Translation: Four Topics in Archaeological Chronology Zhang Chi, Annie Chan To cite this version: Zhang Chi, Annie Chan. Translation: Four Topics in Archaeological Chronology. Chinese Cultural Relics, Eastview Press, 2016. hal-03221001 HAL Id: hal-03221001 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03221001 Submitted on 10 May 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Research and Exploration Four Topics in Archaeological Chronology* Chi Zhang 张弛 Professor, School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University * he introduction of archaeological solute dating and cross-dating, the last of which is the chronology is one of the founda- combined use of the two preceding types of dating, tions of contemporary archaeology. have been a part of archaeological chronology. Thus The evolutionary theories of early far, apart from such minute improvements as the cali- Tcontemporary archaeology and the study of cultural bration of radiocarbon dates with dendrochronology history adopt the relative chronology established by and the introduction of AMS dating, little progress stratigraphy and seriation as the chronological basis has been made in these two types of dating compared for constructing the most fundamental framework of to the rapid development of many other methods human prehistory. Methods of absolute dating that of research in archaeology. If another revolution in have been introduced since the 1950s, of which ra- archaeology is to be hoped for, it is imperative to ad- diocarbon dating is representative, have changed our vance methods of archaeological dating that cater to understanding of prehistoric research in many ways, the growing needs of archaeology, since even under and are therefore considered a milestone in archaeo- the current system of archaeological chronology, logical chronology.[1] Since then, relative dating, ab- there are topics that need to be further addressed. By way of illustration, this article elaborates on four * Research for this article was conducted under the auspices of these topics. of the 2011 Key Project of the National Social Science Foun- dation of China titled “Research on Environmental Archae- RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY AND ology and Ancient Human-Nature Relationships” (Grant ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY No. 11&ZD183) and the 2012 Key Project of the National Social Science Foundation of China titled “Report on the There are two ways to express chronology in his- Research of Yangshao Settlements at Baligang, Dengzhou” tory and archaeology. One is relative dating, which (Grant No. 12&ZD190). refers to the relative association of events in time; it 184 Research and Exploration Four Topics in Archaeological Chronology serves only to reveal the chronological order, not the Seriation, which is commonly classified as a duration of time. The other is absolute dating; it is method of relative dating, can provide not only rela- the numerical age obtained by calculating the rate of tive chronological sequences but also varied time change of objects; it is also called quantitative dating. intervals, with the smallest being 20 years.[3] This In most cases, quantitative dating is measured in the level of accuracy is comparable to what is offered by commonly used solar year. Most Chinese and foreign radiocarbon dating. When calibrated with historical archaeological textbooks categorize the various meth- chronology, this method can even pinpoint the exact ods of chronology used in archaeology into these two calendar year, providing an absolute date.[4] In fact, types of dating.[2] The widely referencedArchaeology: objects also experience a certain rate of change, but Theories, Methods and Practice classifies stratigraphy, this rate is uneven since it varies according to diverse typological sequences and climate and chronology as social, economic and cultural influences, making a relative dating methods, and calendars and historical specific object’s rate of change difficult to determine. chronologies, annual cycles (tree-rings and varves), From the perspective of object change, humans, who radiocarbon dating and calibrated relative methods are comparatively short-lived, are more attuned to as absolute dating. However, since the application the seasonal cycles of the solar year and are less aware of each dating method in archaeology varies and has of long-term changes in objects. However, research- different limitations, the time scales differing accord- ers who have long studied the chronology of objects ingly, it is difficult to group these methods precisely (cultural chronology) are cognizant of the time scale into two categories. of object change and can often discern gaps in the Judging by the chronological precision and the chronological sequence of objects.[5] In this regard, time scale provided by each of the dating techniques, seriation is a method that embodies the meaning historical chronology is the only method that is ac- of absolute dating, at least when compared to such curate as to the date and time, while dendrochronol- modern scientific techniques of dating as radiocar- ogy and dating by varves are the only techniques bon dating. It differs only in terms of chronological that provide an exact time and a yearly time scale. precision, and not in terms of the difference between Other techniques that have been classified as abso- relative and absolute chronology. lute dating, such as radiocarbon dating and methods Perhaps the most meaningful relative chronol- of calibration, provide only a time bracket. Among ogy can be obtained only through Quaternary chron- them, radiocarbon dating provides the smallest ostratigraphy and archaeological stratigraphy, but time bracket, with an error margin of approximately that only applies when one is dealing with research ±30 years. Using radiocarbon dating alone, however, into early history or with simple geological sequenc- cannot provide a sufficiently precise date; to pinpoint es. In the study of Quaternary geological deposits, it the intervals within a solar year, the radiocarbon date has long been noted that dating by varves is accurate has to be calibrated with dates from techniques that to the solar year; similar patterns of annual periodic- provide a precise chronology, such as the dating of ity also occur in deep sea sediments, ice cores, lake tree rings or coral. But even with such calibration, sediments, and loess in certain areas and for certain there can still be systematic errors. Thus, even though periods of time. The deposits archaeological stratig- modern scientific techniques can offer precision to raphy considers can also offer a time scale, especially the degree of an annual time scale, they still cannot when changes in deposits are examined in broad provide accurate chronological measurements of spatial contexts. This is because archaeological stra- smaller time scales. tigraphy studies deposits that have a physical form 185 Chinese Cultural Relics » Issue Number 3-4, 2016 and contain cultural contents. The deposits cannot periodization, geological and geochemical dating, merely be explained by the laws of superposition and floral and faunal dating, radiometric chronology, ar- crosscutting relationships. From the perspective of chaeomagnetic dating, historical chronology, and research in settlement archaeology, all anthropogenic experimental methods. Their classification, however, deposits are archaeological features that have form only discriminates between materials used for dating and cultural content, making them objects of interest and does not highlight the characteristics of these in typological studies. Thus, archaeological deposits dating methods. alone can be used to establish chronological order Furthermore, from the perspective of materials and intervals of time. Climatic phases established by used for dating, most methods provide the date of the the dating of plants and animals are based on mor- artifact or geofact; only a few provide dates for the phological changes in living organisms, and at times formation or the burial of the deposit, both of which can be used to construct time intervals. Evolutionary can be dated by relative and absolute methods. As changes in the DNA of living organisms, for one, are well, among the many methods used for dating ar- of particular significance to large-scale cross-distance chaeological objects, some provide the time of their dating. The rate of cell division in humans has been deaths (or interments), whereas others provide the used to calculate age, which is consistent with the lifespan. Take radiocarbon dating and seriation, for concept of absolute chronology. example: the former provides the time of death of The aim of discussing relative chronology and short-lived organisms as well as the lifespan of long- absolute chronology from this perspective is not to lived organisms (which are mainly trees), whereas divulge the relativism embedded in archaeological the latter can only provide the period of development chronology but to illustrate the temporality of each of objects’ physical forms – that is, the