Researchers increasingly rely on aggregations of radiocarbon dates from archaeological sites as proxies for past human populations. This approach has been critiqued on several grounds, including the assumptions that material is deposited, preserved, and sampled in proportion to past population size. However, various attempts to quantitatively assess the approach suggest there may be some validity in assuming date counts reflect relative population size. To add to this conversation, here we conduct a preliminary analysis coupling estimates of ethnographic population density with late Holocene radiocarbon dates across all counties in California. Results show that counts of late Holocene radiocarbon-dated archaeological sites increase significantly as a function of ethnographic population density. This trend is robust across varying sampling windows over the last 5000 BP. Though the majority of variation in dated-site counts remains unexplained by population density. Outliers reveal how departures from the central trend may be influenced by regional differences in research traditions, development-driven contract work, organic preservation, and landscape taphonomy. Overall, this exercise provides some support for the “dates-as-data” approach and offers insights into the conditions where the underlying assumptions may or may not hold.

From 2014 to 2020, we compiled radiocarbon ages from the lower 48 states, creating a database of more than 100,000 archaeological, geological, and paleontological ages that will be freely available to researchers through the Canadian Archaeological Radiocarbon Database. Here, we discuss the process used to compile ages, general characteristics of the database, and lessons learned from this exercise in “big data” compilation.