Cited by 89Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesArchaeology and Rock Art StudiesPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Radiocarbon AMS Dates for Paleolithic Cave Paintings

Open access
Valladas, H, Tisnérat-Laborde, N, Cachier, H, Arnold, M, de Quirós, F Bernaldo, Cabrera-Valdés, V, Clottes, J, Courtin, J +3 more·2001·Radiocarbon

Abstract

Advances in radiocarbon dating by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) have made it possible to date prehistoric cave paintings by sampling the pigment itself instead of relying on dates derived from miscellaneous prehistoric remains recovered in the vicinity of the paintings. The work at the Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement (LSCE) concentrated on prehistoric charcoal cave paintings from southern France and northern Spain. In most caves, pigment samples were collected from several paintings, and in some instances the sample size allowed for multiple independent measurements on the same figure, so that the coherence of the calculated dates could be tested. Before being dated, each specimen was subjected to a thermal treatment preceded by an acid and basic treatment of intensity commensurate with the sample size. Nine bison drawings from three caves in the Cantabrian region of Spain—two from Covaciella, three from Altamira, and four from El Castillo—were sampled and dated. The 27 dates fell between 13,000 and 14,500 BP, allowing us to attribute the drawings to the Magdalenian period. The 24 dates for 13 drawings in the Cosquer cave indicated two distinct periods of painting activity—one around 28,000 BP and the other around 19,000 BP. The Chauvet cave paintings turned out to be the oldest recorded to date, as five dates fell between 32,000 and 31,000 BP. After discussing the sample preparation protocol in more detail, we will discuss the ages obtained and compare them with other chronological data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033822200041643

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Clottes J, Courtin J. 1994. La grotte Cosquer. Edition Seuil. Paris.
  2. Hedges REM, Bronk Ramsey C, van Klinken GJ, Pettitt PB, Nielsen-Marsh C, Etchegoyen A, Fernadez Niello JO, Boschin MT, Llamazares AM. 1988. Methodolog- ical issues in the 14 C dating of rock painting. Radio- carbon 40(1):35-44.
  3. Igler W, Dauvois M, Hyman M, Menu M, Rowe M, Ve- zian J, Walter P. 1994. Datation radiocarbone de deux figures pariétales de la grotte du Portel (Commune de Loubens, Ariège). Bulletin Société Préhistorique Ariège-Pyrénées XLIX:231-6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Valladas, H., Tisnérat-Laborde, N., Cachier, H., Arnold, M., de Quirós, F. B., Cabrera-Valdés, V, Clottes, J., Courtin, J., Fortea-Pérez, J. J., Gonzáles-Sainz, C., & Moure-Romanillo, A.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Universidad de Oviedo (ES)
Corresponding author
Valladas, H
Venue
Radiocarbon
Published
2001
Volume
43
Issue
2B
Pages
977-986
ISSN
  • 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5755
OpenAlex
W2502912168
Cited by
89
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
  • UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and Rock Art Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
prehistoric cave art, Magdalenian, Cosquer Cave, Chauvet Cave, Altamira Cave, El Castillo cave, Cantabria, southern France, northern Spain, sample preparation, prehistoric chronology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review