Cited by 28Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesArchaeology and Rock Art StudiesCultural Heritage Materials Analysis

AMS Radiocarbon Dates for Charcoal from Three Missouri Pictographs and Their Associated Iconography

Diaz-Granάdos, Carol, Rowe, Marvin W., Hyman, Marian, Duncan, James R., Southon, John R.·2001·American Antiquity

Abstract

This report presents four radiocarbon dates of charcoal pigments from Picture Cave, a site located in a remote wooded area in east-central Missouri. Carbon from charcoal pigments was extracted from three rock drawings on the wall of this cave. The four pigment samples contained sufficient carbon for accelerator mass spectrometric radiocarbon analysis. These black pigment samples (red and white paints are also present in the cave) yielded dates that place their affiliated motifs in a time-frame associated with Cahokia ca. 950 years ago. The dates are somewhat earlier than expected. We discuss the dates in connection with the iconography of the three motif panels tested., RésuméEste reporte anuncia las conclusiones del importante proyecto de datación de pigmenta en el estado de Missouri y examina a fondo las cuatrofechas resultantes en conexión con la iconografía de los tableros examinados. Los pigmentas fueron extraídos de tres tableros pictográficos hallados en los mums de una cueva encontrada en una remota zona boscosa en la zona centro-este del estado de Missouri. Los tableros y temas exponen una copiosa cantidad de data iconográfica. Como parte del proyecto de campo en 1996, Rowe y Hyman, quimicos analñicos de la Universidad de Texas A & M, extrayeron cinco muestras de pigmenta de la zona. Cuatro de las muestras contenian suficiente carbonopara la datación de “Accelerator Mass Spectrometry.” Las cuatro muestras de pigmento negro (también se encuentran pigmentas rojo y bianco) rindieronfechas que ponen los temas afiliados dentro de un período prehistórico en desarrollo. Lasfechas resultantes apoyan las estimaciones temporales originales asociadas con este sitio ñnico, expuestas en Diaz Granádos (1993).

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 · 10.2307/2694246

Cites

31 of 31 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

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: 22

  1. Pace, 2000, Chemical Pretreatment on Plasma-Chemical Extraction for 14C Dating of Pecos River Genre Rock Paintings., American Indian Rock Art, 24, 95
  2. Knight, 1989, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex : Artifacts and Analysis,, 205
  3. Hyman, 1997b, Plasma-Chemical Extraction andAMS Dating of Rock Paintings., American Indian Rock Art, 23, 1
  4. Phillips, 1951, Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and, 25
  5. McAdams, 1887, A Record of Ancient Races in the Mississippi Valley.
  6. Willey, 1988, Aboriginal Skeletons and Petroglyphs in Officer Cave, Tennessee., Tennessee Anthropologist, 13, 51
  7. Bednarik, 1994, Conceptual Pitfalls in Dating of Palaeolithic Rock Art., Prihistoire Anthropologic Mediterraneennes, 3, 95
  8. Temple, 1956, Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, 49, 3
  9. Griffin, 1952, Archaeology of the Eastern United States.
  10. Salzer, 1987, PreliminaryReportontheGottschallSite(471A80).r/!e, Wisconsin Archaeologist, 68, 419
  11. Muller, 1989, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex : Artifacts and Analysis,, 11
  12. Hall, 1989, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex : Artifacts and Analysis,, 239
  13. Emerson, 1989, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex : Artifacts and Analysis,, 45
  14. Williams, 1977, The Waring Papers., 58
  15. Phillips, 1978, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology,
  16. O'Brien, 1994, Cat Monsters and Head Pots.
  17. Hyman, 1997a, Plasma Extraction andAMS 14C Dating of RockPaintings., Techne, 5, 61
  18. Sampson, 1988, Conventionalized Figures on Late Woodland Ceramics., The Wisconsin Archaeologist, 69, 163
  19. Jacobson, 1991, The 1678 Piasa., Illinois Antiquity, 26, 7
  20. Brown, 1989, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex : Artifacts and Analysis,, 183
  21. Schwartz, 1981, TheWild Mammals of Missouri.
  22. Fletcher, 1992, The Omaha Tribe.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Diaz-Granάdos, C., Rowe, M. W., Hyman, M., Duncan, J. R., & Southon, J. R.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)
Venue
American Antiquity
Published
2001-07
Volume
66
Issue
3
Pages
481-492
ISSN
  • 0002-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 2325-5064
OpenAlex
W2326783393
Cited by
28
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
8.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Antiquity (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and Rock Art Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Keywords
rock art, radiocarbon dating, Cahokia, prehistoric cave art

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