You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OxCal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to oxcal+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/oxcal/c8f51db2-1235-43f0-a40b-6929276ef896n%40googlegroups.com.
This is one such statement, and maybe the cited references may say more: “Occasionally, we come across the belief that legacy radiocarbon dates with large standard errors are of little interpretative value because of their greater imprecision. …. however, not only can a Bayesian model handle these data effectively but these dates may actually have the most secure connection between sample and event (e.g., charcoal in a hearth or animal burial). Despite their issues, legacy dates with large standard errors can be informative data for a Bayesian model (see Bayliss et al. 2011; Jay et al. 2012; Krus et al. 2015).”
Hamilton, W. D., & Krus, A. M. (2017). The Myths and Realities of Bayesian Chronological Modeling Revealed. American Antiquity, 83, 187-203. doi:10.1017/aaq.2017.57
Dr. Andrew Millard
Associate Professor of Archaeology,
Durham University, UK
Personal page: https://www.dur.ac.uk/directory/profile/?id=160
Scottish Soldiers Project: https://www.dur.ac.uk/scottishsoldiers
Dunbar 1650 MOOC: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/battle-of-dunbar-1650