Research on prehistoric mainland Southeast Asia is dominated by mortuary contexts, leaving processes such as the transition to sedentism relatively understudied. Recent excavations in southern Vietnam, however, have recovered new evidence for settlement. The authors report on investigations at the neolithic site of Loc Giang (3980–3270 cal BP) in southern Vietnam, where excavation revealed a vertical sequence of more than 30 surfaces. Microarchaeological analyses indicate that these features are carefully prepared lime mortar floors; the lime was probably produced from burnt shell. The floors date to between 3510 and 3150 cal BP, providing the earliest-known evidence for the use of lime mortar, and for durable settlement construction, in this region.

The following paper presents the results of radiocarbon (14C) dating of Middle Bronze Age (MB) contexts in Jerusalem. The dates, sampled with microarchaeology methods from three different locations along the eastern slopes of the city’s ancient core, reveal that Jerusalem was initially settled in the early phases of the period, with public architecture first appearing in the beginning of the 19th century BC and continued to develop until the 17th century BC. At that time, a curious gap in settlement is noted until the 16th century BC, when the site is resettled. The construction of this phase continued into the early 15th century BC. The dates presented are discussed in both the site-level, as well as their far-reaching implications regarding MB regional chronology. It is suggested here that the high chronology, dating the Middle Bronze Age between 2000 and 1600 BC is difficult to reconcile with dates from many sites. In contrast, a more localized chronology should be adopted, with the Middle Bronze Age continuing into the early 15th century BC in certain parts of the southern Levant, such as the region of Jerusalem.

The question under discussion is whether the dates of the Late Bronze (LBIIB)-LBIII (Iron IA) transitions in three sites in the southern Levant, namely Megiddo, Tell es-Safi/Gath and Qubur el-Walaydah occur at the same time, as has been proposed by Israel Finkelstein in his article in 2016 in Egypt and Levant. Here we respond to Finkelstein’s comments. We add some new data, clarify the issues that were raised, and conclude that the Late Bronze (LBIIB)-LBIII (Iron IA) transitions occurred at different times in northern and southern Israel.

The Late Bronze Age to Iron Age transition in the Levant includes the appearance of new material culture that is similar in styles to the Aegean world. In the southern Levant, the distribution of early styles of Aegean-like pottery, locally produced, is limited to the coastal areas of Canaan, making synchronization with the rest of the region difficult. Radiocarbon (14C) dating provides a high-resolution absolute chronological framework for synchronizing ceramic phases. Here, absolute 14C chronologies of the Late Bronze to Iron Age transition in the sites Tel Beth Shean, Tel Rehov, Tel Lachish, and Tel Miqne-Ekron are determined. Results show that the ranges of transitions vary in an absolute time frame by 50–100 years between different sites and that the range of the Late Bronze Age to Iron Age transition in Canaan spans the 13th–11th centuries BC plateau. These chronologies, based on a site-by-site approach for dating, show that the change between early types of Aegean-like pottery (Monochrome) to developed types (Bichrome), occurred over 100 years in Canaan and that the transition occurred in southern sites prior to sites in the north. These ranges show that not only is the Late Bronze to Iron Age not contemporaneous, but also synchronization between sites based on their ceramic assemblages is problematic.

In this response to the reply by Shahack-Gross and Finkelstein (2017), we present additional data of our research at Horvat Haluqim. This includes phytolith percentages and multicellular phytolith stomata in a thin section of a layer in Terraced Field 12, dated by radiocarbon (14C) to the Late Bronze–Early Iron Age. We also show thin-section evidence of aggrading sediment laminations in this terraced field. A new 14C date is given of the Early Islamic Period in Terraced Field 7, as differences in terrace wall architecture are highlighted. We revisit the interpretation by Shahack-Gross and Finkelstein in relation to herd management. Our 14C dates attest that terrace agriculture based on runoff/floodwater irrigation occurred in the Negev Highlands during several periods, including the Iron Age.

One of the most impressive structures in Jerusalem’s ancient landscape is the tower that was built to surround and protect the Gihon Spring, Jerusalem’s perennial water source. The structure, first discovered by Reich and Shukron (2004), encompasses the cave in which the spring sprouts from, with walls 7 m thick built of large boulders. The Spring Tower, along with the other features relating to it, were all attributed to the Middle Bronze Age II, based on their architectural and stratigraphical relationship, the type of architecture, and the pottery found. In the continued excavations carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority along the outer, eastern face of the Spring Tower, it was noted that at least the northeast side of the tower was not built on bedrock, but rather on layers of sediment, which were sealed by the massive boulders at the base of the tower. In order to provide an absolute dating for the structure, two sections were sampled for radiocarbon (14C) dating beneath the foundation stones at two locations. Scenarios for the construction of the tower during Middle Bronze Age (MB) and Iron Age II are considered, based on the new 14C data, yielding a series of dates, the latest of which falls in the terminal phases of the 9th century BCE, alongside previous excavation data.

Shahack-Gross and Finkelstein (2015) further developed their theory, based on microarchaeology, that there was no agriculture in the Negev Highlands during the Iron Age. We critically evaluate their article in this rejoinder and propose that their conclusion is an example of overinterpretation from a small amount of indirect data. Based on phytoliths in two courtyards and a few rooms, i.e. structures not related to farming, they construed the absence of agriculture during the Iron Age in an area of 2000 km2. We present new radiocarbon, macroarchaeological, and microarchaeological data of Horvat Haluqim, showing that agriculture in the Negev Highlands based on runoff/floodwater capture and related terrace wall construction did not begin with the Roman–Byzantine period. Terrace agriculture in the Negev is older and includes also the Iron Age.