑在当时产生了重大的社会影响，在整个西南部早期的农业社区中产生了反响。
“Massacre” was the accepted interpretation for a prehistoric skeletal assemblage of around 90 individuals from Cave 7 in the SE Utah of the North American Southwest since the 1890s. Coltrain and others (Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 2220–2230) rejected this account based on a dispersed suite of AMS radiocarbon dates on purified bone collagen from the interred individuals. Since dates from skeletons exhibiting perimortem damage were scattered across some 400 radiocarbon years, Coltrain et al. argued for multiple interments of victims of violence and related kin spread across several centuries. The temporal placement of interment events in Cave 7 clearly cannot be known independent of radiocarbon assays but such assays should not be privileged above contextual information about which individuals were interred together unless verified by an independent dating laboratory. Only by ignoring important information about burial context in the 1893 field record can the dates of Coltrain et al. be accepted as accurate estimates of time of death. We redated residual collagen from 11 of the Cave 7 individuals because of significant contextual anomalies with some of the prior results. The new assays combined with contextual evidence demonstrate that some of Coltrain et al.’s dates are either too old or too young; the dates are neither sufficiently accurate (true estimates of sample age) nor sufficiently precise (small confidence intervals) to refute a single-event massacre or to confirm multiple interment events in Cave 7. Nonetheless, dates that meet these criteria disclose at least two interment events, a large one of mostly adult males, many exhibiting perimortem damage (a massacre assemblage), and a small one consisting of an adult female with three children. A third interment event of a few adult females and child is possible based primarily on context since the date distribution in this case overlaps substantially with that of the massacre victims; context also hints at other interment events. Aside from chronology we clarify the number of Basketmaker individuals interred at the site and the incidence of perimortem violence. A single-event mass killing continues to be the most likely interpretation for around 58 individuals, mostly adult males (at least 35) but also adult females and children. This incident occurred between cal. AD 20–80 and doubtless had a significant social impact at the time because of its scale, reverberating throughout the early farming communities of the Southwest.
登录
查看更多内容
大平原上的史前战争：克罗溪大屠杀受害者的骨骼分析
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
P. Willey
通讯作者：
P. Willey
原住民、原住民暴力：北美大平原的预接触战争
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
D. Bamforth
通讯作者：
D. Bamforth
对《编篮人 II》第 7 号洞穴的重新评估：屠杀现场或墓地背景
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
J. Coltrain;J. Janetski;Michael D. Lewis
通讯作者：
Michael D. Lewis
比较和结合放射性碳年龄测定的程序：批评
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1978
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
G. K. Ward;Susan R. Wilson
通讯作者：
Susan R. Wilson
克罗溪大屠杀的骨学和考古学
影响因子：
--
作者：
P. Willey;T. Emerson
通讯作者：
T. Emerson