Kalundu Mound: revised chronology and crop evidence - History, Government, Language, and Sources

下载的 PDF 是图像副本。如需可选中文本及更好的辅助技术支持，请使用打印功能。

Southern African Worlds: Rivers, Stone Cities, and Living Heritage
Southern Africa; selected Zambia context · Source-reviewed profile

Kalundu Mound: revised chronology and crop evidence

No ancient self-designation is inferred from this research label or modern place name.

Kalundu Mound: revised chronology and crop evidence brings stratigraphy, direct crop dates, radiocarbon models and historical laboratory records into a local historical context. The 2021 study models the main mound around 1190–1410 calibrated CE, revising older chronological interpretations. Kalomo ceramic categories and a revised mound chronology do not identify one language, migration or centralized farming state.

Farming mound and chronology reassessment Main mound modeled approximately 1190–1410 calibrated CE; underlying evidence distinguished Stratigraphy, direct crop dates, radiocarbon models and historical laboratory records Kalomo, Zambia: approximate public-town orientation, not an excavation, burial, sacred-site, private compound or production-work location; never a territorial, ethnic, linguistic, cultural, political, religious, sovereignty or route boundary. No access, collecting or travel permission is implied.
概览

Households, landscapes, work, and the evidence

Coasts, rivers, fields, and regional connections

Kalomo is a modern orientation for this selected context, not an ancient capital designation or boundary. Kalomo ceramic categories and a revised mound chronology do not identify one language, migration or centralized farming state.

Political organization and community scale

Kalomo ceramic categories and a revised mound chronology do not identify one language, migration or centralized farming state.

Later transformation, living heritage, and modern reception

Living communities and heritage institutions retain their own authority; the atlas cannot establish identity, ancestry, descent or membership. Crop remains, pottery and linguistic reconstruction are distinct evidence; exclude genetic conclusions from multidisciplinary research. Later research, restoration and heritage events are dated separately in the timeline.

Revised mound dates The 2021 study models the main mound around 1190–1410 calibrated CE, revising older chronological interpretations.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered research, not author or community endorsement. Retain the stated chronological, sample and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S1]
Food evidence Directly dated sorghum and other plant remains make subsistence visible; a possible grain identification must not be converted into certainty.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered research, not author or community endorsement. Retain the stated chronological, sample and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S1]
Research history The 1971 laboratory list preserves older measurements; the project account describes renewed investigation, not a final genetic or linguistic verdict.

Brief DNAGENICS AI-assisted paraphrase of registered research, not author or community endorsement. Retain the stated chronological, sample and interpretive limits.

Source review: 2026-10-20 [S2] [S3]
历史序列

简洁、来源化的时间表

这些里程碑是指向点,而不是完整的历史.

  1. Underlying evidence

    Lower deposits and later mound accumulation must not be collapsed into one phase.

    [S1]

  2. Mound accumulation

    The revised model concerns the sampled main sequence, not the age of every Kalomo-classified site.

    [S1]

  3. Direct crop evidence

    A dated sorghum sample informs local crop use, not a single origin of farming.

    [S1]

  4. Earlier date list

    Published laboratory measurements require calibration and stratigraphic reassessment, not literal conversion to precise calendar events.

    [S2]

  5. Reinvestigation

    Renewed sampling and project research reassessed chronology and subsistence.

    [S1] [S3]
文化和语言

Food, craft, labor, belief, and collective work

本简介中命名的语言

  • Crop remains, pottery and linguistic reconstruction are distinct evidence; exclude genetic conclusions from multidisciplinary research.

语言家庭: Language, archaeological style, political allegiance and residence are distinct; the selected evidence does not classify every resident.

Research focus: Stratigraphy, direct crop dates, radiocarbon models and historical laboratory records.

Kalomo ceramic categories and a revised mound chronology do not identify one language, migration or centralized farming state.

Crop remains, pottery and linguistic reconstruction are distinct evidence; exclude genetic conclusions from multidisciplinary research.

Material evidence and transmitted accounts need context. No artifact, ancestral-remains, rock-art or sacred-site imagery is reproduced.

Independent DNAGENICS AI-assisted educational summaries, not reproductions of the cited works or professional scholarly review. Cited communities, museums, researchers, universities, heritage authorities, UNESCO and publishers did not author or endorse this atlas. Names identify sources only; no logos, source imagery, human remains, restricted cultural expressions or sensitive coordinates are reproduced. Public availability does not establish cultural consent. Use the site's contact channel for corrections or concerns.

