ARCS2000 Quiz: Readings Notes Weeks 6-9,11
30 Jul 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
ARCS2000 Science in Archaeology
READINGS
Notes from Readings: Weeks 6-9, 11
Week 6:
Amino acid racemization in bone and the boiling of the German Emperor Lothar I
1. Where is it? (Geographic location of site or region)
Upper Bavaria- burial 500 km north of the place of his death at his castle in
Konigslutter
2. When is it? (Generally what time period does the site/reading cover e.g. Early
Bronze Age)
5 December 1137
3. What sort of site is it? (Midden, burial, cess pit, village, city, mine etc)
Burial
4. What were the researchers wanting to find out?
To exemplify the application of the racemization reaction to anthropological bone
material (specifically, to determine the treatment of Lothar I's body between his
death and burial several weeks later.
5. What sort of artefacts/ecofacts did the researchers study? (e.g. Pottery, metal,
animal bones, residues)
Body of German Emperor Lothar I
6. What techniques did they use? (e.g. What scientific instruments did they use; what
other archaeological techniques did they employ, such as relative dating?)
Amino acid racemization
7. What limitations or cautions (if any) did they mention about their study or about
the scientific instrument they used? (Is there something you should be careful of,
such as the need to calibrate radiocarbon dates?)
Nil.
8. What was actually found or concluded by the published study?
We have used the amino acid racemization reaction to examine whether the corpse
of the German Emperor Lothar I, who died in the 12th century, was defleshed by
boiling in water before transit to his burial site. The answer is yes; Lothar was
apparently boiled for about 6 h.
Evaluating the utility of archaeological index fossils: Optically-stimulated luminescence dating of
Fort Ancient Pottery at the Hahn Site1.
1. Where is it? (Geographic location of site or region)
Hahn site of Fort Ancient- archaeological culture focused on the Middle Ohio River
Valley. Related in varying degrees to Mississippian culture and spread across much
of the eastern US in the late prehistoric era.
2. When is it? (Generally what time period does the site/reading cover e.g. Early
Bronze Age)
Late prehistoric- ca. 1300-1650 CE
ARCS2000 Science in Archaeology
READINGS
3. What sort of site is it? (Midden, burial, cess pit, village, city, mine etc)
Wall trench house
4. What were the researchers wanting to find out?
To support or question the believed age dates for Anderson and Madisonville
pottery- did they exist at the same time?
5. What sort of artefacts/ecofacts did the researchers study? (e.g. Pottery, metal,
animal bones, residues)
17 sherds of Anderson and Madisonville pottery
6. What techniques did they use? (e.g. What scientific instruments did they use; what
other archaeological techniques did they employ, such as relative dating?)
OSL dating
7. What limitations or cautions (if any) did they mention about their study or about
the scientific instrument they used? (Is there something you should be careful of,
such as the need to calibrate radiocarbon dates?)
In an attempt to minimize bias, these sherds were assigned to the two pottery styles
by co-author Robert Genheimer, long-time Fort Ancient expert, and director of
excavations at Hahn
8. What was actually found or concluded by the published study?
The general conclusion is that direct OSL dating of the Anderson and Madisonville
pottery styles supports the hypothesis based on associated dates that they are
coeval for the latter half of the Fort Ancient time period. Minimally, we can now say
that Anderson-style pottery is being made throughout the Fort Ancient sequence,
albeit in decreasing quantities, and the Madisonville-style pottery originates earlier
than expected. WERE BEING MADE AT THE SAME TIME.
Rapid evolution of ritual architecture in central Polynesia indicated by precise 230Th/U coral
dating
1. Where is it? (Geographic location of site or region)
Society Islands, Polynesia
2. When is it? (Generally what time period does the site/reading cover e.g. Early
Bronze Age)
ca. AD 1620–1760
3. What sort of site is it? (Midden, burial, cess pit, village, city, mine etc)
Temple
4. What were the researchers wanting to find out?
To investigate the development of temples on Mo‘orea Island by 230Th/U dating
corals used as architectural elements
5. What sort of artefacts/ecofacts did the researchers study? (e.g. Pottery, metal,
animal bones, residues)
Corals used for building temples (Acropora coral veneers, cut-and-dressed Porites
ARCS2000 Science in Archaeology
READINGS
coral blocks on altar platforms, = multitier stepped altar platforms and pecked basalt
stones)
6. What techniques did they use? (e.g. What scientific instruments did they use; what
other archaeological techniques did they employ, such as relative dating?)
Radiocarbon dating, 230Th/U dating
7. What limitations or cautions (if any) did they mention about their study or about
the scientific instrument they used? (Is there something you should be careful of,
such as the need to calibrate radiocarbon dates?)
Calibration of radiocarbon dates discussed.
8. What was actually found or concluded by the published study?
The dates indicate that temple architecture on Mo‘orea Island developed rapidly
over a period of approximately 140 y (ca. AD 1620–1760),with the largest coastal
temples constructed immediately before initial European contact (AD 1767). The
result of a seriation of architectural features corresponds closely with this
chronology. Acropora coral veneers were superseded by cut-and-dressed Porites
coral blocks on altar platforms, followed by development of multitier stepped altar
platforms and use of pecked basalt stones associated with the late ‘Oro cult.
Week 7:
Ancient DNA typing shows that a Bronze Age mummy is a composite of different skeletons
1. Where is it? (Geographic location of site or region)
Cladh Hallan, a settlement on South Uist in the Outer Hebrides off the west coast of
Scotland
2. When is it? (Generally what time period does the site/reading cover e.g. Early
Bronze Age)
Bronze Age
3. What sort of site is it? (Midden, burial, cess pit, village, city, mine etc)
Settlement- burial beneath foundations of three roadhouses
4. What were the researchers wanting to find out?
To determine whether the two adult skeletons were comprised of the remains of
multiple people
5. What sort of artefacts/ecofacts did the researchers study? (e.g. Pottery, metal,
animal bones, residues)
Skeletal remains of two adults, a sub-adult and a child
6. What techniques did they use? (e.g. What scientific instruments did they use; what
other archaeological techniques did they employ, such as relative dating?)
DNA extraction- Polymerase chain reaction tests
7. What limitations or cautions (if any) did they mention about their study or about
the scientific instrument they used? (Is there something you should be careful of,
such as the need to calibrate radiocarbon dates?)
