Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T19:20:18.157Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Iron Age Chronology in Israel: Results from Modeling with a Trapezoidal Bayesian Framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

Sharen Lee ,
Christopher Bronk Ramsey  and
Amihai Mazar
Sharen Lee*
Affiliation:
Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
Christopher Bronk Ramsey
Affiliation:
Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom
Amihai Mazar
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
*
2Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bayesian methods have been widely used to address the Iron Age chronological debate in Israel, which has implications for the entire eastern Mediterranean Iron Age chronology. However, a consensus has not been reached. This is largely because radiocarbon dates of materials in this period lie on an oscillation in the calibration curve. This study focuses on the modeling of 14C dates from the Iron I and Iron II periods, discusses the underlying assumptions and limitations of existing Bayesian chronologies, and proposes the use of a more appropriate model that allows for the phase transitions not being instantaneous. The new trapezoidal model sheds light on the probable duration of the transitions between the Iron Age phases.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 55 , Issue 2: Proceedings of the 21st International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 2) , 2013 , pp. 731 - 740
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boaretto, E, Finkelstein, I, Shahack-Gross, R. 2010. Radiocarbon results from the Iron IIA site of Atar Haroa in the Negev Highlands and their archaeological and historical implications. Radiocarbon 52(1): 1–12.CrossRefGoogle 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
Brainerd, GW. 1951. The place of chronological ordering in archaeological analysis. American Antiquity 16(4): 301–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2009. Dealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon 51(3): 1023–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruins, HJ, van der Plicht, J, Mazar, A, Bronk Ramsey, C, Manning, SW. 2005. The Groningen radiocarbon series from Tel Rehov: OxCal Bayesian computations for the Iron IB–IIA boundary and Iron IIA destruction events. In: Levy, TE, Higham, T, editors. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. p 271–93.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Kenworthy, JB, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1991. Combining archaeological and radiocarbon information: a Bayesian approach to calibration. Antiquity 65(249):808–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buck, CE, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1992. Calibration of radiocarbon results pertaining to related archaeological events. Journal of Archaeological Science 19(5): 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmi, I, Segal, D. 1996. 14C dating of an Israelite biblical site at Kuntillet Ajrud (Horvat Teman): correction, extension and improved age estimate. Radiocarbon 38(2):385–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantalkin, A, Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2011. Iron Age Mediterranean chronology: a rejoinder. Radiocarbon 53(1):179–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, I. 2005. A low chronology update: archaeology, history and Bible. In: Levy, TE, Higham, T, editors. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. p 31–42.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2006. 14C and the Iron Age chronology debate: Rehov, Khirbet en-Nahas, Dan, and Megiddo. Radiocarbon 48(3):373–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2009. Radiocarbon-dated destruction layers: a skeleton for Iron Age Chronology in the Levant. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 28(324):255–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2010a. Radiocarbon dating the Iron Age in the Levant: a Bayesian model for six ceramic phases and six transitions. Antiquity 84(324): 374–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, I, Piasetzky, E. 2010b. The Iron I/IIA transition in the Levant: a reply to Mazar and Bronk Ramsey and a new perspective. Radiocarbon 52(4): 1667–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Y, Kang, H. 2011. The relative and absolute chronology of Khirbet Qeiyafa: Very late Iron Age I or Very early Iron Age IIA? Israel Exploration Journal 61:171–83.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Y, Streit, K, Ganor, S, Hasel, MG. 2012. State formation in Judah: Biblical tradition, modern historical theories and radiometric dates at Khirbet Qeiyafa. Radiocarbon 54(3–4):359–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilboa, A, Jull, AJT, Sharon, I, Boaretto, E. 2009. Notes on Iron IIA 14C dates from Tell el-Qudeirat (Kadesh Barnea). Tel Aviv 36:82–94.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsberg, AJ. 2006. Flexible Bayesian methods for archaeological dating , University of Sheffield.Google Scholar
Lee, S, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2012. Development and application of the trapezoidal model for archaeological chronologies. Radiocarbon 54(1): 107–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, TE, Higham, T, Bronk Ramsey, C, Smith, NG, Ben-Yosef, E, Robinson, M, Münger, S, Knabb, K, Schulze, JP, Najjar, M, Tauxe, L. 2008. High-precision radiocarbon dating and historical biblical archaeology in southern Jordan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 105(43): 16,460–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazar, A. 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000–586 BCE. New York: Anchor Bible.Google Scholar
Mazar, A. 2005. The debate over the chronology of the Iron Age in the Southern Levant. In: Levy, TE, Higham, T, editors. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. p 15–30.Google Scholar
Mazar, A, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2008. 14C dates and the Iron Age chronology of Israel: a response. Radiocarbon 50(2): 159–80.Google Scholar
Mazar, A, Bronk Ramsey, C. 2010. A response to Finkelstein and Piasetzky's criticism and new perspective. Radiocarbon 52(4): 1681–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazar, A, Bruins, HJ, Panitz-Cohen, N, van der Plicht, J. 2005. Ladder of time at Tel Rehov: stratigraphy, archaeological context, pottery and radiocarbon dates. In: Levy, TE, Higham, T, editors. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. p 193–255.Google Scholar
Robinson, WS. 1951. A method for chronologically ordering archaeological deposits. American Antiquity 16(4):293–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharon, I, Gilboa, A, Boaretto, E, Jull, AJT. 2005. The Early Iron Age Dating Project: introduction, methodology, progress report and an update on the Tel Dor radiometric dates. In: Levy, TE, Higham, T, editors. The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. p 65–92.Google Scholar
Sharon, I, Gilboa, A, Jull, AJT, Boaretto, E. 2007. Report on the first stage of the Iron Age dating project in Israel: supporting a Low Chronology. Radiocarbon 49(1): 1–46.Google Scholar
Stern, E, editor. 2003. Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Vanpaemel, W. 2010. Prior sensitivity in theory testing: an apologia for the Bayes factor. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 54(6):491–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar