2. “
To be present at the instance of the celebrated breakthrough
in science that set the chronological house in order for the
”
Southwestern United States was reward enough.
Emil Haury, 1962
10. “ In December 1872, she was discovered at sea
with all sail set and everything in order but
”
not a person was on board or ever found.
Spicer, 1942
16. “ Detailed analysis of twelve samples of wood by
Dr. David Etheridge, a wood scientist from
Victoria, British Columbia, showed the ship was
built either in Northern New England or the
”
Maritime Provinces of Canada.
NUMA.net
h p://www.numa.net/press/080801.html
24. “ Crossdating suggests that these timbers
were derived from trees cut in the vicinity of
”
southwestern Georgia some time a er 1894.
St. George 2001, Report to NUMA and Geomarine Associates
46. “ The most important limitation [of shipwreck
archaeology]…is the virtual impossibility of
”
deducing the shipyard where a vessel was built.
Basch, 1972
47.
48. “ It was possible to correlate the tree-ring curves
from twelve planks and the keel and construct
a chronology that spanned 248 years,
”
representing the building phase of the ship.
Bonde and Crumlin-Pederson, 1990
52. “ The Skuldelev-chronology fi ed perfectly with
all the chronologies except the one for Belfast,
which, as it turned out, did not cover the dating
”
range for our curve.
Bonde and Crumlin-Pederson, 1990
53. “ Based on these results we can conclude that
the longship excavated in Denmark was built in
the region of the Irish Sea, most likely in Dublin,
”
in the second half of the 11th century.
Bonde and Crumlin-Pederson, 1990
63. “ The result [of successful dendrochronological dating on
ships] is o en so precise that every recognized theory
”
which conflicts with it is immediately discredited.
Bonde & Christensen 1982
71. “ Fluctuation in the amount of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere can also affect
”
the concentration of 14C in the CO2.
University of Arizona AMS Laboratory
73. “ The Holocene part of the 14C calibration is based on
several millennia-long tree-ring chronologies providing
an annual, absolute time frame within the possible error
of the dendrochronology, which was rigorously tested by
”
internal replication of many overlapping sections.
Reimer et al., Radiocarbon, 2004
74. Cu ing dates
Dates assigned to crossdated wood or charcoal specimens
that possess evidence that the last ring present on the
specimen was the last ring grown by the tree before it died.
Source: Nash, Journal of Archeological Research, 2002
78. Noncu ing dates
Dates assigned to crossdated specimens if there is no evidence
indicating that the last ring present on the specimen
was the last one growth before the tree died.
Source: Nash, Journal of Archeological Research, 2002
79. Date clustering
If a number of tree-ring dates from a given site cluster in one
calendar year (or are very close together), one can infer that
some substantial construction (or repair) occurred at that time.
Source: Nash, Journal of Archeological Research, 2002
82. Reading
Stoffel and Bollschweiler (2008), Tree-ring
analysis in natural hazards research – an
overview. Natural Hazards and Earth Systems
Science 8, 187-202.
83. Reading
Stoffel et al. (2010), Whither Dendrogeomorphology?
In Stoffel et al., (eds.), Tree Rings and Natural
Hazards.
