Often times when one thinks about archaeology, one
automatically thinks about the cool stuff, known as artifacts, that
archaeologists excavate, or uncover, through their field work. While this is a large part of what is used to
interpret the past, these artifacts would be pretty worthless without certain
types of information, e.g. provenience, artifact association, location, and in
particular a date associated with when the artifact existed and was used. But how do archaeologists go about dating the
past (i.e. the sites and artifacts that they work on)? If you think it is with flowers and
chocolate, you would be mistaken.
Archaeologists actually utilize several different techniques for dating
the past, and today’s blog post is dedicated to briefly explaining those
methods to you.
Archaeological dating techniques actually fall within two
broad categories: relative and absolute
dating. Relative dating is an
archaeological dating technique of identifying objects at a site as either
older or younger than an established reference point, whereas absolute dating
provides archaeologists a more concrete and precise date associated with the
objects found at the site. Both methods
are readily utilized upon excavation of a site as relative dating provides archaeologists
with a quick estimate of the age of artifacts (again, relative to an
established reference point with a specific date), while the more precise
absolute date is collected later after excavations are complete (due to the
time and efforts required to obtain that date).
For further clarification, you can think of the differences
between relative and absolute dating as being similar to figuring out an age of
a child. You may see a child and assume
a general age category, such as infant, toddler, child, or adolescent. These would be similar to the relative dating
technique described above. A more
specific age, e.g. 5, 8, 11, etc., provides you an exact age of the individual
to whom you described by a relative age category, and it is this specific age
that is associated with the absolute dates identified above.
Today’s blog post focuses on the two primary types of
relative dating: stratigraphy and seriation. Absolute dating
techniques will be discussed in a future blog update. Stratigraphy is a dating technique that takes
into account the soil and rock layers (known as strata) that have been deposited over time in the Earth. These strata can be deposited through a
variety of means, either natural or manmade, and each layer is made up a
specific parent material, or source
substance, that differentiates one layer from another. This means that there could be potentially be
strata made up of limestone, clay, trash, ash, or other materials. We are able to determine a relative age of
these layers based on the law of
superposition, which identifies layers closest to the top soil (the soil
that we walk on) as being younger than those deeper in the ground. You can think of this concept as the Earth’s
surface being composed similarly to a layered cake: When one bakes a layered
cake, the bottom layer is put down first and therefore would be older than the
layer on top that is put down last and is therefore younger (see Figure
1). Dating objects through stratigraphic
analyses takes into account the law of superposition and categorizes artifacts
as either younger or older than each other relative to their location within
the various strata.
 | |
| Figure 1: Stratigraphy is like a layered cake. Photo Credit: Threadless.com |
Seriation is different from stratigraphic analyses, although
it, too, is a relative dating technique.
Seriation is based on stylistic changes of artifacts over time, whereby
the artifacts are identified by their changing styles that occur over a
specific time range. These artifacts
make up what is known as a seriation
typology, which identifies on a scale the artifacts ranging from oldest to
youngest. An example is shown below
(Figure 2). This typology demonstrates
the evolution of Nintendo gaming systems and the gaming graphics associated
with each gaming system.
 |
| Figure 2: Seriation Typology of Nintendo Gaming Systems (Google Images) |
This typology can be utilized to identify other
technological advancements of other gaming systems (e.g. Sega, Play Station, or
Microsoft) and/or games associated with this or other gaming systems. Take for example another famous video gaming
system’s archetypal character: Sonic the Hedgehog. If you were to look at two pictures of Sonic
the Hedgehog (see Figures 3 & 4) and compare them to the seriation typology
provided in Figure 2, when would you date each Sonic?
 |
| Figure 3: Sonic the Hedgehog (Google Images) |
 |
| Figure 4: Sonic the Hedgehog (Google Images) |
Ready for the answer?
Are you sure? Okay, no more
playing hard to get. The Sonic in Figure
3 was created in 1991, which demonstrates an accurate seriation typology if you
guessed that date, but the Sonic in Figure 4 is actually from 2013. Now obviously you would not have been able to
guess that date since there is no 2013 option, the closest you could get would
be 2002, but this just demonstrates how this technique is a relative dating
technique. You can not necessarily get
an accurate, precise age through utilizing this method.
