Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T19:57:27.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing the Limits: Radiocarbon Dating and the End of the Late Bronze Age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Graham Hagens
Graham Hagens*
Affiliation:
251 Bond Street North, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L85 3X1. Email: rgrhagens@cogeco.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Archaeometry is becoming an increasingly important tool in chronological research related to events in the Ancient Near East during the 2nd millennium BCE. This paper is a review of recently published radiometric results in an attempt to establish the probable dating range for one particular event that occurred during the last quarter of that millennium, the end of the Late Bronze Age. The conclusion is that in spite of significant improvements in methodology in recent years, the quantity and quality of radiocarbon data are still insufficient to define the range of that date to much better than a century. It is concluded that the most likely date of the Late Bronze/Iron Age transition (here defined by the arrival of Mycenaean LH IIIC:1b pottery in the Levant) is somewhere in the 8-decade range between ∼1170 to 1100 BCE. A comparative study of archaeological and historical evidence would appear to favor the lower value.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , 2006 , pp. 83 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Ben-Shlomo, D. 2003. The Iron Age sequence of Tel Ashdod: a rejoinder to ‘Ashdod Revisited’ by I Finkelstein and L Singer-Avitz. Tel Aviv 30:83–107.Google Scholar
Ben-Tor, A. 2000. Hazor and the chronology of northern Israel: a reply to Israel Finkelstein. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 317:9–15.Google Scholar
Ben-Tor, A, Ben-Ami, D. 1998. Hazor and the archaeology of the tenth century BCE. Israel Exploration Journal 48:1–38.Google Scholar
Boaretto, E, Jull, AJT, Gilboa, A, Sharon, I. 2005. Dating the Iron Age I/II transition in Israel: first intercomparison results. Radiocarbon 47(1):39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruins, HJ, van der Plicht, J, Mazar, A. 2003. 14C dates from Tel Rehov: Iron Age chronology, pharaohs, and Hebrew kings. Science 300:315–8.Google Scholar
Bunimovitz, S, Faust, A. 2001. Chronological separation, geographical segregation, or ethnic demarcation? Ethnography and the Iron Age Low chronology. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 322:1–10.Google Scholar
Bunimovitz, S, Lederman, Z. 2001. The Iron Age fortifications of Tel Beth Shemesh: a 1990–2000 perspective. Israel Exploration Journal 51:121–47.Google Scholar
Coldstream, N. 2003. Some Aegean reactions to the chronological debate in the southern Levant. Tel Aviv 30:247–58.Google Scholar
Depuydt, L. 1996. The function of the Ebers Calendar concordance. Orientalia 65:61–88.Google Scholar
Dever, WG. 2003. Visiting the real Gezer: a reply to Israel Finkelstein. Tel Aviv 30:259–83.Google Scholar
Drews, R. 1993. The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe ca. 1200 BC. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 280 p.Google Scholar
Faulkner, RO. 1975. Egypt from the inception of the Nineteenth Dynasty to the death of Ramesses III. In: Edwards, IES, Gadd, CJ, Hammond, NGL, editors. The Cambridge Ancient History (3rd edition) Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 217–51.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I. 1996. The stratigraphy and chronology of Megiddo and Beth-Shan in the 12th–11th centuries BCE. Tel Aviv 23:170–84.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I. 1998. Bible archaeology or archaeology of Palestine in the Iron Age? A rejoinder. Levant 30:167–73.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I. 1999. Hazor and the north in the Iron Age: a Low Chronology perspective. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 314:55–70.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2003a. Recent radiocarbon results and King Solomon. Science 302:771–9.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2003b. Wrong and right; high and low 14C dates from Tel Rehov and Iron Age chronology. Tel Aviv 30:283–95.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Singer-Avitz, L. 2001. Ashdod revisited. Tel Aviv 28:231–59.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Singer-Avitz, L. 2004. ‘Ashdod revisited’ – maintained. Tel Aviv 31:122–35.Google Scholar
Gal, Z. 2003. The Iron Age ‘Low Chronology’ in light of the excavations at Horvat Rosh Zayit. Israel Exploration Journal 53:147–50.Google Scholar
Gilboa, A, Sharon, I. 2001. Early Iron Age radiometric dates from Tel Dor: preliminary implications for Phoenicia and beyond. Radiocarbon 43(3):1343–51.Google Scholar
Gilboa, A, Sharon, I. 2003. An archaeological contribution to the Early Iron Age chronological debate: alternative chronologies for Phoenicia and their effects on the Levant, Cyprus, and Greece. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 332:7–80.Google Scholar
