Radiocarbon Dating in Near-Eastern Contexts: Confusion and Quality Control

Abstract

Near-Eastern archaeology has long remained oblivious to radiocarbon dating as unique historical calendars brought about a perception that 14C dating is superfluous. Circular chronological reasoning may occur as a result. There is now strong 14C evidence that the early part of Egyptian history seems older than age assessments currently in vogue among scholars. It is vital to apply systematic and high-quality 14C dating to each and every excavation in the Near East to measure time with the same yardstick. Such a strategy will enable chronological comparison of different areas at an excavation site and also between sites and regions, independent of cultural deliberations. This is essential for proper interpretation of archaeological layers and association with data from other fields. Radiocarbon (14C) is the most common radiometric dating tool applied in archaeology, geosciences, and environmental research. Stringent quality control is required to build up a reliable 14C chronology for the historical periods in Near-Eastern contexts. Important aspects of quality control involve regular laboratory intercomparisons, transparent duplicate and triplicate analysis of selected samples, conventional versus accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) (i.e. sample size), sample selection and association. Finally, bones may provide short-lived dates in important stratigraphic archaeological contexts.

Geoarchaeological tsunami deposits at Palaikastro (Crete) and the Late Minoan IA eruption of Santorini

“…The reasons for the divergence between radiocarbon dating and archaeo-historical dating during the mid-second millennium BCE in the Eastern Mediterranean and Near East have not yet been resolved (Warren and Hankey, 1989;Bruins and Mook, 1989;Manning, 1999;Van der Plicht and Bruins, 2001;Bietak, 2003;Bietak and Höflmayer, 2007;Wiener, 2003Wiener, , 2007Bruins, 2007;Bronk Ramsey et al, 2004;Manning et al, 2006;Friedrich et al, 2006). This problem complicates matters, because mixing dates from the two principal chronological systems e Egyptian Calendar and radiocarbon dating e may lead to erroneous correlations and conclusions.…”

“…Radiocarbon dating was performed by AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) at the 14 C laboratory of the University of Groningen, the Netherlands (laboratory code GrA), in the framework of an ongoing regional 14 C dating project (Bruins and Mook, 1989;Van der Plicht and Bruins, 2001;. The samples were pretreated using standard techniques.…”

“…Subsequently, the graphite targets for the ion source of the AMS (Aerts-Bijma et al, 2001) were prepared from the CO 2 gas. The AMS measures the 14 C/ 12 C and 13 C/ 12 C isotope ratios, enabling calculation of the radiocarbon ages ( Van der Plicht et al, 2000), which are reported in BP, including correction for isotopic fractionation using the d 13 C values. The imbricated in situ position of cattle bones and ceramic sherds in field section 1 at the Promontory (Figs.…”

AMS Dates from Two Archaeological Sites of Korea: Blind Tests

“…van der Plicht and Bruins 2001;Pettitt et al 2003;Mellars 2006;Buck et al 2007;Faught 2008;Graf 2009). Although archaeologists are well aware that uncertainty of 14 C dates is inevitable and dating results should be understood probabilistically, there remains a strong desire to obtain exact dates for target events.…”

“…Despite radiocarbon laboratories’ continuous efforts to increase the accuracy and precision of measurements, uncertainty regarding the general reliability of 14 C dates to correctly date past human activity has long been one of the primary concerns of archaeologists (e.g. van der Plicht and Bruins 2001; Pettitt et al 2003; Mellars 2006; Buck et al 2007; Faught 2008; Graf 2009). Although archaeologists are well aware that uncertainty of 14 C dates is inevitable and dating results should be understood probabilistically, there remains a strong desire to obtain exact dates for target events.…”