Rock surface luminescence dating of prehistoric rock art from central Iberia

Dados Bibliográficos

ID8354552
AutoresNasrin Karimi Moayed (0000-0002-2862-8962, University of Tehran, autor correspondente), Reza Sohbati (0000-0002-2382-0103, Department of Physics Technical University of Denmark Roskilde Denmark), Andrew S Murray (0000-0001-5559-1862, Nordic Laboratory for Luminescence Dating, Department of Geoscience Aarhus University Roskilde Denmark), Eike F Rades (0000-0002-6287-6775, Department of Physics Technical University of Denmark Roskilde Denmark), Morteza Fattahi (0000-0003-2719-5859, University of Tehran), Juan F Ruiz-López (0000-0002-7309-0102, Department of History, Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación y Humanidades Universidad de Castilla‐La Mancha, LAPTe Cuenca Spain)
Ano2023
Volume65
Fascículo2
Páginas319-334
Data de publicação2023-04-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoArchaeometry (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0003-813X • E-ISSN: 1475-4754
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/arcm.12826
OpenAlexW4294591522
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas3
Referências citadas39

Rock art paintings are notoriously difficult to date numerically. Recently, luminescence dating has been shown to provide reliable rock surface burial ages in various archaeological settings. Here we use the cross‐cutting relationship between a fallen rock and two paintings of the Iberian Levantine (older) and Schematic (younger) styles to constrain the age of the paintings by dating the rockfall event using rock surface luminescence dating. Infrared‐stimulated luminescence (IRSL) signals as a function of depth into the buried face of the talus border indicate that the IRSL signal measured at 50°C (IR 50 ) was sufficiently reset to a depth of about 1.6 mm prior to burial. An uncorrected IR 50 age of 1.6 ± 0.2 ka was calculated for the rockfall event by dividing the surface equivalent dose ( D e ) by the total dose rate. This age was corrected using both conventional and field‐to‐laboratory saturation approaches to yield indistinguishable ages of 2.7 ± 0.5 and 2.9 ± 0.3 ka, respectively. Since the panel with Schematic art was first available to the artist after the rockfall, we conclude the Schematic rock art at Villar del Humo is younger than ~2.9 ka. The Levantine rock art was painted on a panel constrained by the talus boulder before detachment, and so it is likely to be older than ~2.9 ka

Archaeology · Geochemistry · Geography · Mineralogy · Prehistory · Rock art · Thermoluminescence dating · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Building materials and conservation · Geology · Paleontology · Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology