Radiocarbon Dates and the Scottish Iron Age

Antiquity ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 43 (169) ◽  
pp. 15-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Euan MacKie
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
The Past ◽  
Iron Age I

Within the past two years the chronology of the later prehistoric period in Scotland has been given a new precision by no less than 24 C14 dates obtained from nine different sites, most of which are conventionally assigned to the pre- Roman Iron Age. Previously the identification and dating of the cultures and sites of this period had depended almost entirely on various exotic bronzes and the time that they and other traits were estimated to have reached Scotland from further south in Britain and from the Continent. The last phase of the Late Bronze Age was fairly confidently assigned a start in the mid-6th century BC on the basis of links with the continental Halstatt Iron Age [I] but the bronzes concerned are nearly all stray finds or from hoards and cannot be tied to any contemporary structures or material cultures except at Covesea and, tenuously, at Traprain Law. The same is true of the various examples of decorated Celtic metalwork which have been found in Scotland: these can be given rough dates on stylistic grounds but were stray finds and unconnected with other aspects of the contemporary material cultures. The dating of hillforts and domestic sites of late pre-Roman times has had to rely on the rare examples

scholarly journals Moẓa during the 10th–9th Centuries BCE: The Results of Excavation Seasons 1993, 2002, and 2003 and their Reflection in a Wider Judahite Context

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 180-202
Author(s):  
Zvi Greenhut
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age I

The paper discusses the finds of the Late Bronze Age, the Iron Age I/IIA, and the Iron Age IIA from the excavations at Moẓa during the years 1993, 2002, and 2003. The site is discussed in its historical framework, relating to Shishak’s campaign to Palestine, as well as in its wider Judahite archaeological context during those periods.

The Bronze and Iron Ages in Jerusalem

2018 ◽  
pp. 11-62
Author(s):  
Kay Prag
Keyword(s):  
Water Supply ◽  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Settlement Pattern ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
The South ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Pastoral Economy ◽  
The Bronze Age

Most evidence for the Bronze Age, Iron Age and Post-Exilic settlement of Jerusalem came from Site A on the south-east ridge, and Kenyon unearthed and dated material of almost all these periods, but very little of the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age I. This settlement pattern is reflected to a lesser extent on other sites, but elsewhere occupation of the region appears to continue, in a more dispersed fashion, perhaps partly related to diversification of the inhabitants to a more pastoral economy. Whether the centrality of Jerusalem is linked to its being an ancient place of burial is considered. Other evidence from the archive relates to the reigns of David, Solomon and Nehemiah. Specific issues are addressed, such as the location of the principal administrative buildings and fortifications, the use of volute capitals, the importance of water supply and drainage, and the problem of residuality affecting archaeological dating in Iron Age Jerusalem, which places the emphasis on C14 dating.

Late second–early first millennium BC abrupt climate changes in coastal Syria and their possible significance for the history of the Eastern Mediterranean

2010 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kaniewski ◽  
E. Paulissen ◽  
E. Van Campo ◽  
H. Weiss ◽  
T. Otto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Environmental History ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Early Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Alluvial Deposits ◽  
Iron Age I

AbstractThe alluvial deposits near Gibala-Tell Tweini provide a unique record of environmental history and food availability estimates covering the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age. The refined pollen-derived climatic proxy suggests that drier climatic conditions occurred in the Mediterranean belt of Syria from the late 13th/early 12th centuries BC to the 9th century BC. This period corresponds with the time frame of the Late Bronze Age collapse and the subsequent Dark Age. The abrupt climate change at the end of the Late Bronze Age caused region-wide crop failures, leading towards socio-economic crises and unsustainability, forcing regional habitat-tracking. Archaeological data show that the first conflagration of Gibala occurred simultaneously with the destruction of the capital city Ugarit currently dated between 1194 and 1175 BC. Gibala redeveloped shortly after this destruction, with large-scale urbanization visible in two main architectural phases during the Early Iron Age I. The later Iron Age I city was destroyed during a second conflagration, which is radiocarbon-dated at circa 2950 cal yr BP. The data from Gibala-Tell Tweini provide evidence in support of the drought hypothesis as a triggering factor behind the Late Bronze Age collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Barbarian Europe and Early Iron Age Greece

1965 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 229-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Snodgrass
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Central Europe ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Aegean Area ◽  
The Past ◽  
The North ◽  
The People ◽  
Mediterranean World ◽  
The Relationship

