Toby Anderson
Jericho Carbon Dating
Fri Jun 1, 2018 19:08
204.62.111.55

Greetings,

In the Jericho section of Wiki's page on Dr Bryant Wood, it argues against Wood's dating based on Radio Carbon dating which it refers to 8 times. It however totally leaves out, IMO, Wood's most important dating method, that is, the 'signed' Egyptian Scarabs (containing 3 Pharoah's names) found colocated with various local pottery. The 2nd most important dating method is the pottery (Wood's specialty). And the 3rd most important is related to the pumice from the eruption of Mount Thera.

Nonetheless, this posting will address the Carbon-14 dating debate.... mostly from the following article:

"Carbon-14 Dates at Jericho and the Destruction Date"
http://www.apxaioc.com/article/carbon-14-dates-jericho-and-destruction-date

"Overall, the C-14 dates from the destruction of the Bronze Age city of Jericho range from as high as 1883 BC to as low as 1262 BC—a range of over 600 years. The archaeological dispute is only divided by about 150 years."

Summary of C14 Samples

3 archeologists presented 4 'samples', to wit:

1. 1883-1324 BC - Bryant Wood presented a sample that initially “was dated to 1410 B.C.E., plus or minus 40 years" - "it was discovered years later that the result of this sample testing was incorrect, and was later reissued on a list of erroneous dates due to a problem with equipment calibration ... The dates were corrected ... to approximately 1883-1324 BC"

2a. 1640 and 1520 B.C. - 6 grain samples
2b. 1690 and 1610 B.C. - 12 charcoal samples

1618-1530 BC - (Bruins, HJ and van der Plicht, J. - Radiocarbon results of short-lived cereal and multiyear charcoal samples from the end of the Middle Bronze Age.” - Regarding these same two researchers, Rodger Young states:

"Oxford results, on well-provenanced plants from Thebes, are basically in agreement with
archaeological dates; actually slightly higher than the 18th Dynasty “High Chronology”. But Bruins & van der Plicht, “Charcoal Radiocarbon Dates of Tell el-Dab‘a (SCIEM 3, 65-77) agree with Bietak that for early levels there, radiocarbon dates are 100 to 200 years earlier than archaeological dates."
--- 'Destruction of Jericho City IV Dated to ~1400 BC by Pumice from Thera, Pottery, Scarabs, and Relative Radiocarbon Dates'
(http://www.rcyoung.org/articles/radiocarbontalk.pdf)

So if we subtract 100 to 200 years ( 150 average) from their dates (1690 to 1520), we get 1540 to 1370. The average, is then 1455bc. .... This is much closer to Wood's date than Kenyon's date.

3. 1688-1262 BC - Italian excavation team under Lorenzo Nigro tested two samples that were excavated from a building appearing to contain debris from the final destruction of the Bronze Age city that had washed down to the bottom of the tell.

Toby

  • JerichoToby Anderson, Thu May 31 21:36
    Summary of Jericho archeology “Recent Discoveries that prove the Bible – digging up the truth” by Bryant G. Wood PHD, director of research Associates for Biblical Research, his specialty is Canaanite ... more
    • Jericho dating with Pottery and ScarabsToby Charles Anderson, Wed Jun 13 16:16
      Hello all, The fall of Jericho is dated using 2 different means, namely: 1. the scarabs found in the tombs: 2. Late Bronze I pottery found: ---a. alongside the scarabs in the tomb ---b. inside the... more
      • Re: Jericho dating with Pottery and ScarabsAnonymous, Fri Jun 15 21:41
        //I disagree. Isn't much of Egyptian chronology determined from finds in the pharoah tombs which were somewhat distant from their respective cities?// Actually figuring which Egyptian city level... more
    • re: JerichoRich McQuillen, Sun Jun 3 23:43
      So the reason we are discussing Jericho... is that the archaeology says no city existed from 1550BC-1100BC... So there was no city for Joshua to conquer. If there are scarabs of pharoahs here, then... more
      • re: JerichoToby Anderson, Mon Jun 4 23:17
        Hello Rich, You: "....archaeology says no city existed from 1550BC-1100BC" Only 1 archeologist says that, who ignored the Egyptian Scarabs containing 3 pharoahs who lived during the earlier part of... more
        • re: JerichoAnonymous, Tue Jun 12 00:40
          https://books.google.com/books?id=c_tDCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&dq=Garstang+middle+building+scarabs&source=bl&ots=F5x6Pfzd5-&sig=RUYOjjihQeYfoqYyAa3bacSZeVQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwju__jfs83bAhWs64MKHbv... more
          • re: JerichoToby Charles Anderson, Wed Jun 13 15:51
            Hello Anonymous, After giving the link to a page in a book, you concluded. You wrote: "The scarabs come from an administrative palace built later. But there was no city there." That is NOT what your... more
            • re: JerichoAnonymous, Fri Jun 15 09:49
              Toby: My trivial mistake, already conceeded, changes nothing. The necropolis is a separate site from the city. A curse was put on rebuilding the city, but not on continued use of the necropolis. So... more
          • re: JerichoAnonymous, Tue Jun 12 15:50
            Pardon my error. The scarabs came from the Necropolis, which is not the city. //From the pottery and scarabs found at the necropolis, Garstang concluded that its use was continuous from the third... more
          • re: JerichoMarianne Luban, Tue Jun 12 11:43
            Anonymous wrote: "The scarabs come from an administrative palace built later. But there was no city there." I am of the opinion that "Anonymous" is nothing more than a trolling sock-puppet, who... more
        • re: JerichoRich McQuillen, Mon Jun 11 22:34
          "Why did you ignore the scarabs in your posting." -- Toby "If there are scarabs of pharoahs here, then the 1550BC date turns into 1435BC." -- me -- We're in agreement, the scarabs are absolute. I... more
          • re: minor date correctionRich McQuillen, Sun Jun 17 12:27
            "If there are scarabs of pharoahs here, then the 1550BC date turns into 1435BC." -- me I misread Amenhotep ii instead of 3. Amenhotep 2 would have ended in 1435BC. I have Amenhotep 3 ending around... more
          • JerichoToby Charles Anderson, Wed Jun 13 15:55
            "Why did you ignore the scarabs in your posting." -- Toby "If there are scarabs of pharoahs here, then the 1550BC date turns into 1435BC." -- Rich -- We're in agreement, the scarabs are absolute. I... more
          • re: JerichoMarianne Luban, Tue Jun 12 12:02
            Rich wrote: "-- We're in agreement, the scarabs are absolute." They are absolute in that they provide a terminus for scarabs among the burials--that terminus being the reign of Amenhotep III.... more
    • Jericho Carbon Dating — Toby Anderson, Fri Jun 1 19:08
      • Re: Jericho Carbon DatingAnonymous, Tue Jun 5 12:21
        Toby, Here's something you might consider as you evaluate the radiocarbon dates you cite: Manning et al, Fluctuating radiocarbon offsets observed in the southern Levant and implications for... more
Click here to receive daily updates