Nijboer and Plicht

UNION INTERNATIONALE DES SCIENCES PRHISTORIQUES ET PROTOHISTORIQUES INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR PREHISTORIC AND PROTOHISTORIC SCIENCES

PROCEEDINGS OF THE XV WORLD CONGRESS (LISBON, 4-9 SEPTEMBER 2006)

ACTES DU XV CONGRS MONDIAL (LISBONNE, 4-9 SEPTEMBRE 2006)

Series Editor: Luiz Oosterbeek

VOL. 9

Session C35

A New Dawn for the Dark Age? Shifting Paradigms in Mediterranean Iron Age Chronology

L'ge obscur se fait-il jour de nouveau? Les paradigmes changeants de la chronologie de l'ge du Fer

en Mditerrane

Edited by Dirk Brandherm and Martin Trachsel

BAR International Series 1871 2008

This title published by Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED England [email protected] www.archaeopress.com BAR S1871 Proceedings of the XV World Congress of the International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Actes du XV Congrs Mondial de lUnion Internationale des Sciences Prhistoriques et Protohistoriques Outgoing President: Vtor Oliveira Jorge Outgoing Secretary General: Jean Bourgeois Congress Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek (Series Editor) Incoming President: Pedro Ignacio Shmitz Incoming Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek New Dawn for the Dark Age? Shifting Paradigms in Mediterranean Iron Age Chronology / L'ge obscur se fait-il jour de nouveau? Les paradigmes changeants de la chronologie de l'ge du Fer en Mditerrane, vol.9, Section C35

UISPP / IUPPS and authors 2008 ISBN 978 1 4073 0351 2 Signed papers are the responsibility of their authors alone. Les texts signs sont de la seule responsabilit de ses auteurs. Contacts : Secretary of U.I.S.P.P. International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Instituto Politcnico de Tomar, Av. Dr. Cndido Madureira 13, 2300 TOMAR Email: [email protected] www.uispp.ipt.pt Printed in England by Alden HenDi, Oxfordshire All BAR titles are available from: Hadrian Books Ltd 122 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7BP England [email protected] The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com

103

THE IRON AGE IN THE MEDITERRANEAN: RECENT RADIOCARBON RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN

Albert J. NIJBOER Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG), Groningen Institute of Archaeology (GIA), Poststraat 6, NL-9712 ER Groningen,

The Netherlands, www.lcm.rug.nl, e-mail: [email protected] Hans van der PLICHT

Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG), Centrum voor Isotopen Onderzoek (CIO), Nijenborgh 4, NL-9714 AG Groningen, The Netherlands, e-mail: [email protected].

Abstract: The paper discusses the methodological requirements for establishing chronologies based on high-precision radiocarbon dates. Inadequate use of available data is identified as one of the main reasons for the current confusion regarding the absolute chronology of the 10th to 8th centuries BC in the Mediterranean. In addition, recent high-quality radiocarbon results from Italy, Carthage and Huelva are presented. As a consequence of the latter, a slight alteration of the absolute chronology of Greek Geometric Fine Wares is suggested, resulting in a longer trading phase in the Mediterranean before the establishment of Greek settlements in southern Italy during the late 8th century BC. Keywords: absolute chronology, Iron Age, Mediterranean, high quality radiocarbon results, Achziv-Huelva fibula

Rsum: Dans le prsent article, les conditions mthodologiques ncessaires ltablissement de chronologies bases sur des datations par radiocarbone de haute prcision sont discutes. Pour ce qui est de la chronologie absolue concernant la priode du 10e au 8e sicle av. J.-C., lutilisation inadapte des donnes disponibles est identifie comme une des raisons principales de la confusion courante en Mditerrane. En outre, des datations par radiocarbone de haute prcision en provenance dItalie, de Carthage, et dHuelva sont prsentes. En consquences de ces dernires, une lgre modification de la chronologie absolue concernant la cramique fine gomtrique grecque est propose. Il sensuit que, en Italie du Sud, linstallation des tablissements grecs au cours de la fin du 8e sicle av. J.-C. est prcd par une phase prolonge de contacts commerciaux en Mditerrane. Mots cl: chronologie absolue, ge du fer, Mditerrane, datations par radiocarbone de haute prcision, fibule de type Achziv-Huelva

Abriss: Der Beitrag behandelt die grundlegenden methodischen Voraussetzungen fr den Aufbau eines chronologischen Gersts auf Grundlage von Przisions-Radiokarbondaten. Ein groer Teil der gegenwrtig in Bezug auf die absolute Chronologie des 10. bis 8. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. im Mittelmeerraum bestehenden Verwirrung kann demnach auf eine nicht methodenadquate Verwendung vorhandener Daten zurckgefhrt werden. Ferner werden neue Przisions-Radiokarbondaten aus Italien, Karthago und Huelva vorgestellt, auf deren Grundlage eine Revision der absoluten Chronologie griechisch-geometrischer Feinkeramik vorgeschlagen wird. Im Ergebnis ist von einer lngeren Phase mediterraner Handelskontakte auszugehen, welche der Grndung griechischer Niederlassungen in Sditalien whrend des spten 8. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. vorausging. Schlsselwrter: Absolute Chronologie, Eisenzeit, Mittelmeer, Prsesions-Radiokarbondatierungen, Achziv-Huelva Fibel

INTRODUCTION

In the past years, the research project on the Iron Age in the Mediterranean, funded by the University of Groningen, The Netherlands, concentrated primarily on sound archaeological contexts from Central Italy, mainly tombs1. High-quality radiocarbon data associated with these contexts have resulted in some chronological reference points for the period around 1000 BC and for the late 9th century BC. It has also resulted in a reliable sequence of archaeological contexts with high-quality radiocarbon determinations covering the period from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age in Latium vetus (ca. 1200800 BC). The project was considered necessary on account of the continued debate on absolute chronology since the late 1980s. Some of the results do not match the

1 Some of the radiocarbon determinations of this project were financed

by the Italian government thanks to mediation by Prof. Anna Maria Bietti Sestieri, Dr.ssa Anna De Santis and Dr.ssa Flavia Trucco. We would like to thank Sander Tiebackx (Groningen Institute of Archaeology) for making the illustrations in this article.

conventional absolute chronology that is based on a partial reading of Greek Geometric/Proto-Corinthian cera-mics related to a text by Thucydides mentioning the Greek colonisation of Sicily during the period 735700 BC.

In order to test the conventional absolute chronology, the project assembled as well radiocarbon data associated with the earliest evidence of the Phoenicians in the western Mediterranean, mainly from Carthage and Huelva (Tartessos). The radiocarbon results from Huelva are intriguing since they can be linked with an account in the Bible mentioning Tarshish, King Hiram I of Tyre, Solomon and their overseas search for precious metals and other luxuries. The available radiocarbon dates from Huelva fully cover in time the reign of Hiram I of Tyre (ca. 970930 BC). A 10th century BC date is also confir-med by the distribution of the Achziv-Huelva fibula.

From the radiocarbon dates assembled, the following picture emerges:

A NEW DAWN FOR THE DARK AGE? SHIFTING PARADIGMS IN MEDITERRANEAN IRON AGE CHRONOLOGY

104

The Phoenicians crossed the whole Mediterranean, from Tyre to Tartessos, from onwards the 10th century BC.

Carthage was founded during the late 9th century BC. The characteristics of this foundation still need to be defined.

One can maintain the foundation dates as implied by Thucydides for the Greek settlements in southern Italy. The characteristics of these foundations still need to be defined.

How all this affects the absolute chronology of the Greek Geometric ceramic sequence requires further research.