Seriation as applied to archaeology obviously does not
utilize Nintendo gaming systems.
Instead, archaeologists utilize several different classes of artifacts
to create their seriation typologies, ranging from pottery and arrowheads to
hair styles and burial styles. The goal
of creating a seriation typology is to utilize an artifact class that readily
changes over time in both style and manufacture, allowing archaeologists to
maximize utility of the seriation typology.
Yearning for more? If
you are satisfied with the first date, stay tuned for the next installment of
this two part series where I will be discussing absolute dating
techniques. It may not be a salacious as
relative dating, but as this post has hopefully demonstrated, relative dating
is not necessarily what it sounds like in popular terms. It is merely a general means of figuring out
an age of a site and/or artifact. It is
the foreplay of archaeological dating.
;)
(And I promise less dating innuendos in the next post. )
To learn more about archaeology, please visit this trilogy of posts: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.
To learn more about archaeology, please visit this trilogy of posts: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.
Reference:
Feder, Kenneth and Park M. Human Antiquity: An Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archeology, McGraw-Hill.
23 comments:
Reading this reminds me of my own childhood days exploring as a young archaeologist in the vast nothingness in Northeast Nevada. I found a variety of spear heads and chips from old pieces of pottery all around the high desert. it is known that a variety of Native American tribes resided there (and still do for that matter). I had a mini maddox and pick hammer and would explore for hours (there is literally nothing else to do in that area so please don't judge). The deeper I dug the more arrowheads and large pieces of pottery I would find. Now I didn't dig too deep but, there was clearly a difference in the quality of the arrowheads and intricate designs on the pieces of pottery. Some look like they came right out of the kindergarden class and some had beautiful designs that were very authentic. The same with the arrowhead, some barely came to a point while others were razor sharp and large enough to a be a knife for my child like hands. It is clear that the strata had varying levels of goods. This was a clear indication that the past tribal groups were in the region for a long time and had advanced through their use of tools. The varying degrees of arrowheads and pottery pieces is proof. Amazing to realize this now that I have a concept of relative dating methods.
James, I know you said not to judge and I'm trying not to sound judgmental in this comment, but I do recommend you read these previous posts:
http://humerusrevelations.blogspot.com/2013/04/dumpster-diving-dirty-truth-behind.html
http://humerusrevelations.blogspot.com/2013/05/dumpster-diving-looting-and-losing-our.html
http://humerusrevelations.blogspot.com/2013/06/dumpster-diving-part-3-what-to-do-when.html
Can you explain what you mean? I'm a little confused by your post. I guess playing with arrowheads as a child was a no-no? I'm only trying to relate to relative dating, not destroying a potential archaeological dig. Hope I didn't defend you or anyone in your field.
It's a sticky subject for archaeologists. On the one hand, there are those who do it because they are interested in the subject matter, and that's good because public interest is what keeps the discipline going in many ways. On the other hand, however, doing so destroys archaeological credibility of the artifacts as the artifact that is taken in a nonscientific/nonarchaeological manner is rendered useless as it lacks specific data that is crucial to its interpretation. You may see an arrowhead, but we see an arrowhead that was used to cut hide or as a teaching tool or as an adult or child artifact or a ritual item. All of this is based on the contextual information that archaeologists are trained to see. Also, from a nonarchaeologist perspective, the groups associated with that arrowhead may see it as stealing. Think of if someone went into your family's grave and took relics from the coffin or if someone walked into your house and stole your family heirlooms. That arrowhead may not have come from a burial and you're not directly walking into someone's house, but it's a similar idea as that artifact is part of someone's history. Particularly a history lost due to systematic destruction of cultures as advocated by the US government and US society. For me, as someone who works in an area where archaeologists get killed for doing their job, what you speak of sounds innocent enough here in the US but is actually different in other parts of the world.