Gilboa, A, Sharon, I, Zorn, J. 2004. Dor and Iron Age chronology: scarabs, ceramic sequence and 14C. Tel Aviv 31:32–59.Google Scholar
Goren, Y, Bunimovitz, S, Finkelstein, I, Na'aman, N. 2003. The location of Alashiya: new evidence from petrographic investigation of Alashiyan tablets from El-Amarna and Ugarit. American Journal of Archaeology 107:233–55.Google Scholar
Hagens, G. 1996. A critical review of dead reckoning from the 21st Dynasty. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 33:153–63Google Scholar
Hagens, G. 1999. An ultra-low chronology of Iron Age Palestine. Antiquity 73:431–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagens, G. 2002. The chronology of tenth century Assyria and Babylonia. The Journal of the Ancient Chronology Forum 9:61–70.Google Scholar
Hagens, G. 2005. The Assyrian king list and chronology: a critique. Orientalia 74:23–41.Google Scholar
Helck, W. 1987. Was kann die Ágyptologie wirklich zum Problem der absoluten Chronologie in der Bronzezeit beitragen? In: Åström, P, editor. High, Middle or Low, Part 1. Gothenburg: Paul Åström Forlag. p 18–26.Google Scholar
James, P, Thorpe, IJ, Kokkinos, N, Morkot, R, Frankish, J. 1991. Centuries of Darkness: A Challenge to the Conventional Chronology of Old World Archaeology. London: Jonathan Cape. 434 p.Google Scholar
Karageorghis, V. 2002. Early Cyprus: Crossroads of the Mediterranean. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum. 232 p.Google Scholar
Kitchen, KA. 1991. Egyptian chronology: problem or solution? Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1(2):235–9.Google Scholar
Manning, SW, Weninger, B. 1992. A light in the dark: archaeological wiggle matching and the absolute chronology of the close of the Aegean Late Bronze Age. Antiquity 66:636–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manning, SW, Weninger, B, South, AK, Kling, B, Kuniholm, PI, Muhly, JD, Hadjisavvas, S, Sewell, A, Cadogan, G. 2001. Absolute age range of the Late Cypriot IIC period on Cyprus. Antiquity 75:328–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazar, A. 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000-586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday. 608 p.Google Scholar
Mazar, A. 1997a. Iron Age chronology–a reply to I Finkelstein. Levant 29:157–67.Google Scholar
Mazar, A. 1997b. Four thousand years of history at Tel Beth Shean. Biblical Archaeologist 60(2):62–76.Google Scholar
Mazar, A. 2004. Greek and Levantine Iron Age chronology: a rejoinder. Israel Exploration Journal 54:24–36.Google Scholar
Mazar, A, Carmi, I. 2001. Radiocarbon dates from Iron Age strata at Tel Beth Shean and Tel Rehov. Radiocarbon 43(3):1333–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Na'aman, N. 2000. The contribution of the Trojan grey ware from Lachish and Tel Miqne-Ekron to the chronology of the Philistine monochrome pottery. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 317:1–7.Google Scholar
Reimer, PJ, Baillie, MGL, Bard, E, Bayliss, A, Beck, JW, Bertrand, CJH, Blackwell, PG, Buck, CE, Burr, GS, Cutler, KB, Damon, PE, Edwards, RL, Fairbanks, RG, Friedrich, M, Guilderson, TP, Hogg, AG, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, G, Manning, S, Bronk Ramsey, C, Reimer, RW, Remmele, S, Southon, JR, Stuiver, M, Talamo, S, Taylor, FW, van der Plicht, J, Weyhenmeyer, CE. 2004. IntCa104 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0–26 cal kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46(3):1029–58.Google Scholar
Sharon, I. 2001. ‘Transition dating’ - a heuristic mathematical approach to the collation of radiocarbon dates from stratified sequences. Radiocarbon 43(2A):345–54.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, AM. 1991. The Aegean angle. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1(2):246–7.Google Scholar
Snodgrass, AM. 2001. The Dark Age of Greece: An Archaeological Survey of the Eleventh to Eighth Centuries. New York: Routledge. 496 p.Google Scholar
Stern, E, Berg, J, Gilboa, A, Sharon, I, Zorn, J. 1997. Tel Dor, 1994–1995: preliminary stratigraphic report. Israel Exploration Journal 47:29–56.Google Scholar
Ussishkin, D. 1985. Level VII and VI at Tel Lachish and the end of the Late Bronze Age in Canaan. In: Tubb, JN, editor. Palestine in the Bronze and Iron Ages: Papers in Honour of Olga Tufnell. London: Institute of Archaeology. p 214–28.Google Scholar
Ussishkin, D. 1995. The destruction of Megiddo at the end of the Late Bronze Age and its historical significance. Tel Aviv 22:240–67.Google Scholar
Ussishkin, D. 2000. The credibility of the Tel Jezreel excavations: a rejoinder to Amnon Ben-Tor. Tel Aviv 27:248–56.Google Scholar
Wente, EF, Van Siclen, CC III. 1976. A chronology of the New Kingdom. In: Johnson, J, Wente, EF, editors. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 34. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. p 217–61.Google Scholar
Zarzeki-Peleg, A. 1997. Hazor, Jokneam and Megiddo in the tenth century BCE. Tel Aviv 24:258–87.Google Scholar