The radiocarbon results and their associated archaeolo-gical contexts demonstrate that the conventional absolute chronology of the 9th and early 8th centuries BC needs to be revised by 50 to 75 years in the older direction, otherwise it will result in a further dissociation between the Phoenician and Greek advance to the western Mediterranean. Such dissociation has to be limited in time around 800 BC for various reasons such as the sound archaeological funerary record of Late Iron Age Italy and the establishment of Euboean/Greek trading settlements at Pithekoussai and Al Mina.

REQUIREMENTS FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH INTO ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY

Our project on the absolute chronology of the Iron Age in the Mediterranean tried to combine high quality radio-carbon results with sound archaeological contexts. In this paper we concentrate on the radiocarbon results and therefore it is necessary to explain what we consider to be a high quality radiocarbon result.

You may employ the 14C method for various purposes but if used for establishing an absolute chronology of a specific cultural phase, the requirements involved need to be strict:

1. The sample has to come from a closed archaeological context or secure stratigraphic layer or deposit. It has to be acknowledged that stratigraphic layers often represent a period of time rather than a moment in time2.

2. The sample must truly represent the event-to-be-dated3.

3. The sample needs to come from a context with artefacts pertaining to a specific cultural phase or pertaining to a transitional period, from one phase to another.

4. The sample should not be contaminated with older or younger carbon from either laboratory or natural origin (ash, grease, lacquer, soil, rootlets, consolidants etc.).

2 Collis forthcoming.

3 van Strijdonck et al. 1999.

5. A short-lived sample needs to be used such as seeds, animal or human bones, cremated bones (not burned or charred), nuts, twigs etc.4 The radiocarbon analysis of human bones can only be interpreted if reservoir effects, giving rise to apparent ages, are assessed5. Besides, with human bones, one needs to account for the turnover time of collagen in bones that may result in an older absolute date by, at the most, 20 to 30 years6. Charcoal and wood may show old age effects7

6. The laboratory doing the radiocarbon analysis needs to have a good reputation as indicated by performance of inter-comparison exercises8 and other quality assurance criteria9. Quality parameters employed in this paper are that the Carbon content, Cv(%), of the bone sample needs to be higher than 35%, that the 13C values need to be around 20 and that the error measured should not be larger than 50 years10.

7. Preferably more than one 14C dating per context or phase, that is, stratigraphically clearly ordered short lived samples, high precision conventional dates for lar-ge samples, multiple AMS dates for smaller samples11.

8. The development of a compendium of 14C dates per phase and possibly per site.

9. A radiocarbon date can not be viewed separately from the actual archaeological context dated. In most literature this is not the case. It also means that statistics on sets of radiocarbon dates can only be applied to single archaeological contexts. Otherwise one applies simultaneously statistics to the archaeo-logical data involved. In the end no one knows any longer what is actually being dated.

10. The radiocarbon analysis needs to be published according to international convention including infor-mation on the laboratory code number of the analysis, the radiocarbon date reported in BP with the standard deviation (expressed as error), the carbon content of the sample and preferably with the 13C values obtained (the 13C value is not useful as a quality parameter in case of cremated bone). Calibrated re-sults should be quoted as date ranges with confidence intervals (1 or 2) using the term cal AD or cal BC12. The recommended calibration curve is INTCAL0413. The program used for calibration needs to be stated as well. The calibration programs most frequently used are OxCal or WINCAL25, which can be downloaded directly from the Radiocarbon web site (www.radio-carbon.org). The results of both calibration programs are compatible.

4 .For dating cremated bones see: Lanting et al. 2001.

5 Lanting van der Plicht 1998.

6 Wild et al. 2000; Lanting 2004.

7 Mook Waterbolk 1985.

8 Scott et al., 2004.

9 Bruins van der Plicht 2001; van der Plicht Bruins 2001.

10 Lanting 2004; Mook Waterbolk 1985.

11 Bruins et al. 2003.

12 Mook 1986.

13 Reimer et al. 2004.

A.J. NIJBOER AND H. VAN DER PLICHT: THE IRON AGE IN THE MEDITERRANEAN: RECENT RADIOCARBON RESEARCH

105

An example of this international convention is the radiocarbon date of the cremated bones found in Tomb 103 of the Villanovan necropolis Villa Bruschi Falgari at Tarquinia (Italy) that was recently excavated by Dr.ssa F. Trucco and her team14. Tomb 103 is assigned to Tarquinia phase 1 and the radiocarbon analysis gives the following result:

GrA-23484: 2885 45 BP15. This result calibrated with OxCal v.3.10 gives the following ranges: 1130990 cal BC (64% probability) or 1220920 cal BC (94% probability)16.

11. All the above needs to be published, meaning the archaeological context together with the details of the radiocarbon determination17.

Even when each of these requirements is met, the radiocarbon method will not result in a historical date, that is an exact date to the year. The radiocarbon method provides us with most likely ranges of absolute years. Archaeology as a discipline is anyhow poorly suited for establishing historical, yearly dates18. At best a date

14 Trucco et al. 2001, 8193; Trucco 2006.

15 The apatite of the cremated bone was dated; see: Lanting et al. 2001.

16 Dr.ssa Flavia Trucco and we are working momentarily on the

publication of the radiocarbon sequence obtained for the Villa Bruschi Falgari necropolis at Tarquinia in combination with full archaeological details on the tombs themselves. 17

During the UISPP session in Lisbon (4th9th September 2006) that is presented here in print, much debate focussed on the radiocarbon data compiled by the team of Gilboa, Sharon and others for Iron Age Israel. The hundreds of radiocarbon dates assembled in their project are somewhat in contrast to data obtained elsewhere (cf. Nijboer 2005b). Our main problem with the radiocarbon results amassed by the team of Gilboa, Sharon and others is that their samples derive from stratigraphic layers in settlements and that subsequently the radiocarbon results are statistically assessed. From their publications, it has become impossible to establish the quality of the radiocarbon dates employed as well as the quality of the archaeological contexts examined. Moreover stratigraphic layers often represent a period of time rather than a moment in time (Collis forthcoming). It is unknown what period of time is covered by each of the stratigraphic layers they have sampled. In addition Gilboa, Sharon, Finkelstein and their followers ignore the stratigraphic analysis of Tel Rehov, which is a main argument supporting the high chronology for key Israeli sites (Bruins et al. 2003). 18

Absolute chronology in archaeology is somewhat fluid. In proto-historical periods one might be able to get down to 25 years while going even further back in time, these margins become larger, up to hundreds of years for Stone Age phases. Archaeology is like a mesmerizing Panta Rhei; countless details from the past floating in slots of time each vying for relevance and interpretation in a world that is adjusting and redefining itself continuously. This chronological fluidity, characteristic for archaeology, is in sharp contrast to the steady, yearly records, annals, on which history should be based. A problem for proto-history is that it often has to combine archaeological fluidity with a few remaining annals. Using the radiocarbon method instead of a historical approach, results in a reversal of the evidence employed for chronol-ogical constructs. There is a fundamental difference between both methods to derive at an absolute chronology in archaeology. This difference will have consequences and repercussions for the stories of the past told. The conventional or traditional absolute chronology is essentially based on records and has a top-down scheme; high cultures with archives define the absolute chronology of low cultures without surviving annals. One can read on this topic in, for example, Renfrews book Before Civilization (Renfrew 1973). A radiocarbon date has an opposite methodology since it essentially dates a local event indepen-dent of concepts of high and low culture. As such the radiocarbon method applied in archaeology has a bottom-up approach. It will lead to

gives us a terminus ante or post quem. Even in the rare cases that archaeology did obtain an exact year, as with some Wiggle Matching results or the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum based on the eyewitness account of the two Plinys (August 24th, 79 AD), final interpretation of the contexts involved still gives us time ranges because the data associated with a specific archaeological find have a biography of construction/ production, use and deposition. Therefore any absolute date used in this article comes with a time range of at least 25 years.

