Skip to main content
Log in

New directions in archaeomagnetism

  • Published:
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the first magnetic analyses of archaeological materials were carried out over a century ago, archaeomagnetic reference curves are now available covering the last few millennia. It would seem to be an appropriate time to examine the archaeomagnetic record to see how it can be improved. For directional studies the disturbing factors include magnetic refraction, mechanical deformation, local magnetic field anomalies, and magnetic anisotropy. In the complex field of archaeointensity determination there is a real need for faster and more reliable methods. The use of sediments on Palaeolithic sites will be increasingly important for the dating of early hominids.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. G. Folgeraiter, Arch. Sci. Phys. Nat., (Genè ve), 8 (1899) 5.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. L. Eighmy, J. H. Hathaway, Geoarchaeology, 2 (1987) 49.

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. C. Lange, B. A. Murphy, A Discussion of Collection Factors Affecting the Quality of Archaeomagnetic Results, in: Archaeomagnetic Dating, J. L. Eighmy, R. S. Sternberg (Eds), Tucson, Arizona University Press, 1990, p. 65.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. J. Clark, D. H. Tarling, M. Noel, J. Archaeol. Sci., 15 (1988) 645.

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. Thellier, Phys. Earth Planet Inter., 24 (1981) 89.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Kovacheva, Prehistoric sites studied archaeomagnetically, in: Archaeometry '90, E. Pernicka, G. A. Wagner (Eds), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1991, p. 559.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. H. Tarling, M. J. Dobson, J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 47 (1995) 5.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. H. Hathaway, G. J. Krause, The Sun Compass Versus the Magnetic Compass, in: Archaeomagnetic Dating, J. L. Eighmy, R. S. Sternberg, (Eds), Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 1990, p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E. Bucur, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 87 (1994) 95.

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Fischer, P.-A. Schnegg, Up-dating the Geomagnetic Survey of Switzerland, Matér. Géol. Suisse, Géophys., 1994, p. 27.

  11. R. S. Coe, Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 56 (1979) 369.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. D. Evans, G. S. Hoye, Magnetic refraction and Archaeomagnetic fidelity, in: Archaeometry '90,. Proc. 27th Symp. on Archaeometry, Heidelberg, E. Pernicka, G. A. Wagner (Eds), Basel, Birkhauser Verlag, 1991, p. 551.

    Google Scholar 

  13. M. J. Aitken, H. N. Hawley, Archaeometry, 13 (1971) 187.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. R. Harold, Archaeometry, 3 (1960) 45.

    Google Scholar 

  15. G. H. Weaver, Archaeometry, 4 (1961) 21.

    Google Scholar 

  16. G. H. Weaver, Archaeometry, 5 (1962) 93.

    Google Scholar 

  17. H. C. Soffel, K. Schurr, Geophys. J. Intern., 102 (1990) 551.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. J. Aitken, Magnetic dating, in: Physics and Archaeology, 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1974, p. 161.

    Google Scholar 

  19. I. G. Hedley, J.-J. Wagner, The Origin of the Magnetic Anisotropy in Pottery.Abstract. 21st Symp. for Archaeometry, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, N.Y., 1981, p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. Rogers, J. M. W. Fox, M. J. Aitken, Nature, 277 (1979) 644.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R. J. Veitch, I. G. Hedley, J. J. Wagner, Arch. Sc. (Genè ve) 37 (1984) No. 3, 359.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. Maag, Ein Kalkbrennofen im Legionslager von Vindonissa, in: Jahresbericht 1982, Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa, Brugg, 1983, p. 65.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ph. Lanos, L.archéomagnétisme, in: Les méthodes de datation en archéologie, Editions Errance, Paris, 1998, p. 119.

  24. W. R. Wood, D. L. Johnson, Adv. Archaeol. Meth. Theo., 1 (1978) 315.

    Google Scholar 

  25. R. S. Sternberg, E. Lass, E. Marion, K. Katari, M. Holbrook, Geoarchaeology, 14 (1999) 415.

    Google Scholar 

  26. I. G. Hedley, Y. Billaud, Deformation of Burnt Structures and Archaeomagnetic Error, Proc. 31st Archaeometry Symp., Budapest,1998. British Archaeological Reports. European Series. Archaeolingua Publishers, Budapest, 1999 (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. Levi, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 13 (1977) 245.

