The Thera eruption

2012 ◽  
pp. 164-175
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 119 (1) ◽  
pp. e2114213118
Author(s):  
Vasıf Şahoğlu ◽  
Johannes H. Sterba ◽  
Timor Katz ◽  
Ümit Çayır ◽  
Ümit Gündoğan ◽  
...  

The Late Bronze Age Thera eruption was one of the largest natural disasters witnessed in human history. Its impact, consequences, and timing have dominated the discourse of ancient Mediterranean studies for nearly a century. Despite the eruption’s high intensity (Volcanic Explosivity Index 7; Dense Rock Equivalent of 78 to 86 km) [T. H. Druitt, F. W. McCoy, G. E. Vougioukalakis, Elements 15, 185–190 (2019)] and tsunami-generating capabilities [K. Minoura et al., Geology 28, 59–62 (2000)], few tsunami deposits are reported. In contrast, descriptions of pumice, ash, and tephra deposits are widely published. This mismatch may be an artifact of interpretive capabilities, given how rapidly tsunami sedimentology has advanced in recent years. A well-preserved volcanic ash layer and chaotic destruction horizon were identified in stratified deposits at Çeşme-Bağlararası, a western Anatolian/Aegean coastal archaeological site. To interpret these deposits, archaeological and sedimentological analysis (X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy instrumental neutron activation analysis, granulometry, micropaleontology, and radiocarbon dating) were performed. According to the results, the archaeological site was hit by a series of strong tsunamis that caused damage and erosion, leaving behind a thick layer of debris, distinguishable by its physical, biological, and chemical signature. An articulated human and dog skeleton discovered within the tsunami debris are in situ victims related to the Late Bronze Age Thera eruption event. Calibrated radiocarbon ages from well-constrained, short-lived organics from within the tsunami deposit constrain the event to no earlier than 1612 BCE. The deposit provides a time capsule that demonstrates the nature, enormity, and expansive geographic extent of this catastrophic event.


Radiocarbon ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 953-961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronny Friedrich ◽  
Bernd Kromer ◽  
Lukas Wacker ◽  
Jesper Olsen ◽  
Sabine Remmele ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTAnnually resolved tree-ring samples of the time period 1625–1510 BCE were analyzed from the German oak tree-ring chronology. Blocks of the same tree rings were previously used to generate IntCal calibration data. The new dataset shows an offset to the calibration data IntCal13 of 24 years and resembles annual data for the same time period derived from tree-ring records in other growth locations. A subset of samples of the period 1625–1585 BCE was additionally measured in three other laboratories (ETH, AAR, AA) for quality control.


1993 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Alexander
Keyword(s):  

2001 ◽  
Vol 105 (3) ◽  
pp. 527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin F. Macdonald ◽  
Sturt Manning

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. eaar8241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte L. Pearson ◽  
Peter W. Brewer ◽  
David Brown ◽  
Timothy J. Heaton ◽  
Gregory W. L. Hodgins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Antiquity ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 88 (339) ◽  
pp. 277-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred Bietak

The criticism of the date of the olive tree branch from Thera offered by Cherubini et al. (above) has to be fully supported. The attribution of the branch in question to the late part of the seventeenth century BC is by itself not unexpected, as most of the other radiocarbon dates of short-lived samples from the site of Akrotiri fall into the second half of that century. The attempt to produce a wiggle-match drawn from a succession of non-existent tree-rings in this branch, and to fit such a result into the general calibration curve to give the illusion of precision, however, does not pass the scientific test. Olive trees do not develop annual tree-rings. Furthermore, no proof could be produced that this branch was alive during the eruption. The olive leaves found in an underlying horizon had no connection to the branch and could have been preserved in dry ground like this for ages before the eruption occurred. The remains of the branch were not found in a tight-fitting context but in a much larger cavity and it seems that the outer part of the branch, including the bark edge (waney edge)—contrary to the assertions of Friedrich et al. (2006)—are missing. The other issue in this scientific discussion is that dating the Thera eruption by 14C is much more problematic than is acknowledged by scientists, since it clashes distinctly with historical and archaeological dating.


1996 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Polinger Foster ◽  
Robert K. Ritner ◽  
Benjamin R. Foster
Keyword(s):  

Antiquity ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 76 (293) ◽  
pp. 733-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sturt W. Manning ◽  
Christopher Bronk Ramsey ◽  
Christos Doumas ◽  
Toula Marketou ◽  
Gerald Cadogan ◽  
...  

The authors report on radiocarbon data derived from carefully selected organic material from Late Minoan IA and IB contexts. The results suggest that the accepted chronology of the period should be revised by 100 years and that the eruption of Thera/Santorini most likely occurred c. 1650–1620 BC.


Nature ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 271 (5640) ◽  
pp. 91-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. S. J. SPARKS ◽  
H. SIGURDSSON ◽  
N. D. WATKINS
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document