Radiocarbon Dates from the Oxford Ams System: Archaeometry Datelist 31

Abstract

This thirty-first list of AMS determinations measured at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU) is predominantly made up of those measured since the start of 1996. However, it also includes some determinations measured earlier which have not been published in previous lists. The dates presented here include those measured through the NERC-funded Oxford Radiocarbon Dating Service (ORADS), those funded by English Heritage and Historic Scotland, and those submitted to the laboratory on a commercial basis. All dates have been measured using the procedures outlined in Law and Hedges (1989), Hedges et al. (1989; 1992) and Bronk Ramsey et al. (Arch. List 30). AMS determinations with OxA numbers greater than 6293 were measured either as graphite (if sufficiently large) or as CO2 (Bronk Ramsey and Hedges 1997). In accordance with international radiocarbon convention all dates are expressed in radiocarbon years before AD 1950 (years BP) using the half-life of 5568 years. Errors are quoted as one standard deviation (1 σ) and are based on an assessment of all the contributions to the error in the laboratory isotope ratio measurement. Natural fractionation of carbon isotopes is accounted for by measuring the δ13C values relative to PDB (with errors of approximately 0.3‰). All combining procedures and significance tests are based on Ward and Wilson (1978). Comments composed by the Laboratory on the basis of information supplied by submitters are given without attribution. All calendrical dates quoted, unless stated otherwise, have been calibrated using the OxCal computer program (Bronk Ramsey 1995; 1998a; 1998b; 2001) using atmospheric data from ‘INTCAL98’ (Stuiver and van der Plicht 1998), and are quoted to 95.4% probability. Previous Archaeometry datelists are referred to in the form: Arch. List 30. Details of methods used are described fully in our in-house documentation. This is regularly updated and archived, so the exact method used for any sample is always fully recorded. Over the 7–8 years the measurements in this list cover, much work has been done to ensure the reliability and reproducibility of measurements made at the laboratory. To a large extent this is to do with good laboratory practice and standardisation of all aspects of the dating process, from calibration of equipment to full traceability of key components and reagents used during the dating process. These aspects of ‘Quality Management’ are often best assessed by those outside the laboratory and, to this end, the lab was accredited to the ISO-9002 standard by the BSI in January of 2000. On a more scientific level, one important test of a radiocarbon dating laboratory is its ability to determine the correct radiocarbon concentration in material whose true age is known. This means the regular measurement of international standards, known-age material and background material (very old material of different types used to estimate sample treatment blanks) and participation in International Radiocarbon Intercomparisons. Another and equally important test is the ability to reproduce measurements on real archaeological material, since this is usually in a poorer state of preservation than known-age material. Here we summarise the results relating to measurements of known-age material (generally tree rings supplied to us by the Queen's University of Belfast, with known ages taken from the INTCAL98 calibration curve) and duplicate measurements made on unknown samples. The results for about 750 measurements on known-age material shown in Table 1 show that error terms quoted on the radiocarbon determinations do reflect very well the true uncertainty. The number falling within one, two and three standard error terms (σ) is very close to the expected proportion (see cf. values in the table header). They also show that any laboratory offset relative to the calibration curve is well under ten years. Overall, the figures suggest a reliability of about 99% (since the average proportion lying within 3σ is 98.93% rather than the theoretical 99.74%). Here we define reliability to be a measure of the probability that a typical sample will give a result in accordance with the quoted error. No process is totally reliable, however, and this can be seen in the details of the data in Table 1. There was one significantly aberrant (well over 2σ) measurement in 1997 and another in 1999. However in 2000 there were nine such measurements. Three of these were due to a known batch-specific problem (the results from these batches were not released). Measurements from batches involving the remaining six (about 4% of the total number) were also rejected, but were unexplained at the time. This intermittent problem with graphitisation was eventually diagnosed and eliminated in November 2000. Having already repeated approximately 150 measurements, we estimated