    Google Scholar 

  28. E. Thellier, O. Thellier, Ann. Géophys., 15 (1959) 285.

    Google Scholar 

  29. R. S. Coe, J. Geophys. Res., 72 (1967) 3247.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. Shaw, Geophys. J. Astron. Soc., 76 (1974) 637.

    Google Scholar 

  31. I. G. Hedley, J.-J. Wagner, A Magnetic Investigation of Roman and Pre-Roman Pottery, in: Archaeometry '90. Proc. 27th Symp. on Archaeometry, E. Pernicka, G. A. Wagner (Eds), Heidelberg. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1991, p. 275.

    Google Scholar 

  32. W. E. Senanayake, M. W. McElhinny, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 30 (1982) 317.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Y. Cui, K. L. Verosub, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 91 (1995) 261.

    Google Scholar 

  34. E. Thellier, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 13 (1977) 241.

    Google Scholar 

  35. D. Walton, Rev. Geophys., 26 (1988) 15.

    Google Scholar 

  36. M. J. Aitken, A. L. Allsop, G. D. Bussell, M. B. Winter, Rev. Geophys., 26 (1988) 3.

    Google Scholar 

  37. D. Walton, J. Shaw, J. Share, J. Hakes, J. Appl. Phys., 71 (1992) 1549.

    Google Scholar 

  38. J. Shaw, D. Walton, S. Yang, T. C. Rolph, J. A. Share, Geophys. J. Inter., 124 (1996) 241.

    Google Scholar 

  39. E. McClelland, J. C. Briden, J. Geophys. Res., 101, B10 (1996) 21995.

    Google Scholar 

  40. H. Tanaka, Geophys. J. Inter. 137 (1999) 261.

    Google Scholar 

  41. F. Heller, H. Markert, Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 31 (1973) 395.

    Google Scholar 

  42. G. J. Borraidale, J. Archaeol. Sci., 24 (1997) 813.

    Google Scholar 

  43. R. S. Sternberg, R. H. McGuire, Techniques for Constructing Secular Variation Curves and for Interpreting Archaeomagnetic Dates, in: Archaeomagnetic Dating, J. L. Eighmy and R. S. Sternberg (Eds), University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 1990, p. 199.

    Google Scholar 

  44. R. S. Sternberg, Archaeomagnetic dating, in: Chronometric Dating in Archaeology, R. L. Taylor, M. J. Aitken (Eds), Plenum Press, New York, p. 324.

  45. C. Batt, Archaeometry, 39 (1997) 153.

    Google Scholar 

  46. R. S. Sternberg, J. Geophys. Res., 94 (1989) 527.

    Google Scholar 

  47. I. G. Hedley, P. Vuagnat, J.-J. Wagner, Terra Cognita, 4 (1984) 361.

    Google Scholar 

  48. M. Le Goff, B. Henry, L. Daly, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 70 (1992) 4.

    Google Scholar 

  49. M. E. Evans, L. Jiang, J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 48 (1996) 1531.

    Google Scholar 

  50. N. E. Jordanova, E. Petrovsky, M. Kovacheva, J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 49 (1997) 543.

    Google Scholar 

  51. C. Batt, M. Noel, New themes in archaeomagnetism, in: Archaeometry '90. Proceedings of the 27th Symp. on Archaeometry, E. Pernicka, G. A. Wagner (Eds), Birkhäuser Verlag, Heidelberg, Basel, 1991, p. 541.

    Google Scholar 

  52. J. L. Eighmy, J. B. Howard, American Antiquity, 56 (1991) 88.

    Google Scholar 

  53. J. M. Pares, A. Perez-Gonzalez, Science, 269 (1995) 830.

    Google Scholar 

  54. J. Gagnepain, I. G. Hedley, C. Peretto, Arkeos, 5 (1999) 29.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hedley, I.G. New directions in archaeomagnetism. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 247, 663–672 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010627821170

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010627821170

Keywords

Navigation