Changes

===Radiocarbon dates for Thera===

===Radiocarbon dates for Thera===

After digging through the vast mantle of tephra, archaeologists found the remains of the Theran town Aktorini. There were no bodies in the remains of the village, indicating there were warning signs that were heeded by the residents before the full eruption. They left behind some storage jars with seeds. Short-lived vegetation such as seeds, when available, are always preferable for radiocarbon dating to larger vegetation specimens such as building lumber, because the dating of lumber reflects the time the tree was growing, which may have been decades before it was cut down and another unspecified length of time while it was in use in the building. These seed specimens were analyzed in a 2004 ''Radiocarbon'' article.<ref>"Dating the Volcanic Eruption at Thera," by Christopher Ramsey, Sturt Manning, and Marigrazia Galimberti, ''Radiocarbon'' 46 (2004), pp. 325-344), available [http://digitalcommons.library.arizona.edu/holdings/journal/issue?r=http://radiocarbon.library.arizona.edu/Volume46/Number1/ here]</ref> The results of this analysis placed the eruption of Thera between 1663 and 1599 BC at a 95% confidence level. Other results obtained from an olive branch with leaves still on it were in agreement: 1627 to 1600 BC with a 95% confidence level.<ref>''Science'' 312, April 28 2006, p. 508.</ref>

After digging through the vast mantle of tephra, archaeologists found the remains of the Theran town Aktorini. There were no bodies in the remains of the village, indicating there were warning signs that were heeded by the residents before the full eruption. They left behind some storage jars with seeds. Short-lived vegetation such as seeds, when available, are always preferable for radiocarbon dating to larger vegetation specimens such as building lumber, because the dating of lumber reflects the time the tree was growing, which may have been decades before it was cut down and another unspecified length of time while it was in use in the building. These seed specimens were analyzed in a 2004 ''Radiocarbon'' article.<ref>"Dating the Volcanic Eruption at Thera," by Christopher Ramsey, Sturt Manning, and Marigrazia Galimberti, ''Radiocarbon'' 46 (2004), pp. 325-344), available [http://digitalcommons.library.arizona.edu/holdings/journal/issue?r=http://radiocarbon.library.arizona.edu/Volume46/Number1/ here]</ref> The results of this analysis placed the eruption of Thera between 1663 and 1599 BC at a 95% confidence level. Other results obtained from an olive branch with leaves still on it were in agreement: 1627 to 1600 BC with a 95% confidence level.<ref>''Science'' 312, April 28, 2006, p. 508.</ref>

===Pottery dating of the Thera event===

===Pottery dating of the Thera event===

<blockquote>In addition to the pottery evidence, the contexts of waterborne pumice from the Theran eruption found in Egypt and the Near East have ben considered as evidence relating to the date of the eruption. At Tell el-Dab^ca, Theran pumice in large quantities was found at five locations, three of which the excavator believes were workshops active during the reign of Thuthmosis III and not abandoned until late in his reign or the following reign of Amenophis II, in any event after c. 1450 B.C. . . . Pumice from the Theran eruption has also been found in Eighteenth Dynasty, likely post-1525 B.C. contexts at Tell el^cAjjul and Tell Nami in Canaan.<ref>Malcom H. Wiener, "Times Change: The Current State of the Debate in Old World Chronology," in ''SCIEM'' 3, p. 40.</ref></blockquote>  

<blockquote>In addition to the pottery evidence, the contexts of waterborne pumice from the Theran eruption found in Egypt and the Near East have ben considered as evidence relating to the date of the eruption. At Tell el-Dab^ca, Theran pumice in large quantities was found at five locations, three of which the excavator believes were workshops active during the reign of Thuthmosis III and not abandoned until late in his reign or the following reign of Amenophis II, in any event after c. 1450 B.C. . . . Pumice from the Theran eruption has also been found in Eighteenth Dynasty, likely post-1525 B.C. contexts at Tell el^cAjjul and Tell Nami in Canaan.<ref>Malcom H. Wiener, "Times Change: The Current State of the Debate in Old World Chronology," in ''SCIEM'' 3, p. 40.</ref></blockquote>  

The "excavator" at Tell el-Dab^ca mentioned in this quote was Manfred Bietak. Bietak takes the "low chronology" for Egypt's Dynasty that places the reign of Tuthmosis III from 1479 to 1425 BC. (The "high chronology" of 1504 to 1450 BC is still held by some historians.) On p. 15 of ''SCIEM'' 3, Bietak has a chart that locates the Thera pumice in the palace district at Tell el-Dab^ca to about 1450 or 1455 BC.  

The "excavator" at Tell el-Dab^ca mentioned in this quote was Manfred Bietak. Bietak takes the "low chronology" for Egypt's Dynasty that places the reign of Tuthmosis III from 1479 to 1425 BC. (The "high chronology" of 1504 to 1450 BC is still held by some historians.) On p.&nbsp;15 of ''SCIEM'' 3, Bietak has a chart that locates the Thera pumice in the palace district at Tell el-Dab^ca to about 1450 or 1455 BC.  

This latest statement from Egyptologists, therefore, maintains that the 1663 to 1599 (median 1631) BC date for the eruption of Thera is about (1631 – 1450) = 180 years too early, in contrast somewhat with the earlier statements by Bietak<ref>''Science'' 28 April 2006, p. 509.</ref> that radiocarbon dates were too high by 120 to 150 years. This represents a movement away from, rather than toward, a compromise solution. The latest version of ''SCIEM'' (Vol. 3) carries on the debate, with no resolution in sight. Articles in ''SCIEM'' 3 by archaeologists Manfred Bietak, Felix Hoffmayer, and Kenneth Kitchen maintain that it is not possible to move Egyptian and related histories 100 or more years back in time, while Sturt Manning and the physicists insist that this must be done if archaeologists are to be consistent with the findings of "science." For those who are not familiar with the issues, the bias would be in favor of the physicists, since in the current culture physicists are higher on the totem pole than archaeologists. For those who are more acquainted with the actual facts of the case, however, there remains adequate reason for questioning the various assumptions that the physicists rely on to arrive at their results.

This latest statement from Egyptologists, therefore, maintains that the 1663 to 1599 (median 1631) BC date for the eruption of Thera is about (1631 – 1450) = 180 years too early, in contrast somewhat with the earlier statements by Bietak<ref>''Science'' 28 April 2006, p. 509.</ref> that radiocarbon dates were too high by 120 to 150 years. This represents a movement away from, rather than toward, a compromise solution. The latest version of ''SCIEM'' (Vol. 3) carries on the debate, with no resolution in sight. Articles in ''SCIEM'' 3 by archaeologists Manfred Bietak, Felix Hoffmayer, and Kenneth Kitchen maintain that it is not possible to move Egyptian and related histories 100 or more years back in time, while Sturt Manning and the physicists insist that this must be done if archaeologists are to be consistent with the findings of "science." For those who are not familiar with the issues, the bias would be in favor of the physicists, since in the current culture physicists are higher on the totem pole than archaeologists. For those who are more acquainted with the actual facts of the case, however, there remains adequate reason for questioning the various assumptions that the physicists rely on to arrive at their results.