Heidelberg radiocarbon dates for Troia I to VIII and Kumtepe

Suitability of biogenic carbonate of Lithospermum fruits for 14C dating

“…(2) The cultural layer of Troy (Turkey), phase IV-V, with an age of 2350-1760 BC (4300-3710 cal yr BP), provided a sample of L. arvense L. fruits, which displayed a black pigment through charcoal matter. The absolute chronology of Troy is based on abundant ceramic material and supported by more than 260 radiocarbon dates (Korfmann and Kromer, 1993;Kromer et al, 2003). Although the majority of radiocarbon measurements were performed on wood charcoal (including wiggle-matched dates on tree-rings), about twenty 14 C ages derived from seed and bone material were also determined.…”

“…(4) L.arvense L. fruits from the cultural layer of Kumtepe (phase C), a Chalcolithic to Early Bronze Age site in close vicinity to Troy. Kumtepe C has been dated to 2900-2600 BC (4850-4550 cal yr BP) on the basis of ceramic typology and 3 radiocarbon determinations on charcoal (Gabriel, 2000; U. Gabriel, personal communication, 2004; Kromer et al, 2003). The nutlets were dark greyish in colour through pigmentation by charred organic matter, which strongly suggests an in situ origin of the fruits (Riehl, 1999).…”

No Systematic Early Bias to Mediterranean14C Ages: Radiocarbon Measurements from Tree-Ring and Air Samples Provide Tight Limits to Age Offsets

“…Nor does Keenan note that detailed studies of 14 C evidence from, for example, the 3rd millennium BC Aegean region yield dates both consistent with conventional views and, in fact, sometimes younger than pre-existing archaeological opinion (e.g. Korfmann and Kromer 1993;Kromer, Korfmann and Jablonka 2002;Manning 1995Manning , 1997. In contrast, the couple of well-known "problem" areas where 14 C and previous archaeological interpretation disagree, such as the start of the Aegean Late Bronze Age, are notable as periods where the conventional archaeological evidence for chronology is widely recognized as ambiguous and capable of alternative interpretations (e.g.…”

A possible new Bronze Age period at Troy

“…It has been noted before that there is a great deal of 'old' material among the Troy samples -i.e. material with a date that is obviously much older than that of the phase in which it was found (Manning 1995: 28;1997;Kromer et al 2003;Weninger, Easton 2014: 166-68). The extent of the difficulty can be seen in figure 4, which displays the ranges of the calibrated dates within the periods as traditionally defined, without assuming the existence of Proto-IV.…”