Synchronising radiocarbon dating and the Egyptian historical chronology by improved sample selection
Abstract
Egypt has some of the oldest written records and extended lists of named rulers. But radiocarbon dates have only fulfilled expectations 66 per cent of the time. So why haven&t the two types of dating made a better match? The authors provide a dozen excellent reasons, which will sound the alarm among researchers well beyond Dynastic Egypt.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
14C dates represent the age of the organics found in association with the pottery, and hence depend on the material history of the former and not the latter.
“they represent the age of the organics found in association with the pottery, and hence depend on the material history of the former and not the latter (see Dee et al. 2012, for examples of inappropriate sample materials).”
From Radiocarbon dating and the Naqada relative chronology (2014) · cites this paper as Dee et al. 2012
Materials with minimal inbuilt age and excellent certainty of association were prioritised.
“we prioritised materials that exhibited minimal inbuilt age and excellent certainty of association (see Waterbolk 1971; Dee et al. 2012).”
From Radiocarbon dating and the Naqada relative chronology (2014) · cites this paper as Dee et al. 2012
The alluvial Nile soil may contain older inherited plant remains and organic compounds, which could result in radiocarbon dates older than the actual time of mudbrick production.
“However, the alluvial Nile soil may also contain older inherited plant remains and organic compounds, transported by the Nile or from past human activities in the soil, which could result in radiocarbon dates older than the actual time of mudbrick production [70,97].”
From The Minoan Thera eruption predates Pharaoh Ahmose: Radiocarbon dating of Egyptian 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects (2025) · cites this paper as [97]
More often the 14C dating results of organic material in mudbricks and mud seals were found to be older by many decades and even centuries than historical age assessments.
“However, more often the 14C dating results of organic material in mudbricks and mud seals were found to be older by many decades and even centuries than historical age assessments [70,71,97].”
From The Minoan Thera eruption predates Pharaoh Ahmose: Radiocarbon dating of Egyptian 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects (2025) · cites this paper as [97]
Radiocarbon dating of mudbricks, based on embedded straw fragments added during the time of mudbrick fabrication, has given reliable results.
“Radiocarbon dating of mudbricks, based on embedded straw fragments, added during the time of mudbrick fabrication, has given reliable results [97].”
From The Minoan Thera eruption predates Pharaoh Ahmose: Radiocarbon dating of Egyptian 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects (2025) · cites this paper as [97]
The 5 radiocarbon dating results of the Ahmose mudbrick underline findings from other investigations that mud from alluvial Nile soil usually contains plant and organic components of different ages that are older than the "fresh" plant fragments added as straw at the time of mudbrick fabrication.
“The 5 radiocarbon dating results of the Ahmose mudbrick (Table 4) underline findings from other investigations [70,97] that mud from alluvial Nile soil usually contains plant and organic components of different ages that are older than the “fresh” plant fragments added as straw at the time of mudbrick fabrication.”
From The Minoan Thera eruption predates Pharaoh Ahmose: Radiocarbon dating of Egyptian 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects (2025) · cites this paper as [97]
Problems remain in radiocarbon sample selection, ad hoc application of dates to archaeological features, and lack of acknowledgment that multiple dates for single contexts are needed to construct chronological frameworks.
“but problems remain in sample selection (Dee et al. 2012), the ad hoc application of dates to archaeological features, and the lack of acknowledgment that multiple dates for single contexts are needed in order to construct chronological frameworks (Levine and Stanish 2014).”
From The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation (2016) · cites this paper as Dee et al. 2012
Early radiocarbon studies of ancient Egypt produced results that diverged from historical expectations by hundreds of years due to inbuilt age, insufficient contaminant removal, or ambiguity in archaeological attributions.
“However, some of these early studies produced results which diverged from historical expectations by hundreds of years. These offsets were caused by a variety of reasons, such as differences between the inherent and historical age of specific items (so-called inbuilt age), insufficient removal of contaminants, or ambiguity in the archaeological attributions [42].”
From Resolution of the High versus Low debate for Old and Middle Kingdom Egypt (2025) · cites this paper as [42]
Cites
‘Wiggle Matching’ Radiocarbon Dates
Bronk Ramsey, C., van der Plicht, J., & Weninger, B. (2001) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200038248 · Cited by 432 · see citing works
Santorini Eruption Radiocarbon Dated to 1627-1600 B.C.
Friedrich, W. L., Kromer, B., Friedrich, M., Heinemeier, J., Pfeiffer, T., & Talamo, S. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1125087 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt
Ramsey, C. B., Dee, M. W., Rowland, J. M., Higham, T. F. G., Harris, S. A., Brock, F., Quiles, A., Wild, E. M., Marcus, E. S., & Shortland, A. J. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1189395 · Cited by 246 · cited 2× · see citing works
“For several decades, however, discrepancies 1 Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrings Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK (Email: michael.dee@rlaha.ox.ac.uk; thomas.higham@rlaha.ox.ac.uk; fiona.brock@rlaha.ox.ac.uk; christopher.ramsey@rlaha.ox.ac.uk)…”
BackgroundSelf-citationInvestigating the likelihood of a reservoir offset in the radiocarbon record for ancient Egypt
Dee, M. W., Brock, F., Harris, S. A., Ramsey, C. B., Shortland, A. J., Higham, T. F. G., & Rowland, J. M. (2010) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.003 · Cited by 68 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Usually a value of greater than 0.7 per cent nitrogen by weight of bone powder is required for pre-treatment to be considered worthwhile (Brock et al. 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation
Stevenson, A. (2016) · Journal of Archaeological Research · doi:10.1007/s10814-016-9094-7 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
“…from recently excavated material (e.g., Friedman et al. 2011, p. 176; Midant-Reynes and Buchez 2002), but problems remain in sample selection (Dee et al. 2012), the ad hoc application of dates to archaeological features, and the lack of acknowledgment that multiple dates for single contexts…”
BackgroundMethodRadiocarbon dating and the Naqada relative chronology
Dee, M. W., Wengrow, D., Shortland, A. J., Stevenson, A., Brock, F., & Bronk Ramsey, C. (2014) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.03.016 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationResolution of the High versus Low debate for Old and Middle Kingdom Egypt
Erdil, P., Webster, L., Kuitems, M., Knoblauch, C., Bestock, L., Höflmayer, F., Beeckman, H., Fuller, D. Q., Manning, S. W., & Dee, M. W. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0314612 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“These offsets were caused by a variety of reasons, such as differences between the inherent and historical age of specific items (so-called inbuilt age), insufficient removal of contaminants, or ambiguity in the archaeological attributions [42].”
Self-citationBruins, H. J., & van der Plicht, J. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0330702 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“However, more often the 14 C dating results of organic material in mudbricks and mud seals were found to be older by many decades and even centuries than historical age assessments [70,71,97].”
Influential
- Authors
- Dee, M. W., Rowland, J. M., Higham, T. F. G., Shortland, A. J., Brock, F., Harris, S. A., & Ramsey, C. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
- Cranfield University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Dee, M.W.
- Venue
- Antiquity
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 333
- Pages
- 868-883
- ISSN
- 0003-598X (ISSN-L)
- 1745-1744
- OpenAlex
- W2269334424
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Antiquity (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
- Keywords
- radiocarbon dating, Egyptian chronology, synchronization, sample selection, dynastic Egypt, historical chronology, ancient Egypt
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review