This paper is concerned with the nature of the relationship that existed between Central Europe and the Aegean area in the early 1st millennium B.C. Interest in Aegean-continental connections has been strong for a considerable time, but has been intensified, particularly from the continental standpoint, in the past fifteen years. Although some of these studies have been concerned with the contacts between 2nd millennium (Late Bronze Age) Greece and the north, others have examined in detail the evidence for the links between the Urnfield culture and Greece during the 10th, 9th and 8th centuries. For Greece, this is an utterly different period from the preceding one; the evidence for foreign contacts suddenly becomes scarce and that for military disasters is virtually non-existent. Yet some scholars have reached very similar conclusions, involving the transmission of objects and of the people who carried them from Central Europe into Greece, for this period as for the preceding Late Bronze Age. Such arguments have a recent exponent in Professor W. Kimmig, whose paper Seevölkerbewegung und Urnenfelderkultur ranges over the whole period from about 1200 to 700. His list of objects and practices in this period, which he considers to have been donated by the Danube-Balkan peoples to the Mediterranean world, is comprehensive indeed: it would include bronze shields and body armour, the equipment of Goliath, the knobbed ware of Troy VII B, the practice of cremation in the Iron Age, the ritual spoliation of weapons in graves, iron swords, spears, knives, bits, lugged axes, spits, fire-dogs, bronze personal objects generally, clay idols, the maeander pattern and the swans of Apollo.

scholarly journals The Iron Age I in the Northern Levant: New perspectives from Lebanon

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanan Charaf
Keyword(s):  
Material Culture ◽  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Smooth Transition ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Southern Levant ◽  
Local Characteristics ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Tell Tayinat

The beginning of the Iron Age in the Levant has been for the past three decades the focus of intense studies and debates. The main reason that had triggered this interest is the turmoil characterizing the end of the Late Bronze Age coupled with the migration of newcomers dubbed the “Sea People” to the coastal Levant. This phenomenon has been studied to a length in the southern Levant where evidence of destructions followed by a new culture is attested on many coastal sites. However, in neighboring Lebanon, few studies focused on this period mainly due to the paucity of archaeological sites dating to the end of the Late Bronze Age/beginning of the Iron Age. In recent years, remains uncovered at major sites such as Tell Arqa (Irqata of the Amarna Tablets), Sarepta, Tyre, or Kamid el-Loz (Kumidi of the Amarna Tablets) gave no evidence for destructions at the end of the Late Bronze Age in this country. On the contrary, the architectural and material culture found at sites such as Tell Arqa and Sarepta points to a smooth transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age. While the exposed architecture is usually flimsy and is characterized by a widespread use of pits and silos (a phenomenon equally observed on other neighboring sites such as Tell Afis in Syria or Tell Tayinat in Turkey), the pottery still retains old characteristics; yet integrated into a few new shapes and fabrics. The patterns of archaism observed in the material cultural in Lebanon challenges the established understanding of the Iron Age I in the southern Levant where it is characterized as a period of turmoil and transformation.This presentation analyses the architectural and material characteristics of the end of the Late Bronze Age I/beginning of the Iron Age I in Lebanon with the aim at isolating both local characteristics and regional influences.

The Rural Hinterland of the Jezreel Valley in the Late Bronze Age III and Iron Age I:

2020 ◽  
pp. 77-102
Author(s):  
Eran Arie ◽  
Karen Covello-Paran ◽  
Anastasia Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age I

Chronology and Terminology in the British Bronze Age

1969 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. B. Burgess
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Early Bronze Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
The Past ◽  
Age Gap ◽  
Middle Bronze Age

SummaryThe paper pleads for an end to persistent misuse of the traditional ‘Three Age’ terminology which still governs the Irish British Bronze Age, and for acceptance of work of the past decade which has either been ignored or misunderstood. Uniform terms of reference are needed, fitted to the new attitudes. Hawkes's Scheme of 1960 provides a framework for this, and is summarized. The Early, Middle, and Late divisions now have a techno-typological, rather than cultural, basis.Traditional cultural and ceramic concepts, based on typology, have resisted changes demanded by a new emphasis on the evidence of associated finds. The various Urn forms and the Deverel—Rimbury complex are particularly relevant here. Associations of Urns, and the few available C14 dates, are examined to demonstrate their existence in the Early Bronze Age, but, because of a remarkable ritual break at c. 1400, not in the Middle Bronze Age, let alone the Late Bronze Age. Similarly, Deverel—Rimbury is now Middle Bronze Age, not Late Bronze Age, its position after c. 1000 uncertain. Since much in our Iron Age is now thought indigenous, already apparent in Deverel—Rimbury, an awkward Late Bronze Age gap is opened up, apparently devoid of settlements and pottery. But much nominally Iron Age material may prove to be Late Bronze Age. There is a need for many more C14 dates to clarify these problems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document