More Like this

1. A Review of Archaeological and Paleoecological Radiocarbon Dating in Bolivia

   https://doi.org/10.5334/oq.118  

   Capriles, José M. (January 2023, Open Quaternary)
2. "Radiocarbon dating of Makuri Lê boom, a very old African baobab from Nyae Nyae, Namibia "

   https://doi.org/10.24193/subbchem.2020.2.12  

   Patrut, Roxana T.; Patrut, Adrian; Rakosy, Demetra; Rakosy, Laszlo; Löwy, Daniel A.; Bodis, Jenő; Von Redenf, Karl F. (June 2020, Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Chemia)

   null (Ed.)
3. Radiocarbon dating of the historic Livingstone tree at Chiramba, Mozambique

   https://doi.org/10.24193/subbchem.2020.3.11  

   Patrut, Adrian; Patrut, Roxana T.; Slater, Michael J.; Rakosy, Laszlo; Löwy, Daniel A.; Von Reden, Karl F. (September 2020, Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Chemia)

   null (Ed.)
4. Serpentine bends site #1: Radiocarbon dating prehistoric soot and associated pictographs

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102925  

   Rowe, Marvin W.; Loendorf, Lawrence L.; Miller, Myles R.; Steelman, Karen L. (June 2021, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports)

   null (Ed.)
5. Radiocarbon re-dating of contact-era Iroquoian history in northeastern North America

   https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav0280  

   Manning, Sturt W.; Birch, Jennifer; Conger, Megan A.; Dee, Michael W.; Griggs, Carol; Hadden, Carla S.; Hogg, Alan G.; Ramsey, Christopher Bronk; Sanft, Samantha; Steier, Peter; et al (December 2018, Science Advances)

   A time frame for late Iroquoian prehistory is firmly established on the basis of the presence/absence of European trade goods and other archeological indicators. However, independent dating evidence is lacking. We use 86 radiocarbon measurements to test and (re)define existing chronological understanding. Warminster, often associated with Cahiagué visited by S. de Champlain in 1615–1616 CE, yields a compatible radiocarbon-based age. However, a well-known late prehistoric site sequence in southern Ontario, Draper-Spang-Mantle, usually dated ~1450–1550, yields much later radiocarbon-based dates of ~1530–1615. The revised time frame dramatically rewrites 16th-century contact-era history in this region. Key processes of violent conflict, community coalescence, and the introduction of European goods all happened much later and more rapidly than previously assumed. Our results suggest the need to reconsider current understandings of contact-era dynamics across northeastern North America. 

   more » « less