that a further 2–3% of the output from 2000 (20–30 determinations) could have been affected. A further set of repeated measurements on samples especially likely to have been affected identified 21 determinations liable to be in error, which have now been withdrawn (see Appendix I). We therefore estimate, from the data on known-age material, that 99% of measurements for this year should now lie within the expected distribution, as for other years (though see next section). The results for about 250 measurements made in duplicate on unknown samples are shown in Table 2. These show, as one would expect, that duplication on real archaeological samples is harder to achieve than on selected, well-preserved material. These measurements include both randomly duplicated samples (now performed on ∼5% of submitted samples) as well as requested duplicates (either by submitter or laboratory, e.g. because of technical difficulty). Such duplicated samples can be expected to contain a higher proportion of ‘problem samples’, but are a fair reflection of the actual dating process. (For example, not all samples can be said to be ‘single entities’.) Taking these data as they are, we can conclude that the reliability of the dating process, which is about 99% for well preserved standard material, is reduced to about 97% for real samples. It is likely that the distribution is not accurately Gaussian and it would be unwise to compensate for this decrease in reliability by increasing the estimated error (by, in this case, around 10%). In any case, the results vary from year to year, and indeed the latest results are now very close to the theoretical limit. Also, the number of samples rejected from this analysis has gradually fallen over the years in question, reflecting the more careful selection of sample material by submitters in collaboration with the laboratory. Quality control of the dating process is essential if radiocarbon results are to be used as the basis for assessing archaeological chronologies. The known-age and duplicate data presented here support the determinations published in this datelist. These data show that the error terms quoted on the measurements can be relied upon to provide a realistic assessment of the true uncertainty in the radiocarbon determinations. They also demonstrate that there is no significant laboratory bias relative to the radiocarbon dates used to build the radiocarbon calibration curve (INTCAL98) and so the measurements published here should be directly comparable to those produced in other laboratories with similar quality control. Obviously much work lies behind the dates published in this list. We must first thank the submitters for their care in sample selection, collaboration during the dating process and for providing comments on the dates for this publication. We would also like to acknowledge all the hard work of past and present members of ORAU who have done so much of the work involved in the dating process and who are not in the author list for this paper: Diane Baker, Angela Bowles, John Foreman, Gillian Hanford, Greg Hodgins, Rupert Housley, Martin Humm, Phil Leach, Neil Murphy, Tamsin O'Connell, Vanessa Pashley, Paul Pettitt, Angie Stokes, Christine Tompkins and G.-J. van Klinken. We also acknowledge that little of this work would ever have been attempted without the generous funding of NERC Scientific Services, English Heritage and Historic Scotland. Fragment of a human right clavicle (catalogue number GS 267), identified by Andrew Chamberlain in 1994 at the British Geological Survey, Keyworth. This previously unidentified bone was among a collection of faunal remains retrieved in 1822 from the third bone cave at Oreston Breakwater Quarry, Plymouth, Devon (NGR SX 502538), submitted by A. T. Chamberlain, Dept. Archaeol. & Prehistory, Univ. Sheffield, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (A. T. C): fauna from the cave include a mixture of Pleistocene and Holocene species (Whidbey and Clift 1823; Chamberlain and Ray 1994). The Early Mesolithic date for GS 267 is similar to direct dates on human remains from other coastal caves in southern Britain including Kent's Cavern, Devon (OxA-1786: 8070 ± 90 BP), Worm's Head Cave, Gower (OxA-4024: 8800 ± 80 BP) and Ogof-yr-Ychen, Caldey Island (OxA-7690: 8290 ± 55 BP; OxA-7691: 8210 ± 55BP; OxA-7741: 8415 ± 65 BP). However the specimen from Oreston Breakwater Quarry may have been treated with Isinglass (a collagen-based preservative) and this radiocarbon determination must therefore be regarded as a minimum estimate of the age of the specimen, as the possible inclusion of modern collagen would bias the determination towards a younger date. Sample from skull from the site of Skirethorns (NGR SD 965645), North Yorks, submitted by S. Kirrane, District Museums Officer, Craven Museum, Skipton, N. Yorks. Comment (S. K.): this skull came to us as a result of superficial survey work at the