AI 研究指南

询问此已审查的配置文件

该指南可以解释和连接本页面中已经存在的事实,不能搜索开放的网络,确定身份或公民身份,也不能评估祖先和遗传信息。

以核准的简介内容为依据 引用使用下面的源代码 没有账户或DNA上下文

AI 对遗传相似性的解读不能证明祖源。内容仅供参考，不构成专业建议。

阅读完整说明

继续前请注意，您即将生成的分析由 AI 模型提供。AI 输出可能不完整、不准确或有误。它描述与参考人群之间的统计遗传相似性，不能证明祖源、族裔、身份或血缘关系。内容仅供参考和学习，不构成医疗、诊断、家谱、法律或其他专业建议。请勿据此作出健康、财务、法律或家庭决定。在适用法律允许的最大范围内，DNA Genics, S.L. 不对使用该 AI 输出所产生的损失或决定承担责任。

不输入姓名、联系方式、家庭-树木信息、账户或工具包识别资料或遗传数据。

证据登记册

本页使用的来源

Prefer national heritage institutions, accountable archaeological projects, academic editions, original studies and living community knowledge in its authorized context. Identify institutional summaries, repository abstracts, preliminary reports, older colonial research, advisory evaluations and tentative nominations rather than treating them as independent excavation confirmation. Attribute chronology, composition date, genre, audience and viewpoint. Public access is not permission to reproduce source images, archives or restricted knowledge.

  1. C1

    Archaeological excavations at Bosutswe, Botswana: cultural chronology, paleo-ecology and economy

    Denbow and colleagues; Journal of Archaeological Science · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2008

  2. C2

    Herders and foragers on Kasteelberg: Interim report of excavations 1999–2002

    Sadr, Smith, Plug, Orton and Mutti; South African Archaeological Bulletin · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2003

  3. C3

    Revisiting Kalundu Mound, Zambia: Implications for the Timing of Social and Subsistence Transitions in Iron Age Southern Africa

    Goldstein and colleagues; African Archaeological Review · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2021

  4. C4

    Central Region, Gweru

    National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated record; consulted 2026-10-20

  5. C5

    Trade and society on the south-east African coast in the later first millennium AD: the case of Chibuene

    Sinclair, Ekblom and Wood; Antiquity 86 · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2012

  6. C6

    Matobo Hills, Zimbabwe

    British Museum African Rock Art project · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · Undated record; consulted 2026-10-20

  7. C7

    Conservation of Archaeological Daga (Adobe) Structures, Domboshaba National Monument, Botswana

    Terra 2008 proceedings; Getty Conservation Institute · Conservation case study within conference proceedings · 2011

  8. C8

    How pots, sand and stone walls helped us date an ancient SA settlement

    Ruby-Anne Birin, Alex Schoeman and Mary Evans; University of the Witwatersrand · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2021-05-28

  9. S1

    Revisiting Kalundu Mound, Zambia: Implications for the Timing of Social and Subsistence Transitions in Iron Age Southern Africa

    Goldstein and colleagues; African Archaeological Review · Original research or institutional account; brief attributed paraphrase · 2021

  10. S2

    Rhodesian Radiocarbon Measurements IV

    J. G. Sheppard and E. R. Swart; Radiocarbon 13(2) · Historical laboratory date list; uncalibrated dates and colonial terminology contextualized · 1971

  11. S3

    Food-security in pre-colonial Zambia

    Steven T. Goldstein; archaeologist's project account · Original project description; only archaeological work, no genetic conclusions summarized · Undated record; consulted 2026-10-20

来源和名称仍然是各自出版商和社区的财产,列入这些来源和名称是为了引证和教育;并不意味着认可DNAGENICS,摘要是编辑原文,应与链接来源核对,以便重要使用。

Editorial review: October 20, 2026

可选的DNA报告

An optional separate paid genetic-similarity report, not a historical source or a representation of every southern African community.

The Historical Atlas is free and uses no DNA or genetic data. The paid report is separate, and this atlas cannot establish identity, ancestry, descent, recognition, territory or community membership.
View the separate report
继续探索
Southern Africa; selected Zambia context Ingombe Ilede: chronology, metalwork, and unequal exchange No ancient self-designation is inferred from this research label or modern place name. 读取配置文件 Southern Africa; selected South Africa context Bokoni: terraces, households, and agricultural innovation No ancient self-designation is inferred from this research label or modern place name. 读取配置文件 Southern Africa; selected Botswana context Bosutswe: households, production, and Kalahari-margin connections No ancient self-designation is inferred from this research label or modern place name. 读取配置文件
使用优惠码 可减免 35% • 11月12日 到期