CHRONOLOGICAL REFERENCE POINTS, CENTRAL ITALY

The requirements mentioned above were applied in a recent research project by the Groningen Institute of Archaeology in collaboration with the Centre of Isotope Research of the University of Groningen (The Nether-lands) and some Italian colleagues, such as Prof. Anna Maria Bietti Sestieri, Dr.ssa Anna De Santis and Dr. Vincenzo dErcole. The project resulted in some chrono-logical reference points. These reference points give clear data regarding sound archaeological contexts and their position in time. The contexts refer to:

two Final Bronze Age Tombs at Celano (Abruzzo) with tree-trunk sarcophagi and their Wiggle-Matching (WMD) results and

the Iron Age hut at Fidene (Rome)

Wiggle-matching results of the radiocarbon dates pertaining to Celano (Abruzzo) Tumulus 4 and 5 with waterlogged, substantial tree-trunk sarcophagi (up to 170 year-rings), indicate that these tumuli were erected around 1000 BC +/- 25 years while the associated artefacts refer to the final stages of the Late Bronze Age in Italy.

Tomb 4 appears to be slightly older than Tomb 5. The sarcophagus of both Celano tombs is made from oak (Quercus sp.) while no traces of bark, nor cambial rings were detected. So far the presence of sapwood is not clear. The outermost rings of the tree trunk from Tomb 4 are of a different lighter colour and tyloses are present in the vessels. The heartwood/sapwood transition zone is implied19. Therefore the absolute dates obtained for both tombs are a Terminus post quem to which one needs to add a number of rings for the sapwood, 20 to 30 rings. Nonetheless, the premise is that little of the heartwood was removed while making the sarcophagus. Moreover the WMD of both tombs coincide well with the radiocarbon sequence obtained for Latium vetus (Table 6.1).

regional absolute chronologies that might deviate somewhat from previous constructs of cultural assimilations. 19

We would like to thank Dr.ssa N. Martinelli and O. Pignatelli of Dendrodata in Verona for this information. We intend to publish in the near future the dendrological information of both Celano Tombs in detail.


106

Table 6.1 Radiocarbon dates available for Latium vetus referring to the period Late Bronze Age-Iron Age / Early Orientalizing period. Collagen is the datable fraction for preserved bone; apatite for cremated bone. The laboratory codes for Groningen are GrN (conventional) and GrA (AMS). Radiocarbon results of lesser quality on account of the discussed radiocarbon quality parameters or on account of the sample are given in italics (see the requirements mentioned above)


107

Sample material laboratory nr. 14C (BP) 13C() Cv(%) Celano Tomb 4, Final Bronze Age WMD Youngest ring dated to 1040 BC Celano, Tomb 4, rings 110 GrN-30007 296824 -27.42 55.7 Celano, Tomb 4, rings 4050 GrN-30008 291825 -27.04 53.4 Celano, Tomb 4, rings 8090 GrN-30009 293525 -26.50 56.1 Celano, Tomb 4, rings 110120 GrN-30010 291725 -26.97 56.1 Celano, Tomb 4, rings 150168 GrN-30011 290024 -26.03 53.3 Celano, Tomb 5 Final Bronze Age WMD Youngest ring dated to 1018 BC 15 years Celano, Tomb 5, rings 110 GrN-28912 295030 -25.71 56.7 Celano, Tomb 5, rings 1120 GrN-28913 291030 -26.01 59.2 Celano, Tomb 5, rings 2130 GrN-28914 283530 -26.89 57.8 Celano, Tomb 5, rings 3140 GrN-28915 283540 -26.92 59.5 Celano, Tomb 5, rings 4150 GrN-28916 284540 -26.69 56.1

Fig. 6.1. Celano, Tumulus 4 and associated artefacts (a. b); Tumulus 5 and associated artefacts (c. d) (b. d not to scale)


108

Sample material laboratory nr. 14C (BP) 13C() Cv(%) Fidene hut charcoal GrN-20127 282050 -25.47 68.9 Fidene hut charcoal GrN-20125 280050 -25.06 65.8 Fidene hut charcoal GrN-20126 279050 -25.69 65.5 Fidene hut seeds GrA-5007 277050 -23.79 58.6 Fidene hut seeds GrA-5008 276050 -24.80 60.8

Both tombs and their contents are illustrated in Figure 6.1. They are assigned to the last stages of the Final Bronze Age in Italy though comparable fibulae are also found in archaeological contexts allocated to the Early Iron Age20. Related fibulae as the ones found in Tomb 4 and 5 at Celano are recovered all over the Italian Peninsula and even in Croatia and nearby regions21.

A date of the last stages of the Final Bronze Age in Italy around 1000 BC immediately raises the question of the beginning of the Early Iron Age. It is most likely that the Early Iron Age in Italy started around 950 BC.

The second chronological reference point of this project concerns the Iron Age hut at Fidene (Rome). Five radiocarbon dates, some from seeds, related to this hut, indicate that the conventional absolute chronology should be raised at least by 30 to 80 years (770 BC has to become 850800 BC).

By now the hut and its contents have been well published22. The associated pottery refers to the early stages of Latial period III that is dated in the conventional absolute chronology, based on a partial reading of Greek Geometric pottery in Italy, around 770750 BC23. This conventional date is not confirmed by the radiocarbon dates. As mentioned above, the beginning of Latial phase III needs to be raised by at least 30 to 80 years and can not be dated younger than 850800 BC.

RADIOCARBON SEQUENCE FOR LATIUM VETUS FROM 1200 TO 800 BC24

A sound radiocarbon sequence for Latium vetus was obtained covering the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age, from ca. 1200 to 800 BC (Table 6.1). The table presents a

20 DErcole 1998; v. Eles Masi 1986, 210211; Zanini 1997, some

catalogue entries. 21

Glogovi 2003; v. Merhart 1969, pls. 4. 5. 7. 22

Bietti Sestieri 2005, 402406; De Santis et al. 1998; Nijboer et al. 1999/2000. 23

Nijboer 2005b. 24

The compilation of data presented in Tab. 6.1 would not have been possible without the encouraging help by Prof. Anna Maria Bietti Sestieri and Dr.ssa Anna De Santis with whom we have collaborated for many years. Their support has been crucial for this project. The high chronology is an important element of their interpretation of the LBAEIA of Latium (cf. Bietti Sestieri De Santis 2003; Bietti Sestieri De Santis 2006).

gradual decline in 14C years from 3000 BP to 2600 BP. The archaeological contexts involved can not be introduced here individually due to limitations set to the size of this paper. In Table 6.1 references are given in which the archaeological contexts from which the samples derived, are introduced. Fig. 6.2 illustrates one of the tombs listed in Table 6.1 and that is assigned to Latial period I/IIa, which coincides with the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age25. The tombs allocated to this phase form a coherent group as do the other contexts from Latial phases II and III.

The interpretation of this radiocarbon sequence in terms of absolute chronology is as follows: The late Bronze Age, the Bronzo Recente and Bronzo

Finale periods in the Italian terminology, includes Latial period I. The Bronzo Finale period dates from 1200 to 950 BC. Latial period I probably emerges during the second half of the 11th century BC and closes around 950 BC.