Skirethorns site undertaken by the Department of Archaeological Sciences at Bradford University in 1994. The site forms part of an interesting plateau which has provided finds from the Mesolithic to the Medieval period. On this particular site there is evidence of what appears to be a Viking farmstead, and also of Iron Age round huts. The skull was retrieved from a deep crevice in the limestone, at the rear of one of the huts. Its date confirms Iron Age occupation. The fact that it was discovered without any other human bones has raised interesting questions about ritual Celtic ‘head cults’, however opinions are divided on this point. The fact that the skull was dated to this period added to its interest and it became the focal point for a major exhibition here at the Craven Museum (1997). This contrasted the archaeological interpretation of the site and the skull, with that of a local artist. This exhibition stimulated a great deal of interest and in this small, local way has contributed to public understanding and support for archaeology. Sample of bone from Taywood Homes, Fulbourn (NGR TL 552257), Cambridgeshire, submitted by C. Duhig, 109 Sturton Street, Cambridge, CB1 2QG. Comment (C. D.): this sample was submitted for the Cambridgeshire Constabulary, being a skeleton of suspiciously-modern appearance, found in a context which had no evidence of antiquity and in a location which might suggest that the bones were of forensic interest. They were extremely pleased to have the antiquity of the remains demonstrated. A sample of bone from Shavards Farm, Meonstoke, Hampshire (NGR 61651065), submitted by N. Stoodley, 207 Farley Lane, Braishfield, Romsey, Hampshire, SO51 0QL. Comment (N. S.): during work on the early Anglo-Saxon cemetery and settlement at Shavards Farm in 1998 and 1999 it was discovered that excavations on the site in the 1980s by Mike Hughes had recovered a crouched inhumation burial. It was suspected that the burial took place in the Bronze Age and a sample of bone was sent for dating in order to confirm this. However, the Middle Iron Age result was not expected and is further evidence, along with an enclosure, for activity at this time. Samples of bone from Southampton High Street (NGR SU 41991108), Hampshire. Submitted by A. D. Russell, Archaeology Unit, Heritage Services, Civic Centre, Southampton. Comment (A. D. R.): OxA-5941 and −5942 were from human remains found within the medieval town of Southampton at the lower end of the High Street. OxA-5941 was from remains found in C. Platt's excavation of 1966. Three partial skeletons were found, one cut by the construction of a twelfth to thirteenth century stone house, but they had no independent dating evidence. Further work on the adjacent site in the 1990s produced a human molar from a late Saxon deposit. This raised the possibility that an earlier cemetery had occupied the site before the late Saxon town was founded c. 950 AD. The two dates would appear to provide proof of this, and raise interesting questions about the sites relationship with Hamwic (AD 650–850), situated less than I km to the northeast. The settlement that the cemetery served has yet to be located. Sample of bone from St. Mary's Churchyard (NGR SU 42651159), Southampton, submitted by A. D. Russell, Archaeology Unit, Heritage Services, Civic Centre, Southampton. Comment (A. D. R.): OxA-7187 was obtained from bones of a human foot encountered during repairs to the nineteenth century churchyard wall of St Mary's Church, St Mary Street, Southampton. Although long considered to be the mother church of middle Saxon Hamwic (AD 650–850) there is little real evidence to back up this assumption. This new date fits well with dates from two skeletons found under the nearby pavement a few years ago (OxA-5447 and −5448). These all go to show that bodies were being buried some distance from the church by the ninth century. Sample of bone fromYsgol Twm O'r Nant, Denbigh, (NGR SJ 05956662) Wales, submitted via the Univ. Bradford, Dept. Archaeol. Sci., by C. Roberts, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Durham, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (C. R.): the site was dated archaeologically to pre-Columbus and therefore, with a skeleton with bone changes suggestive of venereal syphilis, we wanted to see whether it was actually pre-Columbian in date. It seems that the dates provided indicate that it may be but may not be. Of course, dates such as these are important for the discussions of the evolution and development of syphilis in the Old and New Worlds. A sample of bone from Hyde Abbey, Winchester, England (NGR SU 48323013), submitted by H. Rees, Historic Resource Centre, 75 Hyde Street, Winchester, SO23 7DW. Comment (H. R.): although it was a possibility that the date would be before the Norman Conquest, we were not surprised that it was later, as the disarticulated fragment could have been redeposited from any time in the