Reply to Blair
Blair provides a thorough review of data he claims stands in opposition to our narrative concerning the origins of IIa40/Early Blue glass trade beads and their presence in arctic Alaska prior to Columbus’ initial voyage. He employs three lines of evidence: historical and archaeological data, Instrum...
| Published in: | American Antiquity |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2021.45 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0002731621000457 |
| Summary: | Blair provides a thorough review of data he claims stands in opposition to our narrative concerning the origins of IIa40/Early Blue glass trade beads and their presence in arctic Alaska prior to Columbus’ initial voyage. He employs three lines of evidence: historical and archaeological data, Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis, and radiocarbon dating. Our reply addresses his application of these data sets, clarifying his use of our data to arrive at his conclusions. While we continue to disagree with Blair, we do wish to acknowledge his time spent on debating the issue thereby furthering all of our understanding on this topic. |
|---|