Considerations of the Scale of Radiocarbon Offsets in the East Mediterranean, and Considering a Case for the Latest (Most Recent) Likely Date for the Santorini Eruption

Abstract

ABSTRACT.The debate over the dating of the Santorini (Thera) volcanic eruption has seen sustained efforts to criticize or challenge the radiocarbon dating of this time horizon. We consider some of the relevant areas of possible movement in the 14 C dating-and, in particular, any plausible mechanisms to support as late (most recent) a date as possible. First, we report and analyze data investigating the scale of apparent possible 14 C offsets (growing season related) in the Aegean-Anatolia-east Mediterranean region (excluding the southern Levant and especially pre-modern, pre-dam Egypt, which is a distinct case), and find no evidence for more than very small possible offsets from several cases. This topic is thus not an explanation for current differences in dating in the Aegean and at best provides only a few years of latitude. Second, we consider some aspects of the accuracy and precision of 14 C dating with respect to the Santorini case. While the existing data appear robust, we nonetheless speculate that examination of the frequency distribution of the 14 C data on short-lived samples from the volcanic destruction level at Akrotiri on Santorini (Thera) may indicate that the average value of the overall data sets is not necessarily the most appropriate ,4 C age to use for dating this time horizon. We note the recent paper of Soter (2011), which suggests that in such a volcanic context some (small) age increment may be possible from diffuse C0 2 emissions (the effect is hypothetical at this stage and has not been observed in the field), and that "if short-lived samples from the same stratigraphie horizon yield a wide range of 14 C ages, the lower values may be the least altered by old C0 2 ." In this context, it might be argued that a substantive "low" grouping of 14 C ages observable within the overall 14 C data sets on short-lived samples from the Thera volcanic destruction level centered about 3326-3328 BP is perhaps more representative of the contemporary atmospheric 14 C age (without any volcanic C0 2 contamination). This is a subjective argument (since, in statistical terms, the existing studies using the weighted average remain valid) that looks to support as late a date as reasonable from the 14 C data. The impact of employing this revised 14 C age is discussed. In general, a late 17th century BC date range is found (to remain) to be most likely even //such a late-dating strategy is followed-a late 17th century BC date range is thus a robust finding from the 14 C evidence even allowing for various possible variation factors. However, the possibility of a mid-16th century BC date (within -1593-1530 cal BC) is increased when compared against previous analyses if the Santorini data are considered in isolation.

Change and Continuity in Europe and the Mediterranean around 1600bc

“…After the absolute dating of two olive trees that were buried by the Minoan tephra layers of Thera, it is possible to date the dramatic volcanic eruption with 95.4% certainty (2σ) between 1627 and 1600 BC (Friedrich & Heinemeier 2009). This date is also in agreement with the radiocarbon results obtained from short lived seed samples from the destruction levels of the Akrotiri settlement on the Manning & Kromer 2012), and with the volcanic derived bromine peak in northern Anatolian speleothems (Badertscher et al 2014). Although a fundamental scepticism towards such an early date of the Thera eruption seems to persist among some authors (Cherubini et al 2014), we argue that the time has come to move beyond the strictly chronological debate and to consider the wider historical and social implications of this epoch-scale event (Fig.…”

Dating the Thera (Santorini) eruption: archaeological and scientific evidence supporting a high chronology

“…This is incorrect. First, recent work employs Bayesian chronological modelling (Bayliss 2009; Bronk Ramsey 2009a) with a sequence of 14 C dates in order to overcome the single-case potential dating ambiguity (as, e.g., Manning et al 2006), or considers the relevant Akrotiri volcanic destruction level (VDL) data set on short-lived samples as a weighted average (Manning & Kromer 2012), or as a group of events assumed to be distributed exponentially towards the end of the final pre-volcanic eruption phase at Akrotiri using a Tau Boundary paired with a Boundary in OxCal (Bronk Ramsey 2009a) as in Höflmayer (2012a: fig. 2) (see Figure 2).…”

“…There are also a number of other arguments for why it seems very unlikely that any substantive volcanic CO 2 effect applies with regard either to the dating of the olive branch or to the Akrotiri VDL (e.g. Friedrich et al 2009;Heinemeier et al 2009;Manning et al 2009: 300-304;Manning & Kromer 2012;Manning 2014: 50-60).…”

Tree Rings and the Chronology of Ancient Egypt

“…The dynasty comes to a close with the reign of Horemheb, to whom various scholars ascribe a reign as short as 13 years or as long as 35 (van Dijk 2008:200). Likewise, synchronizing ancient relative chronologies with episodes of natural disasters that left telltale evidence across the region, such as the volcanic eruption that devastated the island of Santorini sometime in the Bronze Age, remains contentious (Höflmayer 2012;Manning and Kromer 2012). van Dijk 2008).…”