Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

A new multistage construction chronology for the Great Serpent Mound, USA

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

A new multistage construction chronology for the Great Serpent Mound, USA, by Edward W. Herrmann and colleagues, published in the Journal of Archaeological Science in 2014, is a peer reviewed archaeological dating study using radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence methods to establish that the earthwork was built and rebuilt in multiple episodes, including a significant Fort Ancient period construction phase around 1070 CE, complicating the earlier assumption of a single Adena period origin. Its strength is that direct scientific dating of the mound's own soil layers, replacing earlier assumption with measured evidence. Its limit is that dating construction episodes establishes when the earthwork was built and rebuilt, not why, so a claim about the serpent effigy's religious or astronomical meaning to the people who built it needs an interpretive archaeological or ethnohistorical source addressing that separate question, which this dating study does not attempt to answer.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
1
Edward W. Herrmann and colleagues' 2014 study in the Journal of Archaeological Science is a peer reviewed archaeological dating study using radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence methods, treated at the top tier as direct scientific dating of the mound's own soil layers.
Notes
Peer-reviewed archaeological dating study establishing a new multistage construction chronology for the Great Serpent Mound.
Citation
Author
Edward W. Herrmann and others
Publisher
Journal of Archaeological Science
Publication Year
2014
Source Type
peer-reviewed article
Claims Backed By This Source (17 claims)

This source backs 17 claims across the atlas. As facts: 15 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Sacred Sites, 8 claims: 6 well-attested, 1 holds, 1 general references.
  • Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
  • Articles, 2 claims: 2 well-attested.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.