Latial period II dates from 950 to 825 BC. Latial period III emerges around 825 BC.

On account of the Hallstatt plateau in the calibration curve, it is not possible to date the 8th century BC with the radiocarbon method. Nonetheless we assess that the transition of Latial period III to period IVa dates to 750/725 BC, only slightly higher than in the conventional absolute chronology26. As mentioned above the dates given come with a range of about 25 years. This is also reflected in the radiocarbon results listed in Table 6.1 since there is an overlap in dates for each phase.

Another conclusion is that the radiocarbon sequence given in Table 6.1 corresponds more with the chronological tables as published by Pacciarelli than with the conventional absolute chronology based on a partial reading of Thucydides in combination with Greek Late Geometric and Early Proto-Corinthian ceramics found in Italy27.

25 The tomb contains some miniature weapons among which scudi

bilobati. These double shields remained an important status symbol in Rome for more than 1000 years (Colonna 1991). During these centuries the shields may have altered from status symbol into a ritual artefact. 26

Nijboer 2005a; Nijboer 2005b. 27

Pacciarelli 1999, 63; Pacciarelli 2000, 277; Nijboer 2005b. A comparable radiocarbon sequence as in Table 6.I was obtained in the past years for Tarquinia, mainly based on the recent excavations by


109

Fig. 6.2. Rome, Quadrato di Torre Spaccata, the artefacts from Tomb 1 with radiocarbon date GrA-16411 281050 BP (not to scale; see De Santis 2005 for discussion of the archaeological context)

RADIOCARBON DATES AND THE PHOENICIANS IN THE WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN

In order to test the conventional absolute chronology, the project assembled as well radiocarbon data associated with the earliest evidence of Phoenicians in the Western Mediterranean, mainly from Carthage and from Huelva, Tartessos (SW-Spain). Carthage was chosen on account of its foundation date 814/813 BC, the Hamburg excava-tions going down to the lowest levels of Carthage and on account of the specific characteristics of the calibration curve, which makes it possible to arrive at fairly precise calibrated radiocarbon results for the late 9th century BC.

Flavia Trucco of the Villanovan Villa Bruschi Falgari necropolis (Trucco 2006). The Tarquinia radiocarbon sequence gives a gradual decline in 14C years from 2900 BP to 2600 BP. We intend to publish in 2007/2008 this sequence in combination with some of the Villanovan Tombs examined.

In most handbooks an 8th century BC date for the Phoeni-cian advance to the far western Mediterranean is still used, but recent research clearly documents that they already crossed the whole Mediterranean from the 10th century BC onwards. During the 10th and 9th centuries BC, the Phoeni-cians became particularly interested in the metal-rich re-gions of the western Mediterranean such as Sardinia, Tar-tessos and Etruria. We first present the data from Huelva after which the earliest levels of Carthage are discussed.

At Huelva there are two archaeological deposits that have been dated with the radiocarbon method and both contain artefacts with parallels in the Levant (Fig. 6.3). For convenience we have marked these deposits the Town and the River Deposit.

The contents of the Town Deposit, found in a clear archaeological stratum, were excavated Anno Domini


110

Sample Lab nr. GrN 14C age (BP) Error (1) 13 () Cv (%) Huelva 1 GrN-29511 2745 25 -19.98 49.8 Huelva 2 GrN-29512 2775 25 -20.94 41.7 Huelva 3 GrN-29513 2740 25 -20.08 50.2 Weighted average 2755 15

Radiocarbon determinations Huelva Calibration 68.2% probability Calibration 95.4% probability weighted average:

2755 +/- 15 BP 920 BC (36.7%) 890 BC 875 BC (31.5%) 845 BC

970 BC (1.4%) 960 BC 930 BC (94.0%) 830 BC

GrN-29511: 2745 +/- 25 BP 915 BC (68.2%) 840 BC 970 BC (2.5%) 950 BC 940 BC (92.9%) 820 BC



1998 and subsequently published28. The stratum docu-ments a type of emporium, a trading settlement:

Thousands of local and Phoenician ceramics as well as some MG, Nuragic and even two Iron Age shards from mainland Italy. All in all about 85,000 fragments were recovered from this deposit.

The finds record various crafts such as the processing of copper, iron, silver, ivory and ostrich eggs.

The Phoenician script was introduced at Huelva during the first half of the 9th century BC as well as quantified exchange marked by some shekel units29.

The radiocarbon samples, which were taken from this deposit, consist of various cattle bones of substantial size in order to be able to use the gas counting method as expressed in the code (GrN). This method can obtain a more precise result but requires large samples, in our case of up to 400 grams.

The results indicate that this deposit has a mean-age, based on three separate radiocarbon dates, of 2755 15 BP, which yields a calibrated range of 930830 BC with a 94% probability30. Thus the Town Deposit has an average date from 930 to 830 BC and contains amongst others numerous artefacts from the Levant31.

The Radiocarbon dates of the Huelva Town Deposit (calibration with OxCal v3.10):

The Huelva River Deposit is slightly older than the Town Deposit, both in terms of relative and absolute chrono-

28 Gonzlez de Canales Cerisola et al. 2004; Gonzlez de Canales

Cerisola et al. 2006. 29

Gonzlez de Canales Cerisola et al 2004; Gonzlez de Canales Cerisola et al. 2006. 30

Nijboer van der Plicht 2006. 31

Brandherm did discuss this topic in a recent publication using evidence from Iron Age imported ceramics found on the Iberian Peninsula and from some radiocarbon results (Brandherm 2006).

logy. The Ra de Huelva deposit is considered to be a homogenous assemblage of artefacts and assigned to the final stages of the Late Bronze Age. The deposit is well published and contains numerous metal goods, especially of copper-alloy, indicating that Huelva was a mayor trans-shipment site during the 10th and 9th century BC, loading and offloading goods that have a wide distribution from north-west Europe to Phoenicia32.

Six radiocarbon dates associated with the River Deposit are know33. Samples were taken from the wood in the shafts of the throwing-spears. This wood could have been heartwood but it is unlikely that the old-wood effect accounts for more than a few decades since it is most probable that relatively young trees or branches were used for making the javelin.

Ra de Huelva: One deposit with 6 radiocarbon dates:

CSIC-202 2830 70 BP CSIC-203 2820 70 BP CSIC-206 2820 70 BP CSIC-207 2820 70 BP CSIC-205 2810 70 BP CSIC-204 2800 70 BP

The average of these 6 radiocarbon dates is 2815 30 BP and this takes us definitely into the 10th century BC (Fig. 6.3).

A 10th century BC date for the River Deposit is also signalled by stories in the Scriptures and by a recent excavation in Achziv, northern Israel34.

A specific type of fibula is found in both the River Deposit at Huelva as well as in the oldest layer, phase 1,

32 cf. Ruiz-Glvez 1995. See also the evidence given here.

33 Ruiz-Glvez 1995; Torres et al. 2005.

34 Nijboer forthcoming.


111

Fig. 6.3. Huelva, average radiocarbon dates of both the River and Town deposit


112

Fig. 6.4. Achziv-Huelva fibulae, 10th century BC


113

of the Phoenician family Tomb no. 1 at Achziv in northern Israel35. We label this fibula the Achziv-Huelva fibula marking its most Eastern and Western distribution (Fig. 6.4)36. This type of fibula was used during the 10th century BC on various locations along the shores of the Mediterranean37. One fibula depicted in Fig. 6.4 derives from Amathus Tomb 523 assigned to the Cypro-Geo-metric I/II period38. This tomb is a suitable context to be discussed here since it contains, besides Phoenician and other goods, also a well-known spit, which finds parallels in England, France, Spain and Sardinia39. Once more wide distribution patterns are implied for the 10th century BC with probably Huelva acting as a key trans-shipment site.

