Die Synchronisierung der minoischen Alt- und Neupalastzeit mit der ägyptischen Chronologie

Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit der archäologischen Synchronisierung der minoischen Alt- und Neupalastzeit mit der ägyptischen Chronologie. Seit den 1980er Jahren wird in der ägäischen Vorgeschichte die absolute Datierung der beginnenden Spätbronzezeit und insbesondere die Datierung des Vulkanausbruchs von Santorini am Ende der relativchronologischen Phase SM IA intensiv diskutiert. Kurzlebige Radiokarbondaten legen eine um 100 bis 120 Jahre höhere Datierung für die Eruption von Santorini nahe (zweite Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.), während die archäologisch/historische Methode dieses Ereignis in die Zeit von 1550 bis 1500 v. Chr. datieren würde. Die vorliegende Arbeit unterzieht beide Methoden einer kritischen Überprüfung. Während die verfügbaren Radiokarbonproben für die Altpalastzeit keinerlei Abweichung von der archäologisch/historischen Datierung aufweisen, liegen die naturwissenschaftlichen Datierungen für SM IA um bis zu 120 Jahre zu hoch. Diese Abweichung reduziert sich am Ende von SM IB auf etwa 30-50 Jahre, während ab SH / SM IIIA1 kein Unterschied zwischen naturwissenschaftlicher und archäologisch/historischer Datierung festgestellt werden kann. Gegenwärtig kann für diese Abweichung noch keine Lösung angeboten werden. Die ägyptische (historische) Chronologie dürfte auch nach Ausweis der Radiokarbondaten korrekt sein. Um die hohen ägäischen Daten in das archäologisch/historische Gefüge zu integrieren, müsste unser Verständnis der Entwicklung der materiellen Kultur Ägyptens während der Zweiten Zwischenzeit und des frühen Neuen Reichs massiv verändert werden, da die Synchronisierung der ägäischen Phasen mit Ägypten nicht nur von den historischen Daten Ägyptens, sondern auch von der Datierung der ägyptischen materiellen Kultur, wie Keramik oder Steingefäßen, abhängt.The present work deals with the synchronisation of the Minoan Old- and New-Palace periods with the Egyptian (historical) chronology. Since the 1980ies, absolute dates for the early Late Bronze Age of the Aegean and especially for the eruption of Santorini (Thera) at the end of LM IA are hotly debated between archaeologists and scientists alike. Short-lived radiocarbon dates support a chronology which is 100 to 120 years higher (c. 1650-1600 BC) than dates based on archaeological and historical estimations (c. 1550-1500 BC). The present work critically reviews both archaeological and scientific evidence for these dates. Although available radiocarbon dates for the Old-Palace-Period do not differ from archaeological/historical estimations, for the early Late Bronze Age, scientific dates are 100 to 120 years too high. This offset decreases at the end of LM IB to about 30 to 50 years and is non-existent from LM / LH IIIA1 onwards. At the moment no explanation can be offered for this offset, since also the historical dates for the Egyptian chronology are compatible with radiocarbon dating. In order to incorporate the high Aegean dates in the chronological system of the eastern Mediterranean, it would be necessary to alter our understanding of Egyptian material culture during the late Second Intermediate Period and the early New Kingdom, as our dates for Aegean phases are not only dependent on Egyptian historical chronology but also on Egyptian material culture (pottery and stone vessels)

The Date of the Minoan Santorini Eruption: Quantifying the “Offset”

Despite many recent attempts to settle the dispute concerning the absolute date of the Minoan Santorini eruption, there are still differences between some archaeologists and scientists on the absolute dates and the reliability of radiocarbon dating. The recent publication of over 200 new 14C dates for dynastic Egypt rules out a major flaw in the historical chronology of Egypt and proves the reliability of 14C dating in the Nile Valley. Therefore, the student of Aegean archaeology and eastern Mediterranean interconnections is still confronted with an archaeologically based conventional, or “low,” chronology and a 14C-backed “high” chronology. New 14C determinations from different sites of the Aegean support the high chronology for the Late Minoan (LM) IA, while recent re-evaluation of LM IB determinations are slightly higher but more or less in agreement with archaeological estimations. The present contribution reviews archaeological and scientific data for the LM IA period and argues that a reduced (~30 to 50 yr) offset between archaeological and 14C dates for the Minoan Santorini eruption may be possible, thus offering new perspectives for potential solutions for this problem.The Radiocarbon archives are made available by Radiocarbon and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform February 202

Animal husbandry from the Middle Bronze Age through the Iron Age in the Shephelah—faunal remains from the new excavations at Lachish

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Lachish (Tell ed-Duweir) is located in the southern part of the Judean foothills, known as the Shephelah, and is one of the larger and most extensively excavated multi-period sites in the southern Levant. We present the faunal results of the first three seasons of the most recent excavations, the Austrian-Israeli Expedition to Tel Lachish. The expedition focusses on two areas of the tell encompassing the Middle Bronze Age III through the Iron Age II, area S (deep section) and area P (palace area). The aims for the faunal analysis are threefold: comparing the results between the two areas, seeing how our results compare to previous analyses, and comparing Lachish to other synchronous sites in the Shephelah. We observe differences in subsistence strategies between the areas in addition to diachronic differences. Ovicaprids dominate all assemblages, but we see shifts in the sheep to goat ratio and mortality profiles through time indicating changes in subsistence strategies. Our new results largely agree with the results from previous analyses, showing the value of previous studies and their potential compatibility with newer research. A synchronic comparison of Lachish within the Shephelah shows the occupants of the site were largely self-sufficient but possibly engaged in an exchange of resources in the vicinity.</jats:p&gt