Abstract
AbstractWhen radiocarbon dating techniques were applied to archaeological material in the 1950s they were hailed as a revolution. At last archaeologists could construct absolute chronologies anchored in temporal data backed by immutable laws of physics. This would make it possible to mobilize archaeological data across regions and time-periods on a global scale, rendering obsolete the local and relative chronologies on which archaeologists had long relied. As profound as the impact of14C dating has been, it has had a long and tortuous history now described as proceeding through three revolutions, each of which addresses distinct challenges of capturing, processing and packaging radiogenic data for use in resolving chronological puzzles with which archaeologists has long wrestled. In practice, mobilizing radiogenic data for archaeological use is a hard-won achievement; it involves multiple transformations that, at each step of the way, depend upon a diverse array of technical expertise and background knowledge. I focus on strategies of triangulation and traceability that establish the integrity of these data and their relevance as anchors for evidential reasoning in archaeology.
Highlights
When radiocarbon dating techniques were applied to archaeological material in the 1950s they were hailed as a revolution
When radiocarbon dating was introduced in the early 1950s it was hailed as the solution to a range of chronological problems in archaeology; many expected that it would render obsolete these longstanding methods of constructing relative chronologies
As Libby described the temporal data that could be captured by this means, the crucial warrant for its use as the anchor for an absolute chronology is the stability of the process of radioactive decay, a physical process that is not affected by other properties of the sample itself or its geological, much less its cultural, context
Summary
If any data are “tragically local” (Latour 1999: 59), the fragmentary traces that make up the archaeological record would seem to fit the bill. Drawing on geological principles of superposition these assemblages were interpreted as chronological markers (Renfrew 1973: 24) To extend these sequences beyond the locales where they were established, archaeologists built fine-grained stylistic seriations that capture the orderly succession of form and design within classes of artefacts found in stratified deposits (e.g. Deetz and Dethlefsen 1967); artifacts of a similar material and design could be compared across sites and slotted into a design sequence presumed to hold for a cultural tradition or horizon. I will identify a great many different kinds of objects and claims that function in archaeological contexts as data, extending an account I have developed elsewhere for a relational conception of evidence (Wylie 2011a; Chapman and Wylie 2016) On this view evidential claims are the terminus of practical arguments that, as characterized by Toulmin, originate with some “fact” or “datum” and are mediated by warrants that licence the inferential move from datum to conclusion (Toulmin 1958: 98, 218–221; Chapman and Wylie 2016: 34–36). Which radically diverse types of expertise and bodies of background knowledge were brought together to refine the techniques and establish the standards that configure evolving practices for handling radiogenic data in archaeological contexts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