The 10th century BC date of the Achziv-Huelva fibulae is confirmed independently by the radiocarbon dates available for the River Deposit at Huelva (Fig. 6.3). Therefore, both the River and Town Deposit contain material that can be found in Phoenicia as well.

Especially the 10th century BC date and the distribution of the Achziv-Huelva fibula are intriguing because this confirms a much debated account in the Bible40. There are numerous references in the Scriptures to a place called Tarshish, a location where one could acquire precious metals and other luxuries41. We follow here Lipiski since he argues that Tarshish is metal-rich Tartessos in south-west Spain, a region of which Huelva is the primary settlement. The presented Achziv-Huelva fibula favours this view since it signifies links between Tartessos and Phoenicia from the 10th century BC onwards.

According to the Scriptures, King Hiram I of Tyre and Solomon built merchant ships called the Tarshish fleet, which sailed every three years and returned with precious cargo42. The radiocarbon dates from Huelva, especially those from the River Deposit (Fig. 6.3), fully cover in time the reign of Hiram I of Tyre (ca. 970/960930 BC).

We conclude that the Phoenicians travelled the whole Mediterranean, from Tyre to Tartessos, from the 10th

35 Mazar 2004, 115; Ruiz-Glvez 1995, 241 nos. 21. 22. 23

36 This means that we are at present not aware of a wider dispersal of the

Achziv-Huelva fibula. The distribution of the Huelva fibulae towards Cyprus was already noticed by Almagro Gorbea together with the early di-stribution of some ivory artefacts (cf. Almagro Gorbea 2000). Comparable LBA ivory artefacts are also found in Italy. For a long time Almagro Gorbea has stressed the importance of these finds for a reconstruction of a pre-colonial Phoenician presence in the western Mediterranean. The recent publication of the Achziv family tomb makes it finally possible to take the distribution of this type of fibula into the Phoenician homeland. 37

On Cyprus this type of fibula is characteristic for a long period of time (Giesen 2001, 179208). The archetype, in our opinion, originates in the Levant. As with most other archetypes, its provenance is open to debate. The Sicilian fibulae in Fig. 6.4 are possibly a local modification of the Achziv-Huelva fibula. 38

Karageorghis 1987, 719722; Karageorghis Lo Schiavo 1989 39

cf. Karageorghis Lo Schiavo 1989; Giardino 1995, 237 fig. 117. 40

cf. Aubet 2001; Lipiski 2004. 41

Lipiski 2004, 217. 220. 225265. 42

I Kings 10, 22 and II Chron. 9, 21. Both Kings lived around the period of 970/960930 BC. The exact length of the reigns is unknown since royal annals did not exist at that time.

century BC onwards. For us this has become a fact since it is confirmed by three different types of records:

The stories in the Scriptures,

The distribution of goods such as the Achziv-Huelva fibula (Fig. 6.4)43 and

The radiocarbon dates (Fig. 6.3).

CARTHAGE

In time, the Phoenicians not only traded occasionally with various communities in the Western Mediterranean but also founded permanent settlements, especially along the shores of North Africa and South Spain. Carthage can be considered their main settlement and its foundation is most relevant for the debate on the absolute chronology. In the past years, Hamburg and Gent teams in collaboration with their Tunisian colleagues have been excavating at Carthage, going down to its lowest levels. The partial, chronological reading of the Greek pottery associated with these levels, date them to the second half of the 8th century BC, while the radiocarbon dates are 50 to 75 older and refer to the late 9th century BC. Thus the radiocarbon dates confirm more or less accounts in the ancient literature which state that Carthage was founded in 814/813 BC44.

Samples for radiocarbon dating were taken at Carthage from the oldest levels excavated by the Hamburg team, just above the virgin soil. The average calibrated result of more than 1 kg animal bones is 850795 BC with a 90% probability (calibration with Oxcal v3.10).

The archaeological contexts, to which these radiocarbon dates refer, were published in 200545.

Recently Docter continued excavating at Carthage on a site slightly to the south of the Hamburg excavations. These excavations have yielded amongst others ten radiocarbon dates from the lowest layers that appear to be slightly younger than the radiocarbon results from the Hamburg excavations. These ten radiocarbon dates move into the so-called Hallstatt plateau of the calibration curve but in our opinion still refer to the period around 800 BC46.

REVISION OF THE CONVENTIONAL ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY AND SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR THE IRON AGE PAST

This project on the period 1200 to 800 BC was devised on account of the continued debate on the absolute chrono-

43 See, for example, Giardino and Matthus for other goods crossing the

Mediterranean during the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age (Giardino 1995; Matthus 2000). 44

cf. Nijboer 2005b. 45

Docter et al. 2005. 46

Docter et al. forthcoming; Maraoui Telmini et al. forthcoming.


114

Sample Ka93- lab nr. GrN 14C age (BP) Error (1) 13 () Cv (%) 181 26090 2650 30 -20.40 45.9 183 26091 2710 30 -20.36 47.4 220 26093 2640 50 -21.00 47.7 499 26094 2660 30 -20.22 41.7

Weighted average 2670 +/- 20 BP.

Radiocarbon determinations Carthage-Hamburg excavations Calibration 68.2% probability Calibration 95.4% probability

weighted average: 2670 +/- 20 BP 830 BC (68.2%) 805 BC

895 BC (6.4%) 870 BC 850 BC (89.0%) 795 BC

GrN-26090: 2650 +/- 30 BP 830 BC (68.2%) 795 BC 900 BC (95.4%) 780 BC GrN-26091: 2710 +/- 30 BP 895 BC (68.2%) 820 BC 920 BC (95.4%) 800 BC

GrN-26093: 2640 +/- 50 BP 890 BC (3.5%) 880 BC 850 BC (64.7%) 770 BC 920 BC (93.5%) 750 BC 690 BC (1.9%) 660 BC

GrN-26094: 2660 +/- 30 BP 835 BC (68.2%) 795 BC 900 BC (95.4%) 790 BC

logy of the Iron Age in the Mediterranean since the late 1980s47. For this debate it was thought necessary to provide good data sets. We are convinced that comparable radiocarbon sequences can be obtained for other regions in the Mediterranean, thus eliminating various so-called Centuries of Darkness, which are often present-day constructs that can be disassembled with an accurate analysis of the archaeological record. Such radiocarbon sequences from other regions would also assist in examining synchronisms between different regions and cultures.

One of the most striking conclusions of our project is the correspondence between the radiocarbon dates and some historical events mentioned in ancient literature48. Thus the project substantiates a late 9th century BC date for the foundation of Phoenician Carthage. It also confirms accounts in the Scriptures mentioning King Hiram I of Tyre under whose reign the Phoenicians made long-distance voyages over sea, amongst others to a region called Tarshish that can be identified as the region labelled Tartessos in South West Spain, on the Atlantic.