late Saxon or medieval periods. It was quite surprising, however, that the calibrated ranges were in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (1520–1570, 5.4%; 1630–1690, 41.1%; 1730–1810, 40.1%; 1920–1950, 8.8%), as the site should have ceased to be used for human burial at the Dissolution in 1538. The date range AD 1520–1570 therefore fits the archaeological and documentary evidence best. Three samples of human bone and a fourth of olive wood from Cerro Virtud de las Herrerias, Cuevas de Almanzora, Almeria (37:17N 47:00W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): three samples of human bone and a fourth of olive wood charcoal (with some bark attached) were taken from a Middle Neolithic collective burial in a pit, excavated in 1994: OxA-6713 dates a female aged 35–50 years, OxA-6714 an adult 35–45 years and OxA-6580 a juvenile, probably male, aged 14–15 years. The dates form an internally consistent series, dating to the early-mid fifth millenniumcal BC. Taken overall, the samples for Cerro Virtud provide the first reliably contextualised absolute dates for the Neolithic in lowland south-east Spain, extending its duration to a possible fifteen hundred years. Cerro Virtud is the first example of non-megalithic, Neolithic collective burial to be excavated in this region, although there are parallels in other parts of southern Spain (Montero Ruíz et al. 1999). The site has also yielded evidence for copper metallurgy at a similarly early date (Ruíz Taboada and Montero Ruíz 1999). Sample of bone from Gatas, Turre, Almeria (37:07N 01:53W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): the sample dates the ribs of a juvenile, probably male, aged 14–16 years, and buried in a sealed stone cist, tomb 39, in a stratified context in the Bronze Age settlement of Gatas. According to the stratigraphy and to multiply-dated samples from other burials at Gatas (see Arch. Lists 15, 17 and 19; Castro et al. 1995), tomb 39 dates to phase 4 of the site's occupation, c. 1750–1500 cal BC. Dating was intended to confirm this and to show the late use of stone cists as burial containers. OxA-7764 predates the expected period of time for tomb 39. In the absence of laboratory error, this suggests that either there is a stratigraphic problem, or that the death of the juvenile pre-dated the construction and use of the stone cist. Samples of bone from Calle de los Tintes, Lorca, Murcia (37:40N 01:41W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): the samples date a double burial, Calle de Los Tintes 2, in a pit in a stratified context in the Argaric Bronze Age occupation of the settlement of Lorca: a primary female, aged 35–40 years was interred on the left side and associated with a copper awl, and then succeeded by an adult male, aged 35–45 years, with the same placing and orientation. The pit was then filled with stones and earth and sealed. There are no signs of later intrusions or disturbance. Dating of both burials was intended to confirm the sequence of interment and the timespan between the burials. The dates suggest the interments possibly took place within 100 years of each other, with the female (OxA-7768) pre-dating the male (OxA-7767). As in other examples of such Argaric double burials in south-east Spain (Lull 2000), these dates suggest the practice of burying individuals related by kinship, but at least two or more generations apart from each other. Samples of bone from Madres Mercedarias 11, Lorca, Murcia (37:40N 01:41W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): the samples date a double burial in a cist in a stratified context in the Argaric Bronze Age occupation of Lorca: a primary female, aged 30–35 years, associated with a copper awl was succeeded by a male of the same age and then the stone cist was sealed with no evidence of later disturbance or intrusion. Dating of both burials was intended to confirm the sequence of interment and the timespan between burials. Like Calle de Los Tintes 2 (see above), the dates confirm the order of interment (OxA-7672 is the female and OxA-7671 is the male) and the practice of making double burials out of different generations. Cova d'es Carritx, Menorca, Balearic Islands (39:58N 07:38W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): these two dates are in full agreement with previous dates and confirm the interpretation of the ritual practices carried out in the main funerary chamber (Sala 1) between c. 1450/1400 and 800 cal BC (see Lull et al. 1999). OxA-10309 dates one of the first inhumations in the chamber, which has surprisingly been preserved as a semi-articulated skeleton in a context of successive burial and complex bone rearrangement rituals. On the other hand, OxA-10308 dates a specific burial event in the long-standing sequence of collective funerary use of the chamber. Samples from Cova Des Carritx, Menorca (39:58N 07:38W), Spain, submitted by R. W. Chapman, Dept. Archaeol., Univ. Reading, through