4.8 Article

High-precision radiocarbon dating and historical biblical archaeology in southern Jordan

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0804950105

关键词

archaeometallurgy; social evolution; Iron Age; Levant; StarCAVE

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [0636051]
  2. National Geographic Society [8095-06]
  3. California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technology
  4. University of California San Diego
  5. University of Bergen
  6. Institute for Aegean Prehistory
  7. U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation [2004198]
  8. Directorate For Geosciences
  9. Division Of Earth Sciences [0636051] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent excavations and high-precision radiocarbon dating from the largest Iron Age (IA, ca. 1200-500 BCE) copper production center in the southern Levant demonstrate major smelting activities in the region of biblical Edom (southern Jordan) during the loth and 9th centuries BCE. Stratified radiocarbon samples and artifacts were recorded with precise digital surveying tools linked to a geographic information system developed to control on-site spatial analyses of archaeological finds and model data with innovative visualization tools. The new radiocarbon dates push back by 2 centuries the accepted IA chronology of Edom. Data from Khirbat en-Nahas, and the nearby site of Rujm Hamra Ifdan, demonstrate the centrality of industrial-scale metal production during those centuries traditionally linked closely to political events in Edom's loth century BCE neighbor ancient Israel. Consequently, the rise of IA Edom is linked to the power vacuum created by the collapse of Late Bronze Age (LB, ca. 1300 BCE) civilizations and the disintegration of the LB Cypriot copper monopoly that dominated the eastern Mediterranean. The methodologies applied to the historical IA archaeology of the Levant have implications for other parts of the world where sacred and historical texts interface with the material record.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据