Another outcome is that the radiocarbon data create some problems for the perceived conventional absolute chronology of the Greek Geometric sequence, especially for the 9th and 8th centuries BC49. Nijboer has put forward the hypothesis that the Late Geometric pottery emerges around 800 BC and not around 770 BC, which is only a minor adjustment50. In case this proposal for a revision can not be confirmed by future radiocarbon or preferably

47 cf. Olde Dubbelink van der Plicht 1989; Olde Dubbelink van der

Plicht 1990; Randsborg 1991; Peroni 1994; Giardino, 1995; Bietti Sestieri, 1996; Nijboer et al. 1999/2000. 48

cf. Nijboer 2005b; Nijboer van der Plicht 2006. 49

Trachsel did arrive at a comparable conclusion though with different data and arguments; see: Trachsel 2004. 50

Nijboer 2005b.

dendrochronological research, it will result in a further disentanglement in time between the Phoenician and Greek advance towards the Western Mediterranean. In our opinion both processes are related around 800 BC on account of: The quantity of LG shards at Pithekoussai and Al Mina, The few MG shards so far found in Italy and The difficulty of dissociating the Levantine advance to

the West around 800 BC from the Greek Geometric fine wares.

This research on the Iron Age chronology has consider-able historical consequences. One of the cultural divides in the Mediterranean during the Iron Age concerns the Phoenicians and the Euboeans. Both cultures require a better understanding, especially with respect to their impact on other overseas communities. The Phoenicians are well-known though the material culture in their homeland, more or less present Lebanon, is less well established51. The Euboean culture overseas seems to be restricted to sparse ceramic imports, some notions re-garding the adoption of the Euboean script and possibly the use of a grater during a specific drinking ritual52. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the Phoenician-Euboean puzzle has lead to sterile discussions with respect to predomi-nance and initiative. This debate will continue endlessly as long as the conventional absolute chronology of the Greek Geometric pottery is copied and considered to be the only chronological marker for the Iron Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. With this conventional method of dating, it can not come as a surprise that the Greeks will always be among the first. However, looking at the 10th and 9th century BC settlements in the Western Mediterra-nean with early evidence for Phoenician exchange such as

51 Aubet 2001; Aubet 2004; Aubet 2006; Mazar 2004; Lipiski 2004.

52 Dickinson 2006; Lemos 2003, 199; Ridgway 1997.


115

Huelva in South-West Spain, SantImbenia on Sardinia and Carthage, it will become clear that at least in this part of the Mediterranean, the Phoenicians took the initiative53. Long-distance Euboean/Greek trade appears to become established from 800 BC onwards, judging from the quantity of Late Geometric ceramics recovered in gateway communities such as Al Mina in northern Syria and Pithekoussai in Campania, Italy54. Prior to 800 BC the Euboeans probably maintained a more regional, Aegean, trading network. An interesting question is to what extend the Phoenicians tapped into such regional trading networks all over the Mediterranean during the 10th and 9th centuries BC. There are some indications that they did, and this would coincide with a process that is better understood for other periods and regions. Mayor merchant nations often tapped into regional trading networks and if possible redirected them.

Acknowledgements

For useful debates and for providing radiocarbon samples with a sound archaeological context, our thanks go especially to Prof. Anna Maria Bietti Sestieri, Dr. Anna De Santis, drs. J. N. Lanting, Dr. V. dErcole, Dr. N. Martinelli, Dr. O. Pignatelli, Prof. Hans Georg Niemeyer, Prof. Roald Docter, Dr. Flavia Trucco, Dr. F. Gonzlez de Canales Cerisola, L. Serrano Pichardo, J. Llompart Gmez, Prof. M. E. Aubet and Prof. A. Mazar. Credit for the French translation of the abstract text goes to Renate Heckendorf.

Illustration credits

Fig. 6.1: adapted from DErcole 1998, figs. 36 photo 7. Fig. 6.2: after Bietti Sestieri De Santis 2000, fig. 10. Fig. 6.3: graphs generated with OxCal v3.1. Fig. 6.4, 1: after Mazar 2004, fig. p. 115. Fig. 6.4, 24: after Ruiz-Glvez 1995, pl. 11, 21. 22. 23. Fig. 6.4, 5. 6: after Giesen 2001, pls. 43, 4; 44, 5. Fig. 6.4, 7. 8: after Giardino 1995, fig. 12 A, 5. 6.

References

ALMAGRO GORBEA, M., 2000, La precolonizacin fenicia en la Pennsula Ibrica, in: M.E. Aubet, M. Barthlemy (eds.), Actas del IV Congresso Internacional de Estudios Fenicios y Pnicos II (Cdiz 2000) 711721.

ATTEMA, P.A.J., T. DE HAAS, A.J. NIJBOER, 2003, The Astura Project. Interim Report of the 2001 and 2002 Campaigns of the Groningen Institute of Archa-eology along the Coast between Nettuno and Torre Astura (Lazio, Italy), BABesch 78, 2003, 107140.

53 This context at SantImbenia is introduced by Bafico et al. 1995 and

Oggiano 2000. 54

Ridgway 1992; Ridgway 1994; Ridgway 2000; Luke 2003; Niemeyer 2005; Boardman 2005.

AUBET, M.E., 2001, The Phoenicians and the West 2(Cambridge 2001).

AUBET, M.E., 2004, The Phoenician Cemetery of Tyre-Al Bass. Excavations 19971999, BAAL Hors-serie 1 (Beyrouth 2004).

AUBET, M.E., 2006, Burial, Symbols and Mortuary Practices in a Phoenician Tomb, in: E. Herring, I. Lemos, F. Lo Schiavo, L. Vagnetti, R. Whitehouse, J. Wilkins (eds.), Across Frontiers. Papers in Honour of David Ridgway and Francesca R. Serra Ridgway, Specialist Studies on the Mediterranean 6. (London 2006) 3747.

BAFICO, S., R. DORIANO, F. LO SCHIAVO, 1995, Il Villaggio nuragico di S. Imbenia ad Alghero (SS). Nota preliminare, in: Actes du IIIe Congrs International des tudes Phniciennes et Puniques I (Tunis 1995) 8798.

BATOVIC, S., 1976, La relazioni culturali tra le sponde adriatiche nellet del ferro (Zagreb 1976) 1193.

BIETTI SESTIERI, A.M., 1996, Protostoria. Teoria e pratica (Rome 1996).

BIETTI SESTIERI, A.M., 2005, Discussion, in: G. Bartoloni, F. Delpino (eds.), Oriente e occidente. Metodi e discipline a confronto. Riflessioni sulla cronologia dellet del ferro italiana. Atti dellincontro di studio, Roma 3031 ottobre 2003 (Pisa 2005) 402406.

BIETTI SESTIERI, A.M., A. DE SANTIS, 2000, Proto-storia dei popoli latini (Milano 2000).

BIETTI SESTIERI, A.M., A. DE SANTIS 2003, Il processo formativo della cultura laziale, in: Atti della XXXV Riunione Scientifica dellIstituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria. La comunit della preistoria italiana. Studi e ricerche sul neolitico e le et dei metalli. In memoria di Luigi Bernarb Brea II (Firenze 2003) 745763.

BIETTI SESTIERI, A.M., A. DE SANTIS, 2006, Il rituale funerario nel Lazio tra et del bronzo finale e prima et del ferro, in: P. von Eles (ed.), La ritualit funeraria tra et del ferro e orientalizzante in Italia (Pisa 2006) 7993.

BOARDMAN, J., 2005, Al Mina. Notes and Queries, AncWestEast 4, 2005, 278291.

BRANDHERM, D., 2006, Zur Datierung der ltesten griechischen und phnizischen Importkeramik auf der Iberischen Halbinsel. Bemerkungen zum Beginn der Eisenzeit in Sdwesteuropa, MM 47, 2006, 123.

BRUINS, H.J., J. VAN DER PLICHT, 2001, Radiocar-bon Challenges Archaeo-Historical Time Frameworks in the Near East. The Early Bronze Age of Jericho in Relation to Egypt, Radiocarbon 43, 2001, 13211332.