the NERC-funded ORADS facility. Comment (R. W. C): the Cova d'es Carritx is an intact burial cave located in a deep gorge in the southwest of Menorca. It was discovered by potholers in 1995 and excavated in 1995–97 (Lull et al. 1999). Two chambers immediately inside the entrance contained disarticulated burials, while placed deposits of artefacts and human bones were found throughout the 120 m long system of chambers and passages. An inner chamber contained a sealed pit with a hoard of organic and inorganic artefacts, including wood and horn tubes filled with cut human hair. An AMS dating programme was undertaken to establish the range for deposition of bone and artefacts in different areas of the cave system. OxA-6416, −7235 and −8263 are samples of hair from the hoard, while the rest of the samples date human bone in chamber 1. Taken together, the dates show that the cave was used as an ossuary from c. 1500–800 cal BC. The latest date for bone deposition (OxA-7820) is from a sample deposited on top of the dry-stone wall blocking the entrance to the cave system. Human bone samples from twenty-six caves located in the Meuse Basin in the province of Namur, submitted by R. Orban, C. Polet and I. Jadin, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, and N. Cauwe, Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels, Belgium. Analyses were undertaken with the financial support of the ‘Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique’. The radiocarbon determinations presented here are divided into three chronological groups. Late Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic Comment (N. C., R. O. and C. P.): several sites in Belgium are known to contain Early Mesolithic human bones. Most of them are collective tombs, ie. graves used over a long period of time and to which the dead were successively brought. The date of the Tomb 2 of the Autours rock-shelter (OxA-5838) confirms the emergence of this kind of funeral practice at the beginning of the Holocene period. Today, the corpus of Mesolithic collective tombs includes at least ten examples, located in Belgium and the southern part of England (Cauwe 1998; in press). But, in southern Belgium, with the exception of the Autours rock-shelter and the Margaux Cave, the only other discoveries known are from ancient or non-scientific excavations which give less explanation about the exact conditions of the discovery. Nevertheless, these deposits testify that collective burials in natural caves were frequent during the ninth and eighth millennia BP in north-west Europe. Once more the dates of human bones from the Chaleux Cave (OxA-5679) or the Magrite Cave (OxA-5841) indicate the importance of this phenomenon. We suspect a Late Upper Palaeolithic origin for these funeral practices and this impression first received confirmation with the Late Upper Palaeolithic date of the human bones from the Waulsort X Cave (OxA-6856). Finally, the western Mesolithic is characterised by a great variation in funeral practices. The individual grave of the Autours rock-shelter (OxA-4917) supports this hypothesis. The Middle Neolithic Comment (N. C., R. O. and C. P.): these dates on human bones from several Belgian caves clearly show that the Michelsberg culture also had recourse to the same collective tomb as in the megalithic civilizations. The Autours rock-shelter (OxA-5837) is a good example (Cauwe 1994). The samples used for the eight other dates come from old exavations, but establish the importance of a phenomenon until now only suspected (Toussaint and Becker 1992). Note that OxA-5314 is clearly anomalous and coincides with the time of the excavation at the end of the nineteenth century. Whatever the quality of these collections, it is clear now that the collective burial is not exclusive to the megalith builders and plays a large part in the Middle Neolithic of Western Europe. Indeed the same tradition occurred at the beginning of the Middle Neolithic in southern France and Catalonia beyond the megalithic world (Cauwe 1999). The Late Neolithic Comment (N. C., R. O. and C. P.): the dates presented here concern collective burials and belong to the Late Neolithic, and contain no surprises. They can be added to about thirty dates already known for southern Belgium (Toussaint 1992). From the nineteenth century, about 200 collective graves have been discovered in the Meuse basin and some of them contained burial goods from the Seine-Oise-Marne Culture (De Laet 1982). The majority of the collective burials so far dated belong to the first half of the third millennium BC and take their place in a large tradition including the passage graves of the Parisian basin and those from the Hesse in western Germany (Masset 1997). Detailed comments on the date from Spy can be found in Semal et al. (1996). These samples of human bone originate from presumed prehistoric collective burials discovered in the cave Trou