关于蛇丘时代的争论:罗曼、赫尔曼对莱珀关于蛇丘的答辩的回复

IF 0.4 Q1 Arts and Humanities
B. Lepper, T. Frolking, W. Pickard
{"title":"关于蛇丘时代的争论:罗曼、赫尔曼对莱珀关于蛇丘的答辩的回复","authors":"B. Lepper, T. Frolking, W. Pickard","doi":"10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The debate over the age of Serpent Mound (33AD01) is important because without a cultural context it is impossible to make meaningful statements about what this monumental effigy mound might have meant to its builders. In this response to Romain and Herrmann’s rejoinder, we clarify the provenience of the samples, which yielded the radiocarbon dates that contribute to our argument for a post–Late Woodland age for the effigy. In addition, we extend our critique of Romain and colleagues’ arguments to include the results of an independent study of soil cores extracted from the Serpent and surrounding landscape, which fails to corroborate Romain and colleagues’ assertion that a buried A horizon underlies the mound. Finally, we suggest that the construction of Serpent Mound may be historically linked to droughts in the Mississippi Valley that began at around AD 1100, which resulted in an influx of Mississippian refugees into the region.","PeriodicalId":43225,"journal":{"name":"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Debating the Age of Serpent Mound: A Reply to Romain and Herrmann’s Rejoinder to Lepper Concerning Serpent Mound\",\"authors\":\"B. Lepper, T. Frolking, W. Pickard\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The debate over the age of Serpent Mound (33AD01) is important because without a cultural context it is impossible to make meaningful statements about what this monumental effigy mound might have meant to its builders. In this response to Romain and Herrmann’s rejoinder, we clarify the provenience of the samples, which yielded the radiocarbon dates that contribute to our argument for a post–Late Woodland age for the effigy. In addition, we extend our critique of Romain and colleagues’ arguments to include the results of an independent study of soil cores extracted from the Serpent and surrounding landscape, which fails to corroborate Romain and colleagues’ assertion that a buried A horizon underlies the mound. Finally, we suggest that the construction of Serpent Mound may be historically linked to droughts in the Mississippi Valley that began at around AD 1100, which resulted in an influx of Mississippian refugees into the region.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806\",\"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/10.1080/01461109.2018.1507806","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: 4

摘要

关于蛇丘(33AD01)年代的争论很重要,因为如果没有文化背景,就不可能对这个巨大的雕像丘对它的建造者可能意味着什么做出有意义的陈述。在对罗曼和赫尔曼的反驳的回应中,我们澄清了样本的来源,由此得出的放射性碳年代为我们关于该雕像的后林地时代的论点做出了贡献。此外,我们扩展了对Romain及其同事的论点的批评,包括对从大蛇和周围景观中提取的土壤岩心的独立研究结果,该研究未能证实Romain及其同事的断言,即在土丘下方有一个被掩埋的地平线。最后,我们认为蛇丘的建造可能与公元1100年左右开始的密西西比河流域的干旱有关,干旱导致密西西比难民涌入该地区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Debating the Age of Serpent Mound: A Reply to Romain and Herrmann’s Rejoinder to Lepper Concerning Serpent Mound
ABSTRACT The debate over the age of Serpent Mound (33AD01) is important because without a cultural context it is impossible to make meaningful statements about what this monumental effigy mound might have meant to its builders. In this response to Romain and Herrmann’s rejoinder, we clarify the provenience of the samples, which yielded the radiocarbon dates that contribute to our argument for a post–Late Woodland age for the effigy. In addition, we extend our critique of Romain and colleagues’ arguments to include the results of an independent study of soil cores extracted from the Serpent and surrounding landscape, which fails to corroborate Romain and colleagues’ assertion that a buried A horizon underlies the mound. Finally, we suggest that the construction of Serpent Mound may be historically linked to droughts in the Mississippi Valley that began at around AD 1100, which resulted in an influx of Mississippian refugees into the region.
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