I tend to go with the following: If you find it on the surface, record where you found it. Take pictures. Get GPS coordinates. Contact a local governmental archaeologist to let them know what you found. Often times because the artifact has lost its contextual information you'll be allowed to keep that artifact but it keeps local archaeologists aware of what potential sites are out there. And if that area is a protected spot the archaeologist will often times inform you of such so as to protect you from breaking any laws (as federal lands and private lands are separate deals when it comes to artifacts). "Excavating" by non-trained archaeologists is not something that I abide by because it destroys sites, and purchasing artifacts from someone is also something I do not abide by. Why? Because you never know what you're purchasing and if it's real or not. One of the first people I met when I started my undergrad was a looter and he used to fabricate artifacts all the time. He got so good at it that he couldn't tell the difference between his fakes and the real deals, and he tried to hand everything off on me. The whole lot of it was worthless because it lacked contextual info and I didn't know what was real vs. fake, which distorts history and understanding of the past. So buyer beware is definitely a mantra everyone should believe in when it comes to archaeological remains, particularly for nonlocal items as you never know if someone was possibly killed in the procurement of that artifact.
What an enlightening discussion this has been for me. The three part dumpster diving series was interesting to read and now I see why you wanted referred those blogs to me. Darn kids those days! Very interesting to hear. I never would have looked at it that way. Recalling my childhood looting days now after hearing this information, I remember some of those arrowheads to be really amazing pieces. I can't help but feel bad that I did that and very well could have messed up a possible Native burial ground. You are probably going to want to shoot me after hearing this, but my sister and I used to stack piles of those things. It could have been at the site of a battle or cemetery. My mind has successfully been opened up to a new way of viewing old tools. Think about it. You could find an old spoon out on a hike. You might think nothing of it but, it could have been some vintage era type of utensil that leads to many new discoveries of a culture of people or the history of the environment which it was found at. Pretty crazy to think about. I can see why the idea of me as a child playing with arrowheads would make most anthropologists flinch. Think of how much gets destroyed and how much could have been learned by the desecrated lands and artifacts. We definitely need to be more proactive as people to what we find.
I try not to fault anyone who doesn't know too badly as I was one of those people who thought that excavation was just simply digging and that there was no scientific methods behind it. I got chewed up one side and down the other by an archaeologist, which is how I learned, and I didn't appreciate learning the lesson that way. Particularly because as I've been exposed to different cultures around the world I have discovered that each has a different take on archaeological remains so a culturally relativistic perspective is good to take when confronting people on such topics. But you are correct: people need to be more proactive about archaeology, and it wouldn't hurt if they were knowledgeable and proactive about a lot of topics. Ignorance isn't necessarily bliss as it can hurt a lot of people and not just in archaeology.
After reading this entry on seriation dating, I am glad that it was not on serial dating. This is far more interesting. I am looking at my surroundings and wonder what would be derived if excavated centuries in the future. I collect white ceramic and porcelain pottery and have several pieces that have been handed down to me. Over time, there are different firing techniques, glazes and colors. Their shapes vary from ornamental to utilitarian. Some have seen regular use and have stains and chips that have likely captured evidence of their contents while others are too precious to me to use. There are modern as well as antiquated religious symbols of Christmas, Easter and angels so in addition a Christian background could be a conclusion. There are also recently purchased tiles that likely contain modern building materials and are embossed with the blessings of home and family. One of the pieces contains several pieces of Black Hills gold jewelry, which came from the mines in my mother’s home state of South Dakota. Authentic Black Hills gold is a specific mixture of gold and other metals to create the varied colors of the signature leaves. Their metallurgy and style can provide additional time lines and pieces to the puzzle. Just look around, fore we are surrounded by time capsules.
Great insightful comment, Catherine. I'm happy to see you're making the proper connections that this post was trying to get readers to make. :)
After reading this article, I found myself relating to seriation dating. I am a fan of old traditional hot rods (as you might of seen in my artwork in the student gallery) and there are times at carshows where I try to distinguish years and models of the cars being displayed based on the styling. I prefer anything pre 1968 because of the various design and body styles. Each car had a distinctive look as opposed to cars nowadys where they either look like eggshells or electric razor blades.