Madame, Bouvignes-sur-Meuse, province of Namur, (40:16N 4:53E), and Goyet Cave on the bank of the River Samson near Namèche, Mozet, province of Namur (50:27N 4:59E), Belgium. They were excavated by E. Dupont in the 1860s and submitted by Rosine Orban, Caroline Polet and Anne Hauzeur, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, Belgium. Comment (R. O., C. P. and A. H): OxA-6118 and −5678 reveal that the skeletons belong to the Roman period. This is, at first sight, surprising because most of the burials found in the caves of the Meuse basin are dated to the Neolithic. However, a recent re-examination of the pottery collected during the excavations of Trou Madame has been performed by A. Hauzeur and A. Cahen-Delhaye, Royal Museums of Art and History. It shows that eight potsherds belong to the Bronze and the Iron Age, and another one (dolium) to the second half of the first century AD. Further, the site of Goyet has been attributed to the Upper Palaeolithic on the basis of the industry (Otte 1984) and the fauna (Germonpré 1996). But Tihon (1895–6) points out the presence of Roman pottery which gives support to the dates obtained here and to the possible occurrence of cave inhumations in Belgium during the Roman period. Samples of human bone from Stavelot, Belgium (50:23N 5:5E), submitted by M. Otte, Préhistoire, Univ. Liège, Belgium. Comment (M. O.): The position of the burial suggested an attribution to the Abbot Wibald, and the results confirm this attribution. Samples of bone from the site of Irlich, Neuwied (50:26N 07:28E), Germany, submitted by Dr. M. Baales, Romisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Forschungsbereich Altsteinzeit, Schloss Monrepos, 56567 Neuwied 13, Germany. Comments by M. Baales and A. von Berg, Archaologische Denkmalpflege, Koblenz. Comment (A. v. B. and M. B.): in 1998 A. von Berg found in the Kreismuseum Neuwied a cardboard box filled with sand, two flint (silex) artefacts, a bone point fragment, an animal tooth pendant, as well as human bones and teeth. The last can be attributed to at least three individuals: an adult with red coloured bones (among them a complete femur) and teeth, juvenile (neonate) also with red coloured bones and teeth, and an adult with light brown bone fragments, among them part of a skull cap. These finds were uncovered on a heap of sand transported to the village of Heddesdorf (town of Neuwied) and found there together with red coloured sand. It is believed that these finds were originally dug out during sand mining in 1957 near the modern Neuwied suburb of Irlich, not far from where the Wied flows into the Rhine. Samples from the bone point and a red-coloured bone fragment believed to belong to the second individual were sent for dating to the Utrecht AMS-laboratory. The bone fragment gave a date of 12 110 ± 90 BP (UtC-9221), δ13C = −23.9‰ while the bone point did not contain enough collagen to date. This first age is now confirmed by the ORAU results, dating the adult femora (OxA-9847) and a rip fragment of the juvenile (OxA-9848). While the sample of the brownish skull cap gave a very young date (OxA-9876), a light brown rip fragment (probably belonging to an adult individual) is again of Late Glacial age (OxA-9736), giving the oldest date for all samples. The new ORAU dates suggest that at least three Late Glacial human individuals were found at Irlich These are believed to represent burials of the period between the Gönnersdorf/Andernach Magdalenian and the Allerød Federmessergruppen so far not represented by radiometric dated sites in the Neuwied Basin. Samples in this series were submitted by M. Street, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, and T. Terberger, University Greifswald, in cooperation with R. E. M. Hedges, T. F. G. Higham and P. B. Pettitt (ORAU). Samples of human bone from eight German contexts of proposed late Pleistocene age submitted to ORAU include remains from archaeological contexts (the burial at the Mittlere Klause in Bavaria and human remains from the Urdhöhle in Thuringia) which have been assigned to the Magdalenian, and skeletal material from possibly Late Glacial contexts in the Central Rhineland (Weißenthurm and Niedermendig). An important aspect of the dating program are human remains recovered from river gravels without an accompanying cultural assemblage, but attributed to the late Pleistocene. A number of them (e.g. Hahnöfersand, Paderborn-Sande) are assigned to the earlier phases of the German Upper Palaeolithic and have contributed to the discussion of the origins and development of anatomically modern humans. In view of the potential importance of this material, it appeared worthwhile to determine the reliability of older results of dating (e.g. Churchill and Smith 2000, 88, 100). The Hahnöfersand calvarium fragment was discovered in March 1973 together with a number of faunal remains lying on the south bank of the River Elbe near Hamburg (53:33N 9:43