Towards an Accurate and Precise Chronology for the Colonization of Australia: the Example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health - Papers: part A Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health January 2016 Towards an accurate and precise chronology for the colonization of Australia: The example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia Rachel Wood Australian National University Zenobia Jacobs University of Wollongong, [email protected] Dorcas Vannieuwenhuyse Jane Balme University of Western Australia Sue O'Connor Australian National University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers Recommended Citation Wood, Rachel; Jacobs, Zenobia; Vannieuwenhuyse, Dorcas; Balme, Jane; O'Connor, Sue; and Whitau, Rose, "Towards an accurate and precise chronology for the colonization of Australia: The example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia" (2016). Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health - Papers: part A. 4187. https://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers/4187 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Towards an accurate and precise chronology for the colonization of Australia: The example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia Abstract An extensive series of 44 radiocarbon (14C) and 37 optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages have been obtained from the site of Riwi, south central Kimberley (NW Australia). As one of the earliest known Pleistocene sites in Australia, with archaeologically sterile sediment beneath deposits containing occupation, the chronology of the site is important in renewed debates surrounding the colonization of Sahul. Charcoal is preserved throughout the sequence and withinmultiple discrete hearth features. Prior to 14C dating, charcoal has been pretreated with both acid-base-acid (ABA) and acid base oxidation- stepped combustion (ABOx-SC) methods at multiple laboratories. Ages are consistent between laboratories and also between the two pretreatment methods, suggesting that contamination is easily removed from charcoal at Riwi and the Pleistocene ages are likely to be accurate. Whilst some charcoal samples recovered from outside hearth features are identified as outliers within a Bayesian model, all ages on charcoal within hearth features are consistent with stratigraphy. OSL dating has been undertaken using single quartz grains from the sandy matrix. The majority of samples show De distributions that are well-bleached but that also include evidence for mixing as a result of post-depositional bioturbation of the sediment. The results of the two techniques are compared and evaluated within a Bayesian model. Consistency between the two methods is good, and we demonstrate human occupation at this site from 46.4-44.6 cal kBP (95.4% probability range). Importantly, the lowest archaeological horizon at Riwi is underlain by sterile sediments which have been dated by OSL making it possible to demonstrate the absence of human occupation for between 0.9-5.2 ka (68.2% probability range) prior to occupation. Publication Details Wood, R., Jacobs, Z., Vannieuwenhuyse, D., Balme, J., O'Connor, S. & Whitau, R. (2016). Towards an accurate and precise chronology for the colonization of Australia: The example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia. PLoS One, 11 (9), 0160123-1-0160123-25. Authors Rachel Wood, Zenobia Jacobs, Dorcas Vannieuwenhuyse, Jane Balme, Sue O'Connor, and Rose Whitau This journal article is available at Research Online: https://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers/4187 RESEARCH ARTICLE Towards an Accurate and Precise Chronology for the Colonization of Australia: The Example of Riwi, Kimberley, Western Australia Rachel Wood1☯*, Zenobia Jacobs2☯, Dorcas Vannieuwenhuyse3☯, Jane Balme3, Sue O’Connor4, Rose Whitau4 a11111 1 Research School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia, 2 Centre for Archaeological Science, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, 2522, Australia, 3 School of Social Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, 6009, Australia, 4 Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. * [email protected] OPEN ACCESS Citation: Wood R, Jacobs Z, Vannieuwenhuyse D, Balme J, O’Connor S, Whitau R (2016) Towards an Accurate and Precise Chronology for the Colonization Abstract of Australia: The Example of Riwi, Kimberley, 14 Western Australia. PLoS ONE 11(9): e0160123. An extensive series of 44 radiocarbon ( C) and 37 optically stimulated luminescence doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0160123 (OSL) ages have been obtained from the site of Riwi, south central Kimberley (NW Austra- Editor: Marco Peresani, University of Ferrara, ITALY lia). As one of the earliest known Pleistocene sites in Australia, with archaeologically sterile sediment beneath deposits containing occupation, the chronology of the site is important in Received: May 4, 2016 renewed debates surrounding the colonization of Sahul. Charcoal is preserved throughout Accepted: July 12, 2016 the sequence and within multiple discrete hearth features. Prior to 14C dating, charcoal has Published: September 21, 2016 been pretreated with both acid-base-acid (ABA) and acid base oxidation-stepped combus- Copyright: © 2016 Wood et al. This is an open tion (ABOx-SC) methods at multiple laboratories. Ages are consistent between laboratories access article distributed under the terms of the and also between the two pretreatment methods, suggesting that contamination is easily Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits removed from charcoal at Riwi and the Pleistocene ages are likely to be accurate. Whilst unrestricted use, distribution,and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are some charcoal samples recovered from outside hearth features are identified as outliers credited. within a Bayesian model, all ages on charcoal within hearth features are consistent with Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are stratigraphy. OSL dating has been undertaken using single quartz grains from the sandy within the paper and its Supporting Informationfiles. matrix. The majority of samples show De distributions that are well-bleached but that also Funding: The Australian Research Council (http:// include evidence for mixing as a result of post-depositional bioturbation of the sediment. www.arc.gov.au), with the Kimberley Foundation The results of the two techniques are compared and evaluated within a Bayesian model. Australia (http://www.kimberleyfoundation.org.au)and Consistency between the two methods is good, and we demonstrate human occupation at the Commonwealth Departmentof the Environment this site from 46.4–44.6 cal kBP (95.4% probability range). Importantly, the lowest archaeo- (http://www.environment.gov.au) provided funding for the research (Linkage Grant LP100200415,awarded logical horizon at Riwi is underlain by sterile sediments which have been dated by OSL to JB, SO'C). REW wrote this paper whilst funded by making it possible to demonstrate the absence of human occupation for between 0.9–5.2 an Australian Research Council Discovery Early ka (68.2% probability range) prior to occupation. Career Award (DE150100070). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0160123 September 21, 2016 1 / 25 Towards an Accurate and Precise Chronology for the Colonization of Australia Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. 1. Introduction 1.1 Dating the colonization of Australia The time of arrival of early modern humans in Australia is an open question, in large part because most sites do not contain human fossils. However, an early colonisation is made possi- ble by recent discoveries of Homo sapiens fossils dating to more than 40,000 years in southern China [1] and Laos [2, 3], alongside increasing archaeological evidence for an earlier migration out of Africa than previously thought [4–6]. Moreover, genetic clock estimates for the founding populations in Australia have been estimated variably to be 63 ± 5 ka [7], 58 ± 8 ka [8], and 55 ± 11 ka [9] and most recently, Rasmussen, Guo [10] provided genetic evidence that Aborigi- nal Australians descended from an early Asian expansion wave some 62–75 ka ago. In Australia, the oldest human fossils are about 40,000 years old [11, 12]. Earlier archaeolog- ical traces are restricted to artefacts buried 45,000–60,000 years ago [13–19]. However preci- sion on age estimates is often in the order of at least ± 5 ka (at 1σ), making interpretation of these early age estimates difficult. Recent reviews of the chronology of Australian sites coalesce on an age of no later than 47–48 ka ago [20–22], although many researchers still consider ages of 50 ka or earlier to be probable [16, 23, 24]. At the heart of the Australian colonization debate lies questions about (a) the accuracy of the ages obtained using 14C and luminescence-baseddating techniques, (b) the precision of the age estimates and their usefulness in pinpointing the earliest occupation of the continent, and (c) the reliability of the context and association of the artefacts with the dated materials. The debate is currently marred by inappropriate consideration of uncertainties, low numbers of dates