蛇丘:仍由阿黛娜建造,并在古堡时期重建

IF 0.4 Q1 Arts and Humanities
G. Monaghan, E. Herrmann
{"title":"蛇丘:仍由阿黛娜建造,并在古堡时期重建","authors":"G. Monaghan, E. Herrmann","doi":"10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Radiocarbon dates from the base of Serpent Mound in Ohio demonstrate that it was built 2,100–2,300 years ago during the Adena period but was subsequently rebuilt or repaired about 900 years ago during the Fort Ancient period. We describe the basis for supporting the chronology of this building sequence, why it is the best and most complete explanation from the data at hand, and discuss the errors and misconceptions that critics of it have put forth. Our interest is in establishing a chronology of mound construction in order to address questions about cultural continuity/discontinuity, appropriation, and reuse of cultural monuments and religious/political symbols. We also plead that researchers jointly collect new data from Serpent Mound to end the back-and-forth questioning of chronological context and research competence.","PeriodicalId":43225,"journal":{"name":"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Serpent Mound: Still Built by the Adena, and Still Rebuilt During the Fort Ancient Period\",\"authors\":\"G. Monaghan, E. Herrmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Radiocarbon dates from the base of Serpent Mound in Ohio demonstrate that it was built 2,100–2,300 years ago during the Adena period but was subsequently rebuilt or repaired about 900 years ago during the Fort Ancient period. We describe the basis for supporting the chronology of this building sequence, why it is the best and most complete explanation from the data at hand, and discuss the errors and misconceptions that critics of it have put forth. Our interest is in establishing a chronology of mound construction in order to address questions about cultural continuity/discontinuity, appropriation, and reuse of cultural monuments and religious/political symbols. We also plead that researchers jointly collect new data from Serpent Mound to end the back-and-forth questioning of chronological context and research competence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01461109.2018.1511156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要俄亥俄州蛇丘基地的放射性碳年代表明,它建于2100年至2300年前的阿德纳时期,但随后在约900年前的古堡时期重建或修复。我们描述了支持这一建筑序列年表的基础,为什么它是手头数据中最好、最完整的解释,并讨论了批评者提出的错误和误解。我们的兴趣是建立土堆建造的年表,以解决文化纪念碑和宗教/政治象征的文化连续性/不连续性、挪用和再利用问题。我们还恳请研究人员共同从蛇丘收集新数据,以结束对时间背景和研究能力的反复质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Serpent Mound: Still Built by the Adena, and Still Rebuilt During the Fort Ancient Period
ABSTRACT Radiocarbon dates from the base of Serpent Mound in Ohio demonstrate that it was built 2,100–2,300 years ago during the Adena period but was subsequently rebuilt or repaired about 900 years ago during the Fort Ancient period. We describe the basis for supporting the chronology of this building sequence, why it is the best and most complete explanation from the data at hand, and discuss the errors and misconceptions that critics of it have put forth. Our interest is in establishing a chronology of mound construction in order to address questions about cultural continuity/discontinuity, appropriation, and reuse of cultural monuments and religious/political symbols. We also plead that researchers jointly collect new data from Serpent Mound to end the back-and-forth questioning of chronological context and research competence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信