BRUINS, H.J., J. van der PLICHT, 2003, Response to Comment on 14C Dates from Tel Rehov. Iron-Age Chronology, Pharaohs, and Hebrew Kings, Science 302, 2003, 568c.


116

BRUINS, H.J., J. VAN DER PLICHT, A. MAZAR, 2003, 14C Dates from Tel Rehov. Iron-Age Chrono-logy, Pharaohs, and Hebrew Kings, Science 300, 2003, 315318.

COLLIS, J., forthcoming, Reflections on the Chronology and Nomenclature of the Iron Age, in A. Lehoerff (ed.), Colloque Construire le temps. Histoire et methodes des chronologies et calandriers des derniers millnaires avant notre re en Europe occidentale, Lille 79 decembre 2006, forthcoming.

COLONNA, G., 1991, Gli Scudi bilobati dellItalia centrale e lancile dei Salii, ArchCl 43, 1991, 55122.

DANTI, A., 2001, Lindagine archeologica nellarea del tempio di Giove Capitolino, BCom 102, 2001, 323346.

DERCOLE, V., 1998, La necropoli dellet del bronzo finale delle Paludi di Celano, in: V. DErcole, R. Cairoli (eds), Archeologia in Abruzzo (Montalto di Castro 1998) 157166.

DE SANTIS, A., 2001, Anagnina. Rinvenimenti di et protostorica, in: F. Filippi (ed.), Archeologia e Giubileo (Napoli 2001) 304306.

DE SANTIS, A., 2005, A Research Project on the Earliest Phases of the Latial Culture, in: P. Attema, A.J. Nijboer, A. Zifferero (eds.), Papers in Italian Archaeo-logy VI. Communities and Settlements from the Neolithic to the Early Medieval Period (Oxford 2005) 156163.

DE SANTIS, A., forthcoming, La definizione delle figure sociali riconoscibili in relazione alla nascita e allo sviluppo della cultura laziale, in: Atti del convegno Le ragioni del Cambiamento, Roma 1517 giugno 2006, forthcoming.

DE SANTIS, A., R. MERLO, J. DE GROSSI MAZO-RIN, 1998, Fidene. Una casa dellet del ferro (Milano 1998).

DICKINSON, O., 2006, The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age (London 2006).

DOCTER, R.F., F. CHELBI, B. MARAOUI TELMINI, A.J. NIJBOER, J. VAN DER PLICHT, W. VAN NEER, K. MANSEL, S. GARSALLAH, forthcoming, New Radiocarbon Dates from Carthage. Bridging the Gap Between History and Archaeology?, in: C. Sagona (ed.), Beyond the Homeland. Markers in Phoenician Chronology, Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series, forthcoming.

von ELES MASI, P., 1986, Le fibule dellItalia settentrionale, PBF XIV, 5 (Mnchen 1986).

GIARDINO, C., 1995, Il Mediterraneo Occidentale fra XIV ed VIII secolo a. C. Cerchie minerarie e metallurgia, BARIntSer 612 (Oxford 1995).

GIESEN, K., 2001, Zyprische Fibeln. Typologie und Chro-nologie, SIMA Pocket-Book 161 (Jonsered 2001).

GLOGOVI, G., 2003, Fibeln im kroatischen Ksten-gebied (Istrien, Dalmatien), PBF XIV, 13 (Stuttgart 2003).

GONZLEZ DE CANALES CERISOLA, F., L. SERRANO PICCHARDO, J. LLOMPART GMEZ, 2004, El emporio fenicio precolonial de Huelva (ca. 900770 a.C.) (Madrid 2004).

GONZLEZ DE CANALES CERISOLA, F., L. SERRANO PICCHARDO, J. LLOMPART GMEZ, 2006, The Pre-colonial Phoenician Emporium of Huelva ca. 900770 BC, BABesch 81, 2006, 25 41.

KARAGEORGHIS, V., 1987, Chronique des fouilles et dcouvertes archologiques Chypre, BCH 111, 1987, 663733.

KARAGEORGHIS, V., F. LO SCHIAVO, 1989, A West Mediterranean Obelos from Amathus, RStFen 17, 1989, 1529.

KROMER, B., M. SPURK, 1998, Tree-Ring Based Calibration 920011,855 cal BP, Radiocarbon 40, 1998, 11171125.

LANTING, J.N., 2004, Ross Island. Radiocarbon Dates and Absolute Chronology, in: W. OBrien (ed.), Ross Island, Bronze Age Studies 6 (Galway 2004) 305316.

LANTING, J.N., A.T. AERTS-BIJMA, J. VAN DER PLICHT, 2001, Dating of Cremated Bones, Radiocarbon 43, 2001, 249254.

LANTING, J.N., J. VAN DER PLICHT, 1998, Reservoir Effects and Apparent 14C-Ages, JIrishA 9, 1998, 151165.

LEMOS, I.S., 2003, Craftsmen, Traders and some Wives in Early Iron Age Greece, in: N.C. Stampolidis, V. Karageorghis (eds.), Sea RoutesInterconnections in the Mediterranean 16th6th c. BC. Proceedings of the International Symposium held at Rethymnon, Crete in September 29th October 2nd 2002 (Athens 2003) 187195.

LIPISKI, E., 2004, Itineraria Phoenicia, Studia Phoeni-cia 18 (Leuven 2004).

LUKE, J., 2003, Ports of Trade, Al Mina and Geometric Greek Pottery in the Levant (Oxford 2003).

MARAOUI TELMINI, B., F. CHELBI, R.F. DOCTER, forthcoming, Les fouilles Tuniso-Belges du Terrain Bir Massouda (20022005). Contribution la connaissance de la topographie de Carthage lpoque archaque, in: A.M. Arruda (ed.), Proceedings of the VIth Congress of Phoenician and Punic Studies, Lis-bon 25th September 1st October 2005, forthcoming.

MATTHUS, H., 2000, Die Rolle Zyperns und Sardiniens im mittelmeerischen Interaktionsproze whrend des spten zweiten und frhen ersten Jahrtausends v. Chr., in: F. Prayon, W. Rllig (eds.), Der Orient und Etrurien. Zum Phnomen des Orientalisierens im westlichen Mittelmeergebiet (Pisa 2000) 4175.

MAZAR, E., 2004, The Phoenician Family Tomb N.1 at the Northern Cemetery of Achziv (10th 6th centuries BC), CuadAMediterranea 10 (Barcelona 2004).


117

von MERHART, G., 1969, Hallstatt und Italien. Gesammelte Aufstze zur frhen Eisenzeit in Italien und Mitteleuropa (Mainz 1969).

MOOK, W.G., 1986, Buisness Meeting. 12th International Radiocarbon Conference, Radiocarbon 28, 1986, 799.

MOOK, W.G., H.T. WATERBOLK, 1985, Handbook for Archaeologists III. Radiocarbon Dating (Strassbourg 1985).

NIEMEYER, H.G., 2005, There is No Way Out of the Al Mina Debate, AncWestEast 4, 2005, 292295.

NIJBOER, A.J., 2005a, La cronologia assoluta dellet del ferro nel Mediterraneo, dibattito sui metodi e sui risultati, in: G. Bartoloni, F. Delpino (eds.), Oriente e occidente. Metodi e discipline a confronto. Riflessioni sulla cronologia dellet del ferro italiana. Atti dellincontro di studio, Roma 3031 ottobre 2003 (Pisa 2005) 527556.

NIJBOER, A.J., 2005b, The Iron Age in the Mediterrannean: A Chronological Mess or Trade before the Flag, Part II, AncWestEast 4, 2005, 255277.