The different ways of dating anthropological finds is very interesting. As a child, like James, I used to dig stuff up. Things that I found were very cool looking, but I never kept them. My mother hated it when I brought stuff home from my little tours of the woods and stuff. I always thought it was cool to dig and find things, though I always put it back and buried it again. Kids do those kind of things without thinking about the anthropological aspect of life. I did not know then that I could have been destroying something that no one had seen before, or that could have been dated back to the earliest times of my hometown.
After reading this article I have learned the different meaning of Anthropological dating techniques, as a kid I have grown up with playing Nintendo and never though about the changes they have made with the characters and think about how the go about using that technique. Even today I go hiking in the woods from time to time and will find old rusted out containers that I automatically think is from the past but never analyzing it all they way through.
Seriation dating reminds me a lot of what I do with music or tv/movies. I may not know exactly when it came out, but I can usually come up with the decade instantly by the sound or style. The example with the video games really helps me to understand seriation dating. With this example, I can see how I can practice this with other examples such as tools, cars, clothing, etc. I really enjoy traveling and when I can see the different strata I often wonder what happened during those different time periods. Recently I took my kids and nieces out to Grimes Point to check out the Native American's caves and petroglyphs. From our parking spot we could clearly see the various strata, which peaked the kids' interest. We didn't really learn much about the strata, but it did leave us all curious.
This post reminds me of my childhood growing up in a small town with not a lot of stuff to do for younger children. So, we had to either go explore the fields in the area surrounding our houses or we had a video game system to keep us busy inside the house. Near one of my friend’s house there was an old open pit mine and you could see the different levels of strata but only went down a few levels. Also with the video game consoles, I think every kid had a few different types of systems and would usually get the newest system for either their birthday or Christmas. Never thought to view the characters in the gaming systems to help understand seriation typology a little better.
Anthropology 102: 1002
Information such as this help me to understand relative dating in more detail. It's kind of neat how you can go to the Grand Canyon and see all the different layers on display there. Next time I go I'm going to try and visually do some more intense exploration of them.
There is actually a place in town where you can see the stratigraphic profiles of the hills of the area. I can't remember the name of the park, but the hill is known as Rattlesnake is south Reno (off McCarran). Some place a little closer by to enjoy the activity, unless you want an excuse to take the fam to the grand canyon. :)
Relative dating is interesting in that it allows an archaeologist to come up with approximate dates for sites by looking at the context in which they were found. Isn't that the point of archaeological research? By studying the artifacts and their context, information can be gleaned about past human behavior by approximate dates learned through relative dating and geographic locations.
Courteney Hedicke, Anth 101
Putting stratigraphy into cake form is easy to understand. Time is layers and this makes the concept simple for readers. Interesting to see the difference in graphics between Mario over 30 years. shows the advancement in technology and science.
Zachary Forrester
anthro 101 3001 summer
It is interesting and dating does help to place things in their proper chronological order. Couldn't the progress in toys be considered a form of mutation or evolution?
Cultural evolution, yes, but not a mutation as the toys are not changing themselves. Mutations are not man-made, although they can be influenced by man-made constructs (e.g. radiation or prescription drugs).
This is a great article for those pursuing Archaeology, love the images! Great way to learn!
I remember you showing us this blog post in class when we were learning about dating! I love how this blog is interactive and has relevant pictures showing how dating works. I also really like how Stratigraphy is displayed in a cake. It makes it easy to understand and relate to the layers and times stacked on top of each other.
-Sam Ruebush Anth 102
I can relate this with a cake because there are so many layers with the earth's soil. It would be cool to see what we can find with the bottom layer.
Jovie Black
Sometimes when they create newer versions in characters or in this cause game consuls, They look completely different. I relate seriation to the movie "Chucky". Over time he completely changed. And from reading other comments, I seen people compared most of this to cake layering, i'm confused on how?
Post a Comment