NIJBOER, A.J., forthcoming, A Phoenician Family Tomb, Lefkandi, Huelva and the 10th Century BC in the Mediterranean, in: C. Sagona (ed.), Beyond the Homeland. Markers in Phoenician Chronology. Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series, forthcoming.

NIJBOER, A.J., J. VAN DER PLICHT, A. M. BIETTI SESTIERI, A. DE SANTIS, 1999/2000, A High Chronology for the Early Iron Age in Central Italy, Palaeohistoria 41/42, 1999/2000, 163176.

NIJBOER, A.J., P.A.J. ATTEMA, G.J.M. VAN OORTMERSSEN, 2005/2006, Ceramics from a Late Bronze Age Saltern on the Coast near Nettuno (Rome, Italy), Palaeohistoria 47/48, 2005/2006, 141205.

NIJBOER, A.J., J. VAN DER PLICHT, 2006, An Interpretation of the Radiocarbon Determinations of the Oldest Indigenous-Phoenician Stratum Thus Far, Excavated at Huelva, Tartessos (South-West Spain), BABesch 81, 2006, 4146.

OLDE DUBBELINK, R.A., J. VAN DER PLICHT, 1989, Satricum en de 14C-datering, Tijdschrift voor Mediterrane Archeologie 4, 1989, 413.

OLDE DUBBELINK, R.A., J. VAN DER PLICHT, 1990, Le Capanne II e IV a Borgo le Ferriere (Satri-cum) e le datazione al radiocarbonio, Archeologia Laziale 10, QuadA Etrusco-Italica 19 (Roma 1990) 234237.

OGGIANO, I., 2000, La ceramica fenicia di SantImbenia (Alghero-SS), in: P. Bartoloni, L. Campanella (eds.), La ceramica fenicia di Sardegna (Roma 2000) 235258.

PACCIARELLI, M., 1999, Torre Galli. La necropoli della prima et del ferro (Scavi P. Orsi 19221923) (Soveria Mannelli 1999).

PACCIARELLI, M., 2000, Dal villagio alla citt, Grandi contesti e problemi della protostoria italiana 4 (Firenze 2000).

PERONI, R., 1994, Introduzione alla protostoria italiana (Roma 1994).

RANDSBORG, K., 1991, Historical implications. Chronological Studies in European Archaeology c. 2000500 BC, ActaArch 62, 1991, 89109.

REIMER, P.J., M.G.L. BAILLIE, E. BARD, A. BAYLISS, J.W. BECK, C.J.H. BERTRAND, P.G. BLACKWELL, C.E. BUCK, G.S. BURR, K.B. CUTLER, P.E. DAMON, R.L. EDWARDS, R.G. FAIRBANKS, M. FRIEDRICH, T.P. GUILDERSON, A.G. HOGG, K.A. HUGHEN, B. KROMER, F.G. MCCORMAC, S. MANNING, C. BRONK RAMSEY, R.W. REIMER, S. REMMELE, J.R. SOUT-HON, M. STUIVER, S. TALAMO, F.W. TAYLOR, J. VAN DER PLICHT, C.E. WEYHENMEYER, 2004, INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 026 cal kyr BP, Radiocarbon 46, 2004, 10291058.

RENFREW, C., 1973, Before Civilization. The Radiocar-bon Revolution and Prehistoric Europe (New York 1973).

RIDGWAY, D., 1992, The First Western Greeks (Cam-bridge 1992).

RIDGWAY, D., 1994, Phoenicians and Greeks in the West. A View from Pithekoussai, in: G.R. Tsetskhladze, F. De Angelis (eds.), The Archaeology of Greek Colonisation. Essays Dedicated to Sir John Boardman (Oxford 1994) 3546.

RIDGWAY, D., 1997, Nestors Cup and the Etruscans, OxfJA16, 1997, 325344.

RIDGWAY, D., 2000, The First Western Greeks Revisited, in: D. Ridgway (ed.), Ancient Italy and its Mediterranean Setting. Studies in Honour of Ellen Macnamara (London 2000) 179191.

RUIZ-GLVEZ, M., 1995, Cronologia de la Ra de Huelva en el marco del Bronce Final de Europa occidental, in: M. Ruiz-Glvez Priego (ed.), Ritos de paso y puntos de paso. La Ra de Huelva en el mundo del Bronce Final europeo, Complutum Extra 5 (Madrid 1995) 7983.

SCOTT, E.M., C. BRYANT, I. CARMI, G. COOK, S. GULLIKSEN, D. HARKNESS, J. HEINEMEIER, E. MCGEE, P. NAYSMITH, G. POSSNERT, J. VAN DER PLICHT, M. VAN STRIJDONCK, 2004, Precision and accuracy in applied 14C dating. Some findings from the 4th International Radiocarbon Com-parison, JASc 31, 2004, 12091213.

STUIVER, M., P.J. REIMER, E. BARD, J.W. BECK, G.S. BURR, K.A. HUGHEN, B. KROMER, G. MCCORMAC, J. VAN DER PLICHT, M. SPURK, 1998, INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration, Radiocarbon 40, 1998, 10411083.

TORRES, M., M. RUIZ-GLVEZ PRIEGO, A. RUBINOS, 2005, La cronologia de la cultura nurgica


118

y los inicios de la Edad del Hierro y de las colonizaciones histricas en el Mediterrneo centro-occidental. Una aproximinacin desde la cronologa radiocarbnica y el registro arqueolgico, in: M. Ruiz-Glvez Priego (ed.), Territorio nurgico y paisaje antiguo. La Meseta de Pranemuru (Cerdena) en la Edad del Bronce (Madrid 2005) 169194.

TRACHSEL, M., 2004, Untersuchungen zur relativen und absoluten Chronologie der Hallstattzeit. Universitts-forschungen zur prhistorischen Archologie 104 (Bonn 2004).

TRUCCO, F., D. DE ANGELIS, C. IAIA, 2001, Villa Bruschi Falgari. Il sepolcreto villanoviano, in: A.M. Moretti Sgubini (ed.), Tarquinia etrusca. Una nuova storia (Roma 2001) 8193.

TRUCCO, F., 2006, Considerazioni sul rituale funerario in Etruria meridionale allinizio dellet del ferro alla luce delle nuove ricerche a Tarquinia, in: P. von Eles (ed.), La ritualit funeraria tra et del ferro e orientalizzante in Italia (Roma 2006) 95102.

VAN DER PLICHT, J., H.J. BRUINS, 2001, Radiocar-bon Dating in Near-Eastern Mediterranean Contexts. Confusion and Quality Control, Radiocarbon 43, 2001, 11551166.

VAN STRIJDONCK, M., D.E. NELSON, P. COMBRE, C. BRONK RAMSEY, E.M. SCOTT, J. VAN DER PLICHT, R.E.M. HEDGES, 1999, Whats in a 14C date?, in: J. Evin (ed.), Third Conference on 14C and Archaeology (Lyon 1998) 433440.

WILD, E.M., K.A. ARLAMOVSKY, R. GOLSER, W. KUTSCHERA, A. PRILLER, S. PUCHEGGER, W. ROM, P. STEIER, W. VYCUDILIK, 2000, 14C Dating with the Bomb Peak: An Application to Forensic Medicine, in: Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics, Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 172, fasc. 1, 2000, 944950.

ZANINI, A. (ed.), 1997, Dal bronzo al ferro. Il II millennio a. C. nella Toscana centro- occidentale. Exhibition catalogue Livorno (Pisa 1997).

Date post:	05-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kavuri-mb
View:	9 times
Download:	0 times

Nijboer and Plicht

Documents